Ten years after the UK stumbled into a rushed public vote that polarised the country and caused disorder, a caution emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Policymakers and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is equipped.
That conveys the caution from two leading journalists from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Structures Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have determined that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a potentially fraught and transformative referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator stated. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our islands remains highly fragile."
New Title Seeks to Stir Debate
The pair have studied the political, economic and societal arguments for any governmental shift in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the issue with a series of lectures that will bring them to Westminster early next month.
"What concerns everybody, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a binary, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been clarified because then you land with an extremely divided society where people who have lost are resistant to defeat and the people who have won lack clarity exactly what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister should call a referendum on Irish unification if it appears likely that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists say such a time is imminent, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions play down the possibility, leaving it unclear whether or when there could be a referendum.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unity has hidden the absence of substantive discussion, noted McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the notion but the actual thinking which may surpass that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in scholarly circles but very few elected officials or activists seek to involve themselves even with the essentials. As an example, what sort of state would you want? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the book, no writer endorses unity or the status quo. Both writes two pieces that seek objectivity in presenting the case for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, marshalling financial and societal figures, past examples and structural examples.
Discussions range over flags and symbols, levies, medical care, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the threat of unionist unrest. The objective is to enlighten and stimulate dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," commented the writer. "Discussion suggests an acknowledgement of the concept that there may exist reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where the electorate report they favour unity but reject greater financial contributions or implementing a new flag to recognise unionists' British identity.
"The Irish government does need to determine what the proposal from Irish nationalism is other than just stating: 'We want a united Ireland and we love you'," remarked the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
The journalist thinks a national vote in his generation is likely and that it might occur suddenly. "It is possible just a mad or a poor or a negligent secretary of state who says: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, valid arguments, he commented. "Somebody will prevail here and somebody will eventually not succeed but both parties has possesses something to gain from the opposing viewpoints."
Request for Broader Discussion
Westminster needed to engage with the debate, stated O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a UK matter as much as it is an Irish matter."
