A decade after the UK embarked on a hasty referendum that divided the nation and unleashed turmoil, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar could occur with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering disturbances for which no one is equipped.
That conveys the caution from two prominent commentators from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a possibly fraught and seismic public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction rapidly," O’Toole stated. "In my opinion that the institutional structure of our archipelago remains extremely volatile."
Released Volume Aims to Stir Debate
The team have examined the political, economic and cultural reasons for any constitutional change in a book, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to provoke discussion on the topic with a roadshow of public talks that will take them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles all parties, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We should prevent a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, unclear proposal whose results have not been clarified because then you land with an extremely divided society where the losing side are unable to accept defeat and the those successful lack clarity quite what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is looming, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and unionists play down the possibility, leaving it unclear whether or when there will be a national vote.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Political rhetoric for and against unity has hidden the shortage of substantive discussion, stated McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has gone on in universities but very few government figures or advocates seek to involve themselves even with the fundamentals. For instance, which kind of country would you want? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, neither author endorses unification or the current situation. Both authors two essays that strive for impartiality in detailing the rationale for a unified Ireland and the case opposing it, marshalling economic and societal statistics, historical precedents and structural examples.
Debates cover identity markers, duties, medical care, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The objective is to educate and stimulate discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there has not yet occurred a debate," stated O’Toole. "Debate implies an acceptance of the idea that there might be good arguments on either side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where citizens claim they support unity but reject greater financial contributions or introducing a different emblem to recognise unionists' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin must determine what the offer from Irish nationalism is aside from just stating: 'We want a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride believes a referendum in his generation is likely and that it could happen unexpectedly. "You could have just a mad or a ill-advised or a incompetent government minister who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have reasonable, legitimate perspectives, he stated. "One side will succeed here and somebody will in the end lose but both parties has got something to learn from the opposing arguments."
Request for Broader Dialogue
Westminster should engage with the debate, urged the analyst. "This is about the United Kingdom. It's a British question equally as it is an Irish matter."
