A decade following the UK embarked on a rushed referendum that split the nation and caused chaos, a warning comes from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar could occur with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering disturbances for which no one is prepared.
That represents the warning from two leading writers from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Establishments Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are woefully ill-prepared for a potentially contentious and monumental referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator said. "In my opinion that the institutional structure of our islands remains very unstable."
Book Publication Intends to Provoke Discussion
The duo have studied the political, financial and cultural reasons for any constitutional change in a book, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the matter with a roadshow of lectures that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What haunts everyone, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We must avoid a referendum on a binary, unclear proposal whose implications have remained undefined because then you end up with an highly polarised community where those defeated are unable to accept defeat and the those successful are uncertain quite what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a referendum on Irish unification if it is indicated that a most voters would support.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is looming, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions minimise the likelihood, making it uncertain when or if there will be a national vote.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Partisan language for and against unification has hidden the absence of substantive discussion, said McBride.
"People tend to be for or against the notion but the actual thinking which might go beyond that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in universities but hardly any elected officials or advocates want to engage even with the basics. For instance, what type of nation might be preferred? Unitary? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, no writer endorses unification or the status quo. Both writes two pieces that aim for neutrality in laying out the rationale for a unified Ireland and the argument against, gathering financial and social data, past examples and structural examples.
Debates encompass identity markers, duties, medical care, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The goal is to educate and stimulate conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the topic but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," stated the writer. "Dialogue implies an recognition of the concept that there might be good arguments on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where the electorate claim they support unity but refuse paying higher taxes or implementing a alternative symbol to recognise pro-UK communities' British identity.
"The Irish government should work out what the offer from pro-unification movements is other than just declaring: 'We desire a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride considers a referendum in his generation is probable and that it could happen unexpectedly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a poor or a feckless government minister who states: 'Let's just do this and settle the matter.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have credible, legitimate points, he stated. "Somebody will win here and the other side will in the end be defeated but each side has has valuable insights to acquire from the other's positions."
Call for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster should engage with the discussion, urged the analyst. "This concerns Britain. It is a UK matter equally as it is an Irish issue."
