A decade following the UK embarked on a hurried referendum that divided the country and triggered disorder, a warning is issued from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Policymakers and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the same might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, triggering convulsions for which no one is prepared.
That represents the warning from two leading writers from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Unprepared
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have determined that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially fraught and monumental referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction rapidly," the commentator stated. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our region remains highly fragile."
New Title Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The pair have studied the governmental, financial and societal rationales for any constitutional change in a publication, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the matter with a tour of lectures that will bring them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everyone, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, vague proposition whose results have not been clarified because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily split population where people who have lost are resistant to losing and the people who have won are uncertain precisely what it is that they have won."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue that moment is looming, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but both governments and pro-UK factions downplay the possibility, leaving it unclear when or if there will be a national vote.
Lack of Serious Debate
Political rhetoric for and against unification has hidden the shortage of serious debate, noted the journalist.
"Many are for or against the concept but the concrete planning which could extend past that to achieve it is mostly absent. A lot has taken place in academia but very few elected officials or activists are willing to participate with the basics. For instance, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the book, none of the commentators supports unity or the current situation. Both writes two pieces that aim for objectivity in detailing the argument for a unified Ireland and the argument against, marshalling economic and social statistics, past examples and structural examples.
Arguments range over flags and symbols, levies, health services, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the danger of loyalist violence. The goal is to enlighten and provoke dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," commented O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an acceptance of the concept that there may exist valid points on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters report they prefer unification but refuse greater financial contributions or introducing a different emblem to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British identity.
"Authorities in Dublin should determine what the proposal from pro-unification movements is beyond just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," stated O’Toole.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride thinks a national vote in his lifetime is possible and that it might occur unexpectedly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a poor or a incompetent official who says: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have credible, legitimate perspectives, he commented. "Somebody will prevail on this issue and somebody will eventually be defeated but both parties has possesses valuable insights to gain from the opposing positions."
Request for Broader Dialogue
Westminster needed to join the debate, stated the analyst. "This involves your state. It is a British issue just as much as it is an Irish matter."
