A decade following the UK embarked on a hasty referendum that split the country and unleashed turmoil, a warning is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the same could occur with a referendum on a unified Ireland, initiating convulsions for which nobody is ready.
That is the message from two prominent commentators from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to examine the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Unprepared
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a potentially fraught and seismic referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can come out of the blue and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator remarked. "It is my view that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Aims to Provoke Discussion
The team have studied the political, financial and cultural rationales for any constitutional change in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the matter with a tour of public talks that will take them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What haunts everyone, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a binary, vague proposition whose implications have remained undefined because then you find yourself with an extremely polarised community where those defeated are not reconciled to losing and the victorious side don't know precisely what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unity if it is indicated that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim that moment is approaching, and a group named pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but both governments and pro-UK factions play down the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity when or if there will be a referendum.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has masked the lack of substantive discussion, noted the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the notion but the concrete planning which could extend past that to realise it is mostly absent. Much has occurred in universities but very few government figures or advocates want to engage with even the fundamentals. For instance, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, none of the commentators advocates unification or the existing arrangement. They authors two pieces that seek impartiality in laying out the argument for a unified Ireland and the argument opposing it, gathering financial and social figures, previous instances and structural examples.
Discussions cover flags and symbols, duties, health services, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The objective is to enlighten and provoke conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a debate," stated the writer. "Dialogue indicates an acceptance of the notion that there could be good arguments on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where voters claim they prefer unification but oppose greater financial contributions or adopting a new flag to reflect unionists' British culture.
"Policymakers in Ireland does need to establish what the proposal from pro-unification movements is aside from just saying: 'We desire a united Ireland and we value you'," stated the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist believes a referendum in his era is possible and that it could happen unexpectedly. "There might be just a mad or a poor or a feckless government minister who states: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have credible, legitimate arguments, he said. "Somebody will prevail here and the other side will ultimately lose but both parties has got something to gain from the other's arguments."
Call for Broader Debate
Westminster must participate in the discussion, urged O’Toole. "This involves the United Kingdom. It's a British question as much as it is an Irish question."
