A decade following the UK entered into a rushed referendum that polarised the nation and caused disorder, a warning emerges from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar could occur with a national vote on a unified Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is ready.
That represents the warning from two prominent writers from either side of the Irish border who have joined forces to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have determined that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a potentially fraught and transformative referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can build support rapidly," the commentator said. "It is my view that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The pair have studied the governmental, financial and cultural reasons for any governmental shift in a publication, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the matter with a series of lectures that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts everyone, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We must avoid a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, unclear proposal whose implications have not been spelled out because then you land with an extremely split population where the losing side are not reconciled to defeat and the victorious side don't know quite what it is that they have achieved."
Governmental Mandate
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would approve.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists say that moment is approaching, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the possibility, resulting in ambiguity when or if there might be a national vote.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Political rhetoric for and against unity has obscured the absence of serious debate, noted the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the notion but the actual thinking which could extend past that to make it possible is mostly absent. Much has taken place in universities but hardly any politicians or campaigners are willing to participate with even the basics. For instance, which kind of country should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the volume, neither author endorses unification or the status quo. They authors two essays that strive for impartiality in detailing the case for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, assembling economic and societal statistics, historical precedents and constitutional models.
Discussions encompass flags and symbols, duties, medical care, elderly benefits, public liabilities and the danger of loyalist violence. The goal is to enlighten and provoke dialogue.
"There's huge interest in the issue but there has not yet occurred a discussion," commented O’Toole. "Debate suggests an acknowledgement of the idea that there might be reasonable perspectives on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens say they support unification but oppose paying higher taxes or implementing a alternative symbol to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British identity.
"The Irish government must work out what the plan from pro-unification movements is beyond just stating: 'We want a unified Ireland and we value you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
The journalist believes a national vote in his era is likely and that it may take place suddenly. "You could have just a reckless or a poor or a feckless secretary of state who says: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the pro-unification advocates and unionists have reasonable, justified points, he commented. "One side will win here and somebody will eventually not succeed but both parties has has valuable insights to acquire from the opposing positions."
Appeal for Broader Debate
Westminster needed to participate in the debate, stated O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter equally as it is an Irish matter."
