Ten years following the UK entered into a rushed referendum that polarised the nation and unleashed disorder, a caution emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and voters drifted into Brexit and the same may happen with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering upheavals for which nobody is ready.
That is the message from two prominent commentators from each side of the Irish border who have teamed up to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a possibly contentious and seismic public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can build support swiftly," the commentator said. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our region remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The pair have examined the governmental, financial and cultural reasons for any structural alteration in a publication, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to provoke discussion on the matter with a series of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster soon.
"What concerns everyone, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We should prevent a national vote on a yes-no, vague proposition whose consequences have remained undefined because then you end up with an extremely polarised community where the losing side are resistant to defeat and the people who have won don't know exactly what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups say that moment is looming, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the prospect, resulting in ambiguity if and when there might be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unity has hidden the shortage of serious debate, said McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the notion but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it has largely not occurred. Much has occurred in scholarly circles but very few government figures or campaigners want to engage with even the essentials. As an example, what sort of state might be preferred? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, neither author supports unification or the existing arrangement. Each composes two articles that seek objectivity in presenting the rationale for a united Ireland and the rationale against, marshalling economic and societal figures, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Arguments range over national emblems, taxes, healthcare systems, elderly benefits, public liabilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The aim is to inform and stimulate dialogue.
"There's huge interest in the issue but there has not yet occurred a discussion," stated the writer. "Discussion implies an acceptance of the notion that there might be valid points on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where citizens claim they favour unity but oppose greater financial contributions or adopting a alternative symbol to reflect unionists' British identity.
"Authorities in Dublin should work out what the proposal from pro-unification movements is other than just declaring: 'We want a united Ireland and we love you'," remarked O’Toole.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride considers a referendum in his lifetime is likely and that it might occur unexpectedly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a poor or a negligent government minister who states: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have credible, valid arguments, he commented. "One side will prevail in this matter and somebody will in the end lose but all factions has got valuable insights to acquire from the alternative positions."
Appeal for Broader Dialogue
Westminster must join the discussion, said the analyst. "This concerns your state. It's a UK matter equally as it is an Irish issue."
