A decade after the UK entered into a hurried public vote that divided the nation and triggered disorder, a caution comes from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, sparking disturbances for which nobody is prepared.
That conveys the caution from two prominent writers from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Establishments Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are woefully unready for a potentially tense and transformative referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our islands remains highly fragile."
Book Publication Intends to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have examined the political, economic and societal arguments for any structural alteration in a book, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the topic with a roadshow of speaking events that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everyone, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We must avoid a national vote on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose consequences have not been clarified because then you land with an extremely polarised community where the losing side are not reconciled to defeat and the victorious side don't know precisely what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it is indicated that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is imminent, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there will be a referendum.
Insufficient Informed Dialogue
Political rhetoric for and against unity has masked the lack of serious debate, said the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the notion but the concrete planning which could extend past that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has occurred in academia but hardly any elected officials or advocates are willing to participate even with the basics. For instance, what sort of state should be desired? Centralised? Federal?"
Volume's Strategy
In the publication, none of the commentators advocates unification or the current situation. Both writes two essays that seek neutrality in presenting the case for a unified Ireland and the argument against, assembling financial and social statistics, historical precedents and structural examples.
Discussions encompass identity markers, levies, healthcare systems, elderly benefits, public liabilities and the danger of loyalist violence. The goal is to educate and stimulate discussion.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," said O’Toole. "Dialogue implies an acceptance of the idea that there could be valid points on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where the electorate say they support unification but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a different emblem to reflect unionists' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin should work out what the plan from Irish nationalism is aside from just stating: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we value you'," said O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
The journalist thinks a national vote in his generation is likely and that it may take place abruptly. "It is possible just a mad or a bad or a feckless government minister who states: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have plausible, legitimate points, he said. "One side will win on this issue and somebody will ultimately not succeed but each side has has valuable insights to gain from the opposing arguments."
Call for Wider Dialogue
Westminster needed to participate in the dialogue, said the analyst. "This concerns Britain. It's a British issue as much as it is an Irish matter."
