A decade after the UK stumbled into a hasty public vote that divided the nation and caused chaos, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Authorities and voters drifted into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, sparking disturbances for which nobody is prepared.
That represents the warning from two leading commentators from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Structures Unprepared
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have determined that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely ill-prepared for a possibly fraught and transformative referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can build support swiftly," the commentator stated. "It is my view that the political architecture of our archipelago remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Aims to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have studied the governmental, economic and cultural arguments for any governmental shift in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the issue with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What concerns all parties, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We must avoid a national vote on a binary, unclear proposal whose implications have not been clarified because then you land with an highly polarised community where those defeated are resistant to defeat and the victorious side are uncertain exactly what it is that they have achieved."
Governmental Mandate
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland government minister must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it is indicated that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists claim such a time is looming, and a non-profit called pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but both governments and pro-UK factions play down the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there could be a referendum.
Insufficient Substantive Discussion
Partisan language for and against unity has hidden the lack of substantive discussion, noted the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has taken place in universities but very few elected officials or activists want to engage with even the basics. As an example, which kind of country might be preferred? Centralised? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, none of the commentators supports unity or the existing arrangement. They composes two pieces that strive for neutrality in presenting the argument for a united Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling economic and social statistics, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Arguments range over flags and symbols, taxes, medical care, retirement funds, sovereign debt obligations and the threat of unionist unrest. The aim is to educate and stimulate discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there has not yet occurred a discussion," said the writer. "Dialogue suggests an acceptance of the notion that there might be good arguments on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where voters say they prefer unification but reject greater financial contributions or implementing a different emblem to reflect unionists' UK heritage.
"The Irish government should establish what the plan from nationalist groups is other than just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.
Probability of Referendum
McBride believes a national vote in his lifetime is possible and that it could happen suddenly. "You could have just a reckless or a ill-advised or a incompetent official who declares: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate perspectives, he said. "Somebody will prevail in this matter and the other side will eventually lose but both parties has possesses valuable insights to gain from the other's viewpoints."
Call for Broader Discussion
Westminster should engage with the discussion, stated O’Toole. "This involves the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter equally as it is an Irish matter."
