A decade after the UK stumbled into a hasty public vote that divided the nation and unleashed disorder, a warning is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical could occur with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering disturbances for which no one is ready.
That is the message from two respected journalists from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Not Ready
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely ill-prepared for a potentially fraught and monumental public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can come out of the blue and can gain traction very quickly," the commentator stated. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Aims to Provoke Discussion
The duo have analysed the political, economic and societal arguments for any constitutional change in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the topic with a tour of public talks that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What haunts all parties, or must worry everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose consequences have not been clarified because then you end up with an extremely polarised community where the losing side are not reconciled to losing and the people who have won are uncertain exactly what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister should call a referendum on Irish unification if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim that moment is looming, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions minimise the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there might be a national vote.
Insufficient Substantive Discussion
Political rhetoric for and against unity has hidden the shortage of substantive discussion, stated the journalist.
"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the actual thinking which could extend past that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has occurred in universities but very few politicians or campaigners are willing to participate with even the essentials. To illustrate, which kind of country might be preferred? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, neither author supports unification or the status quo. Both authors two articles that aim for impartiality in laying out the argument for a unified Ireland and the case opposing it, gathering financial and societal figures, historical precedents and constitutional models.
Discussions cover national emblems, duties, medical care, retirement funds, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of loyalist violence. The goal is to inform and stimulate conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," commented O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an acknowledgement of the idea that there could be reasonable perspectives on each side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where citizens say they prefer unification but reject greater financial contributions or introducing a different emblem to acknowledge unionists' UK heritage.
"Policymakers in Ireland should work out what the proposal from Irish nationalism is aside from just declaring: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we love you'," remarked the commentator.
Likelihood of Public Vote
The journalist considers a national vote in his generation is likely and that it might occur suddenly. "There might be just a reckless or a poor or a negligent government minister who states: 'Let us proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have plausible, legitimate arguments, he commented. "Somebody will prevail on this issue and the other side will in the end not succeed but each side has possesses valuable insights to acquire from the other's positions."
Appeal for Broader Debate
Westminster needed to engage with the dialogue, said the analyst. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a British issue as much as it is an Irish matter."
