A decade following the UK stumbled into a hasty public vote that polarised the country and caused turmoil, a advisory emerges from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and citizens drifted into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking disturbances for which nobody is ready.
That represents the warning from two leading writers from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a possibly tense and transformative referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can gather momentum rapidly," the commentator remarked. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
New Title Intends to Provoke Discussion
The duo have analysed the political, financial and cultural rationales for any constitutional change in a volume, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the topic with a tour of public talks that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What haunts everyone, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We should prevent a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose results have not been clarified because then you land with an extraordinarily divided society where the losing side are not reconciled to losing and the victorious side are uncertain quite what it is that they have achieved."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official should call a referendum on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would support.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups claim this point is approaching, and a group called Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists downplay the likelihood, making it uncertain if and when there could be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unity has obscured the lack of informed dialogue, said McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which could extend past that to realise it is mostly absent. A great deal has taken place in scholarly circles but scarcely any elected officials or advocates are willing to participate even with the essentials. To illustrate, what type of nation would you want? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, neither author supports unity or the existing arrangement. Each composes two pieces that aim for impartiality in laying out the rationale for a unified Ireland and the argument against, assembling economic and social data, historical precedents and structural examples.
Arguments cover identity markers, duties, health services, elderly benefits, public liabilities and the threat of loyalist violence. The goal is to enlighten and stimulate conversation.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there is still lacking a discussion," said the writer. "Discussion indicates an recognition of the notion that there might be good arguments on either side."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate report they favour unity but refuse greater financial contributions or adopting a new flag to recognise pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin must determine what the plan from Irish nationalism is other than just declaring: 'We want a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride thinks a referendum in his generation is likely and that it could happen abruptly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a poor or a incompetent official who declares: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have plausible, valid arguments, he stated. "One side will succeed here and somebody will eventually lose but both parties has got valuable insights to gain from the opposing positions."
Appeal for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster needed to join the dialogue, said the analyst. "This involves Britain. It's a British issue equally as it is an Irish question."
