A decade following the UK embarked on a hurried public vote that divided the nation and triggered disorder, a warning emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and electorate drifted into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which no one is equipped.
That conveys the caution from two prominent journalists from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a possibly contentious and monumental public vote.
"The key takeaway 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. "It is my view that the political architecture of our region remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Intends to Stir Debate
The team have analysed the political, economic and cultural rationales for any structural alteration in a volume, Examining Irish Unification, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to encourage dialogue on the matter with a tour of lectures that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What troubles everybody, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We do not want a national vote on a binary, unclear proposal whose implications have remained undefined because then you end up with an highly split population where the losing side are resistant to defeat and the people who have won don't know precisely what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would support.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim that moment is imminent, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions downplay the likelihood, leaving it unclear whether or when there could be a referendum.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Political rhetoric for and against unification has obscured the lack of substantive discussion, said the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the notion but the concrete planning which may surpass that to make it possible has largely not occurred. A great deal has gone on in academia but hardly any politicians or advocates want to engage with even the fundamentals. As an example, what type of nation would you want? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the book, none of the commentators endorses unity or the existing arrangement. Each composes two articles that strive for neutrality in presenting the argument for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, marshalling economic and societal figures, historical precedents and constitutional models.
Discussions encompass flags and symbols, duties, medical care, retirement funds, sovereign debt obligations and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The objective is to enlighten and provoke dialogue.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an acknowledgement of the concept that there might be good arguments on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters say they support unity but refuse increased taxation or implementing a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' British culture.
"Policymakers in Ireland does need to establish what the plan from Irish nationalism is aside from just stating: 'We desire a united Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride believes a referendum in his lifetime is likely and that it might occur abruptly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a negligent government minister who says: 'We should proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, valid arguments, he stated. "Somebody will succeed here and somebody will in the end not succeed but both parties has got valuable insights to acquire from the opposing arguments."
Appeal for Wider Discussion
Westminster should engage with the dialogue, said O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It is a British question just as much as it is an Irish question."
