Ten years following the UK stumbled into a hasty public vote that divided the nation and unleashed chaos, a advisory is issued from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the same might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is prepared.
That is the message from two leading writers from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Structures Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially fraught and monumental referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can build support very quickly," the commentator stated. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have examined the political, economic and cultural rationales for any structural alteration in a volume, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the matter with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What concerns everybody, or should haunt everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose consequences have remained undefined because then you find yourself with an highly divided society where people who have lost are not reconciled to losing and the those successful lack clarity precisely what it is that they have gained."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is imminent, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but both governments and pro-UK factions downplay the possibility, leaving it unclear if and when there might be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements for and against unification has hidden the absence of informed dialogue, stated the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to make it possible is mostly absent. A great deal has gone on in academia but very few elected officials or advocates seek to involve themselves even with the essentials. For instance, what sort of state might be preferred? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, none of the commentators advocates unity or the current situation. Each composes two articles that seek neutrality in detailing the rationale for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, gathering financial and societal data, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Arguments encompass national emblems, taxes, medical care, retirement funds, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to inform and stimulate discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there is still lacking a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Debate suggests an recognition of the idea that there may exist valid points on each side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters claim they prefer unification but oppose greater financial contributions or introducing a different emblem to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British culture.
"The Irish government should establish what the proposal from nationalist groups is aside from just declaring: 'We want a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked O’Toole.
Probability of Referendum
The journalist thinks a referendum in his era is likely and that it may take place unexpectedly. "You could have just a mad or a ill-advised or a feckless official who says: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, justified perspectives, he commented. "Somebody will succeed in this matter and somebody will in the end lose but each side has possesses something to learn from the opposing arguments."
Call for More Extensive Debate
Westminster needed to join the debate, said O’Toole. "This concerns your state. It's a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish issue."
