A decade after the UK entered into a rushed referendum that split the country and triggered chaos, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and voters entered unwittingly Brexit and the same might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, initiating convulsions for which no one is prepared.
That represents the warning from two prominent writers from each side of the Irish border who have teamed up to examine the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a possibly fraught and transformative public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can build support swiftly," O’Toole said. "It is my view that the political architecture of our region remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Intends to Provoke Discussion
The pair have examined the political, economic and societal arguments for any constitutional change in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the issue with a series of public talks that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What concerns everyone, or must worry every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, vague proposition whose results have not been spelled out because then you find yourself with an highly divided society where those defeated are unable to accept defeat and the victorious side are uncertain exactly what it is that they have won."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a most voters would support.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists claim this point is looming, and a organisation called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the likelihood, leaving it unclear whether or when there could be a national vote.
Insufficient Serious Debate
Partisan language for and against unification has masked the shortage of serious debate, stated the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the idea but the actual thinking which could extend past that to make it possible has largely not occurred. A great deal has gone on in scholarly circles but hardly any elected officials or campaigners are willing to participate with the basics. To illustrate, what type of nation would you want? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the volume, no writer supports unity or the current situation. Both writes two essays that seek impartiality in detailing the rationale for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, assembling financial and social data, historical precedents and structural examples.
Debates range over flags and symbols, taxes, health services, elderly benefits, public liabilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The objective is to educate and provoke conversation.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there is still lacking a discussion," commented the writer. "Discussion suggests an recognition of the notion that there may exist good arguments on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where citizens report they prefer unity but refuse paying higher taxes or implementing a new flag to reflect unionists' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland should determine what the plan from pro-unification movements is other than just declaring: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride considers a national vote in his era is likely and that it might occur unexpectedly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a poor or a incompetent secretary of state who declares: 'Let us proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Each of the pro-unification advocates and unionists have plausible, legitimate perspectives, he said. "Somebody will prevail in this matter and somebody will in the end not succeed but both parties has got something to acquire from the other's arguments."
Request for More Extensive Debate
Westminster should engage with the discussion, said O’Toole. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It is a British question just as much as it is an Irish matter."
