Ten years after the UK stumbled into a hasty public vote that split the nation and triggered chaos, a caution is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
The government and voters drifted into Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is ready.
That represents the warning from two prominent writers from either side of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially tense and monumental public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can arise suddenly and can gain traction very quickly," O’Toole said. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our archipelago remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Intends to Encourage Dialogue
The pair have examined the political, economic and societal arguments for any governmental shift in a book, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to provoke discussion on the topic with a tour of lectures that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everybody, or must worry every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We should prevent a national vote on a yes-no, vague proposition whose consequences have remained undefined because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily divided society where the losing side are not reconciled to defeat and the those successful are uncertain quite what it is that they have achieved."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists claim this point is approaching, and a group named pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there might be a referendum.
Absence of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has hidden the shortage of serious debate, said McBride.
"People tend to be for or against the idea but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to realise it is mostly absent. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but scarcely any government figures or activists seek to involve themselves with the fundamentals. As an example, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, none of the commentators supports unity or the status quo. Both authors two articles that aim for objectivity in detailing the argument for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, assembling financial and societal data, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Debates cover identity markers, duties, healthcare systems, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The aim is to enlighten and provoke dialogue.
"Considerable attention exists in the topic but there hasn't quite been a discussion," said the writer. "Dialogue suggests an recognition of the concept that there may exist reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where citizens claim they support unity but oppose greater financial contributions or implementing a new flag to reflect unionists' British identity.
"The Irish government must work out what the offer from pro-unification movements is beyond just declaring: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.
Probability of Referendum
McBride thinks a referendum in his lifetime is possible and that it may take place abruptly. "There might be just a mad or a ill-advised or a feckless government minister who declares: 'Let's just do this and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have plausible, legitimate arguments, he commented. "One side will prevail in this matter and somebody will eventually be defeated but each side has got valuable insights to learn from the alternative positions."
Appeal for Wider Discussion
Westminster needed to join the discussion, stated O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a UK matter as much as it is an Irish question."
