Ten years following the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that split the country and triggered turmoil, a warning is issued from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating disturbances for which no one is equipped.
That is the message from two prominent writers from each side of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland departing the UK to form a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Unprepared
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially fraught and monumental public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can gain traction very quickly," the commentator stated. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our region remains highly fragile."
New Title Seeks to Stir Debate
The duo have examined the governmental, economic and societal arguments for any constitutional change in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the matter with a roadshow of public talks that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts everybody, or should haunt everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated O’Toole.
"We should prevent a national vote on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose implications have remained undefined because then you end up with an extremely divided society where the losing side are resistant to losing and the those successful are uncertain precisely what it is that they have gained."
Legal Framework
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists say such a time is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions downplay the likelihood, leaving it unclear when or if there will be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has masked the lack of informed dialogue, said McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the actual thinking which might go beyond that to achieve it is mostly absent. A great deal has occurred in scholarly circles but scarcely any government figures or advocates are willing to participate with even the essentials. To illustrate, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the book, none of the commentators advocates unification or the existing arrangement. Each authors two pieces that seek impartiality in detailing the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale opposing it, marshalling financial and societal data, historical precedents and structural examples.
Discussions range over identity markers, levies, medical care, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to enlighten and encourage conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an acknowledgement of the idea that there may exist reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where the electorate claim they prefer unification but reject increased taxation or adopting a new flag to recognise pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"The Irish government should determine what the offer from Irish nationalism is other than just saying: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," stated the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride considers a national vote in his lifetime is probable and that it may take place suddenly. "It is possible just a reckless or a bad or a negligent secretary of state who says: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate arguments, he stated. "One side will win in this matter and the other side will eventually not succeed but each side has got valuable insights to gain from the other's positions."
Request for Broader Discussion
Westminster should join the discussion, urged O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It is a UK matter as much as it is an Irish matter."
