A decade following the UK entered into a hurried public vote that polarised the nation and caused disorder, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar may happen with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating disturbances for which no one is prepared.
That is the message from two prominent 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 fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a potentially contentious and seismic referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can build support very quickly," the commentator said. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Intends to Stir Debate
The team have analysed the political, financial and cultural arguments for any governmental shift in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to provoke discussion on the issue with a roadshow of lectures that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles all parties, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We should prevent a national vote on a binary, unclear proposal whose implications have not been spelled out because then you land with an highly split population where people who have lost are not reconciled to losing and the those successful lack clarity precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it appears likely that a majority would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists say that moment is approaching, and a non-profit called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists minimise the likelihood, leaving it unclear whether or when there might be a referendum.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unity has obscured the lack of substantive discussion, stated McBride.
"Many are for or against the concept but the actual thinking which could extend past that to achieve it has largely not occurred. A lot has taken place in scholarly circles but hardly any government figures or campaigners seek to involve themselves with the basics. As an example, what sort of state should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the book, none of the commentators endorses unity or the status quo. They authors two essays that aim for neutrality in presenting the argument for a united Ireland and the rationale opposing it, assembling economic and social statistics, past examples and structural examples.
Discussions range over flags and symbols, duties, medical care, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The objective is to enlighten and provoke discussion.
"There's huge interest in the issue but there is still lacking a debate," commented the writer. "Debate implies an acknowledgement of the concept that there might be reasonable perspectives on either side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where citizens claim they prefer unity but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a new flag to reflect unionists' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland should determine what the offer from Irish nationalism is beyond just declaring: 'We desire a united Ireland and we value you'," said O’Toole.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride thinks a national vote in his generation is likely and that it may take place unexpectedly. "It is possible just a reckless or a poor or a negligent official who says: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have plausible, valid points, he stated. "One side will win here and somebody will ultimately be defeated but each side has possesses important lessons to gain from the alternative positions."
Call for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster should engage with the discussion, stated O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish matter."
