A decade after the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that split the nation and triggered chaos, a advisory emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar may happen with a national vote on a unified Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is ready.
That conveys the caution from two leading commentators from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully ill-prepared for a potentially tense and seismic public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator said. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our region remains extremely volatile."
New Title Aims to Stir Debate
The team have examined the political, economic and societal reasons for any constitutional change in a publication, Examining Irish Unification, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to encourage dialogue on the issue with a roadshow of speaking events that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What concerns all parties, or must worry everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you find yourself with an extremely split population where the losing side are not reconciled to defeat and the people who have won are uncertain quite what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister should call a public vote on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups claim such a time is approaching, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions play down the likelihood, leaving it unclear whether or when there will be a referendum.
Insufficient Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has hidden the shortage of substantive discussion, noted McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the idea but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it is mostly absent. A lot has occurred in universities but very few elected officials or advocates are willing to participate with even the fundamentals. For instance, which kind of country would you want? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, none of the commentators endorses unity or the status quo. Each authors two articles that strive for objectivity in laying out the rationale for a unified Ireland and the case against, assembling economic and societal statistics, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Arguments range over flags and symbols, duties, health services, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the threat of loyalist violence. The goal is to inform and stimulate discussion.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," said O’Toole. "Dialogue implies an recognition of the idea that there might be reasonable perspectives on either side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens claim they favour unification but refuse paying higher taxes or introducing a alternative symbol to reflect pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"Policymakers in Ireland should determine what the offer from Irish nationalism is aside from just declaring: 'We seek a united Ireland and we value you'," said O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
The journalist considers a referendum in his generation is possible and that it might occur suddenly. "You could have just a reckless or a poor or a negligent government minister who states: 'Let us proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, justified arguments, he commented. "One side will prevail in this matter and the other side will in the end lose but each side has possesses something to gain from the other's viewpoints."
Appeal for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster needed to engage with the discussion, said O’Toole. "This concerns Britain. It's a British question just as much as it is an Irish matter."
