A decade after the UK entered into a hurried referendum that divided the country and caused disorder, a warning comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating upheavals for which nobody is prepared.
That conveys the caution from two prominent journalists from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to create a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Structures Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a possibly fraught and transformative referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that events can arise suddenly and can build support rapidly," O’Toole remarked. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our region remains extremely volatile."
Released Volume Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The team have examined the governmental, economic and societal reasons for any constitutional change in a volume, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to encourage dialogue on the topic with a series of public talks that will bring them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everyone, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We should prevent a national vote on a binary, unclear proposal whose results have remained undefined because then you land with an extraordinarily split population where people who have lost are resistant to defeat and the people who have won are uncertain quite what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would support.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups claim this point is approaching, and a group named Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but both governments and unionists minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there might be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements for and against unification has masked the shortage of substantive discussion, stated McBride.
"Many are supportive or opposed the concept but the actual thinking which could extend past that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but hardly any elected officials or campaigners are willing to participate with even the essentials. For instance, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, no writer advocates unity or the existing arrangement. Each composes two essays that strive for objectivity in detailing the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale opposing it, marshalling economic and social data, previous instances and governmental frameworks.
Arguments range over flags and symbols, taxes, medical care, retirement funds, public liabilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The aim is to enlighten and provoke conversation.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there is still lacking a discussion," stated O’Toole. "Discussion implies an acknowledgement of the concept that there could be reasonable perspectives on either side."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens claim they prefer unification but refuse increased taxation or introducing a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' British culture.
"The Irish government should determine what the offer from Irish nationalism is beyond just saying: 'We desire a united Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride considers a referendum in his generation is possible and that it could happen unexpectedly. "It is possible just a reckless or a ill-advised or a negligent official who says: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have credible, valid points, he said. "One side will prevail in this matter and somebody will eventually be defeated but each side has possesses important lessons to acquire from the opposing arguments."
Call for More Extensive Debate
Westminster should join the dialogue, urged O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish issue."
