Ten years following the UK stumbled into a hurried public vote that split the nation and triggered disorder, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Authorities and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar may happen with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking upheavals for which nobody is prepared.
That is the message from two respected journalists from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a potentially tense and seismic referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that events can arise suddenly and can gain traction very quickly," the commentator stated. "In my opinion that the institutional structure of our region remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have studied the governmental, economic and cultural arguments for any constitutional change in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to encourage dialogue on the issue with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What troubles everybody, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We should prevent a referendum on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose results have not been spelled out because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily divided society where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the victorious side lack clarity precisely what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim that moment is imminent, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions play down the prospect, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there could be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unification has obscured the lack of substantive discussion, said McBride.
"Many are supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which could extend past that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has taken place in universities but scarcely any politicians or campaigners want to engage even with the essentials. To illustrate, which kind of country should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, no writer advocates unification or the current situation. They writes two pieces that strive for objectivity in detailing the argument for a unified Ireland and the argument opposing it, gathering financial and societal data, historical precedents and structural examples.
Discussions encompass national emblems, taxes, health services, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the risk of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to inform and stimulate discussion.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," commented the writer. "Debate implies an acceptance of the concept that there may exist valid points on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where voters claim they support unity but reject paying higher taxes or introducing a alternative symbol to recognise unionists' British identity.
"The Irish government does need to establish what the offer from nationalist groups is aside from just saying: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we value you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride thinks a national vote in his lifetime is likely and that it may take place unexpectedly. "You could have just a mad or a poor or a incompetent official who declares: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have credible, valid points, he commented. "One side will prevail here and the other side will eventually lose but all factions has got something to acquire from the alternative arguments."
Request for Broader Discussion
Westminster needed to join the debate, urged the analyst. "This involves your state. It's a British question just as much as it is an Irish matter."
