Ten years following the UK entered into a hasty referendum that split the nation and caused disorder, a caution is issued from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, triggering disturbances for which nobody is equipped.
That is the message from two respected journalists from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Not Ready
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a potentially fraught and monumental referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that events can arise suddenly and can gather momentum rapidly," the commentator said. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our region remains extremely volatile."
Released Volume Aims to Provoke Discussion
The pair have analysed the governmental, economic and societal reasons for any governmental shift in a publication, Examining Irish Unification, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the topic with a roadshow of public talks that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles all parties, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated O’Toole.
"We should prevent a referendum on a binary, vague proposition whose results have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extremely split population where the losing side are unable to accept losing and the those successful don't know quite what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state should call a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists argue such a time is approaching, and a non-profit called pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions minimise the prospect, making it uncertain when or if there might be a national vote.
Insufficient Serious Debate
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unification has masked the shortage of substantive discussion, noted the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the idea but the actual thinking which may surpass that to make it possible is mostly absent. Much has gone on in universities but scarcely any government figures or activists seek to involve themselves even with the basics. For instance, which kind of country should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the book, none of the commentators supports unification or the status quo. Both composes two essays that strive for impartiality in laying out the argument for a united Ireland and the rationale against, marshalling financial and societal statistics, historical precedents and structural examples.
Debates range over identity markers, duties, healthcare systems, pensions, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of unionist unrest. The objective is to enlighten and encourage dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there is still lacking a debate," stated the writer. "Dialogue indicates an acceptance of the idea that there could be good arguments on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate report they prefer unity but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a different emblem to reflect pro-UK communities' British identity.
"The Irish government must determine what the proposal from nationalist groups is aside from just saying: 'We want a united Ireland and we value you'," stated the commentator.
Probability of Referendum
The journalist thinks a referendum in his era is possible and that it could happen unexpectedly. "There might be just a mad or a ill-advised or a negligent official who states: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and pro-UK supporters have plausible, justified perspectives, he stated. "Somebody will succeed here and somebody will eventually not succeed but each side has possesses something to learn from the opposing positions."
Request for Broader Discussion
Westminster must engage with the discussion, said O’Toole. "This is about your state. It is a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish matter."
