A decade after the UK embarked on a rushed public vote that polarised the country and triggered disorder, a warning emerges from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical could occur with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is prepared.
That conveys the caution from two prominent writers from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Structures Unprepared
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a possibly contentious and transformative public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can come out of the blue and can gather momentum swiftly," the commentator said. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our region remains highly fragile."
New Title Intends to Provoke Discussion
The team have studied the political, economic and cultural reasons for any structural alteration in a publication, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to stir debate on the topic with a tour of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What haunts everyone, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We must avoid a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, unclear proposal whose implications have not been clarified because then you end up with an extremely split population where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the those successful are uncertain quite what it is that they have achieved."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups say that moment is imminent, and a group called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but both governments and pro-UK factions minimise the likelihood, making it uncertain if and when there could be a national vote.
Absence of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unity has obscured the lack of substantive discussion, stated McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in academia but very few government figures or activists are willing to participate even with the essentials. To illustrate, which kind of country might be preferred? Centralised? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the volume, none of the commentators supports unity or the status quo. Each composes two articles that aim for neutrality in presenting the case for a united Ireland and the rationale opposing it, gathering financial and social data, previous instances and structural examples.
Arguments cover flags and symbols, levies, healthcare systems, pensions, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of unionist unrest. The objective is to inform and provoke discussion.
"There's huge interest in the issue but there is still lacking a dialogue," commented O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an recognition of the concept that there could be good arguments on either side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where voters claim they favour unification but reject increased taxation or adopting a different emblem to reflect unionists' UK heritage.
"Policymakers in Ireland must work out what the proposal from nationalist groups is other than just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we value you'," said O’Toole.
Possibility of Referendum
The journalist thinks a referendum in his era is possible and that it might occur abruptly. "There might be just a reckless or a ill-advised or a incompetent official who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate arguments, he said. "Somebody will prevail on this issue and the other side will eventually lose but all factions has possesses important lessons to learn from the opposing arguments."
Request for Wider Dialogue
Westminster should engage with the debate, urged O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It's a UK matter as much as it is an Irish question."
