Ten years following the UK stumbled into a rushed public vote that split the country and triggered disorder, a caution emerges from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and electorate entered unwittingly Brexit and the same could occur with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating disturbances for which no one is equipped.
That is the message from two leading commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to examine the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a possibly tense and seismic public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can come out of the blue and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Aims to Provoke Discussion
The pair have analysed the political, economic and societal reasons for any constitutional change in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to provoke discussion on the issue with a series of lectures that will bring them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts everybody, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a yes-no, vague proposition whose implications have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extraordinarily divided society where those defeated are not reconciled to defeat and the those successful are uncertain precisely what it is that they have won."
Governmental Mandate
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official should call a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would support.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists say this point is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the prospect, making it uncertain if and when there might be a referendum.
Lack of Serious Debate
Political rhetoric for and against unity has masked the shortage of serious debate, noted McBride.
"People tend to be for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to make it possible has largely not occurred. A lot has occurred in scholarly circles but hardly any politicians or campaigners are willing to participate with the essentials. For instance, what sort of state would you want? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, no writer advocates unity or the existing arrangement. They writes two essays that aim for neutrality in detailing the rationale for a unified Ireland and the case opposing it, assembling economic and societal figures, previous instances and constitutional models.
Arguments cover identity markers, duties, medical care, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to educate and encourage conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there is still lacking a discussion," said the writer. "Discussion implies an acceptance of the notion that there might be valid points on either side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate claim they prefer unity but oppose greater financial contributions or introducing a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"The Irish government should work out what the proposal from pro-unification movements is beyond just declaring: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we value you'," stated O’Toole.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride believes a national vote in his generation is likely and that it might occur unexpectedly. "There might be just a irresponsible or a poor or a negligent secretary of state who states: 'Let's just do this and resolve it.'"
Both nationalists and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, legitimate arguments, he commented. "One side will prevail here and the other side will ultimately not succeed but both parties has possesses valuable insights to gain from the alternative positions."
Call for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster must engage with the discussion, urged O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter equally as it is an Irish question."
