Ten years following the UK embarked on a rushed referendum that divided the nation and caused turmoil, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a referendum on a unified Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is ready.
That conveys the caution from two leading writers from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely ill-prepared for a possibly tense and transformative referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can build support swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our archipelago remains extremely volatile."
New Title Aims to Provoke Discussion
The pair have analysed the governmental, economic and societal reasons for any governmental shift in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the matter with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What concerns everyone, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We should prevent a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, vague proposition whose results have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extraordinarily divided society where people who have lost are not reconciled to losing and the those successful don't know precisely what it is that they have won."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister must arrange a referendum on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is imminent, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity if and when there will be a national vote.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unity has masked the lack of substantive discussion, noted McBride.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the idea but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it has largely not occurred. A great deal has taken place in universities but scarcely any government figures or advocates seek to involve themselves even with the essentials. To illustrate, which kind of country should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, none of the commentators endorses unity or the current situation. Both composes two essays that aim for neutrality in presenting the case for a united Ireland and the argument against, assembling financial and social statistics, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Discussions cover national emblems, taxes, healthcare systems, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the danger of loyalist violence. The goal is to enlighten and stimulate dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there is still lacking a discussion," said the writer. "Dialogue suggests an recognition of the concept that there could be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where citizens claim they favour unity but oppose paying higher taxes or adopting a different emblem to reflect unionists' British culture.
"The Irish government does need to establish what the offer from nationalist groups is aside from just stating: 'We want a united Ireland and we welcome you'," stated the commentator.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride believes a national vote in his generation is likely and that it might occur unexpectedly. "You could have just a mad or a bad or a incompetent official who declares: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, justified points, he said. "One side will prevail in this matter and somebody will in the end be defeated but each side has got important lessons to learn from the other's viewpoints."
Call for Broader Discussion
Westminster should participate in the discussion, stated the analyst. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish question."
