A decade after the UK embarked on a hurried referendum that split the nation and unleashed disorder, a advisory comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Policymakers and citizens entered unwittingly Brexit and the similar could occur with a referendum on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is prepared.
That represents the warning from two prominent commentators from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to examine the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Structures Not Ready
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a possibly fraught and monumental public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can build support swiftly," O’Toole said. "It is my view that the political architecture of our islands remains extremely volatile."
New Title Aims to Encourage Dialogue
The pair have analysed the political, economic and societal rationales for any structural alteration in a volume, Examining Irish Unification, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to encourage dialogue on the issue with a tour of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts everybody, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We should prevent a referendum on a binary, unclear proposal whose consequences have not been clarified because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily split population where those defeated are not reconciled to defeat and the people who have won don't know precisely what it is that they have won."
Constitutional Provision
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state should call a referendum on Irish unification if it appears likely that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue that moment is imminent, and a organisation named pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the possibility, leaving it unclear whether or when there could be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unification has masked the lack of informed dialogue, noted McBride.
"People tend to be for or against the idea but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but scarcely any elected officials or activists are willing to participate with even the essentials. As an example, what type of nation would you want? Unitary? Federal?"
Volume's Strategy
In the publication, no writer supports unity or the status quo. Both writes two essays that strive for impartiality in presenting the rationale for a united Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling economic and social figures, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Discussions encompass national emblems, duties, health services, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The objective is to enlighten and encourage conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the topic but there is still lacking a debate," stated the writer. "Discussion suggests an recognition of the notion that there could be valid points on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters report they prefer unity but refuse increased taxation or implementing a new flag to recognise unionists' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland should establish what the proposal from nationalist groups is aside from just declaring: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," stated O’Toole.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist thinks a national vote in his era is probable and that it might occur abruptly. "It is possible just a reckless or a ill-advised or a negligent government minister who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate points, he stated. "Somebody will win in this matter and somebody will in the end lose but each side has got important lessons to learn from the opposing positions."
Request for Wider Dialogue
Westminster should join the debate, stated O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It is a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish issue."
