A decade following the UK entered into a hurried referendum that split the country and caused turmoil, a caution is issued from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar may happen with a referendum on a unified Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is prepared.
That is the message from two prominent journalists from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially contentious and transformative public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can arise suddenly and can build support swiftly," the commentator said. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our islands remains extremely volatile."
Released Volume Aims to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have analysed the governmental, financial and cultural reasons for any governmental shift in a volume, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the issue with a series of speaking events that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everybody, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said the analyst.
"We must avoid a referendum on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose results have not been clarified because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily split population where the losing side are not reconciled to losing and the people who have won are uncertain exactly what it is that they have won."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state should call a referendum on Irish unification if it seems probable that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue that moment is looming, and a group called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and unionists play down the possibility, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there will be a national vote.
Insufficient Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements for and against unity has obscured the shortage of substantive discussion, noted McBride.
"Many are for or against the idea but the concrete planning which may surpass that to make it possible has largely not occurred. A lot has taken place in academia but hardly any politicians or activists seek to involve themselves with the essentials. To illustrate, what sort of state should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the volume, no writer supports unity or the current situation. Both authors two pieces that aim for impartiality in laying out the argument for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, marshalling economic and social statistics, previous instances and constitutional models.
Discussions range over national emblems, duties, health services, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the risk of loyalist violence. The aim is to educate and provoke discussion.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there hasn't quite been a discussion," commented the writer. "Discussion implies an acceptance of the idea that there could be good arguments on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where citizens claim they prefer unity but oppose greater financial contributions or introducing a new flag to recognise unionists' British culture.
"The Irish government does need to work out what the proposal from Irish nationalism is beyond just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
The journalist believes a referendum in his generation is probable and that it might occur suddenly. "There might be just a mad or a ill-advised or a feckless official who declares: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have plausible, legitimate arguments, he stated. "One side will prevail in this matter and the other side will eventually lose but all factions has possesses valuable insights to acquire from the other's arguments."
Appeal for Wider Discussion
Westminster must join the debate, stated O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It is a British question just as much as it is an Irish question."
