Ten years after the UK embarked on a hurried referendum that split the nation and caused turmoil, a caution emerges from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and voters entered unwittingly Brexit and the identical might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, initiating disturbances for which nobody is prepared.
That conveys the caution from two prominent writers from either side of the Irish border who have joined forces to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially tense and seismic referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can build support rapidly," the commentator said. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our region remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Aims to Stir Debate
The pair have studied the governmental, economic and cultural reasons for any governmental shift in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to encourage dialogue on the topic with a roadshow of speaking events that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What troubles all parties, or should haunt everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We must avoid a national vote on a binary, vague proposition whose consequences have not been clarified because then you land with an extremely divided society where people who have lost are unable to accept 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 official is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would approve.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim that moment is looming, and a organisation named pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there could be a referendum.
Absence of Serious Debate
Partisan language for and against unification has hidden the lack of serious debate, said the journalist.
"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the actual thinking which might go beyond that to realise it is mostly absent. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but very few government figures or advocates are willing to participate with the fundamentals. For instance, what type of nation would you want? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the volume, no writer advocates unity or the status quo. Each authors two essays that aim for impartiality in laying out the argument for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, marshalling economic and social figures, past examples and constitutional models.
Arguments encompass national emblems, duties, health services, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The objective is to educate and encourage discussion.
"There's huge interest in the issue but there has not yet occurred a discussion," commented the writer. "Debate implies an recognition of the idea that there could be valid points on each side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where voters report they favour unification but reject increased taxation or introducing a new flag to recognise unionists' British culture.
"The Irish government must establish what the proposal from nationalist groups is beyond just saying: 'We desire a united Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist considers a national vote in his generation is likely and that it may take place unexpectedly. "You could have just a mad or a bad or a incompetent secretary of state who states: 'Let's just do this and get it out of the way.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate arguments, he stated. "One side will win in this matter and somebody will eventually not succeed but both parties has has important lessons to gain from the alternative arguments."
Appeal for Broader Discussion
Westminster needed to engage with the dialogue, urged O’Toole. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish issue."
