Ten years following the UK embarked on a hurried referendum that polarised the nation and caused chaos, a warning emerges from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the same may happen with a referendum on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is equipped.
That represents the warning from two leading commentators from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Not Ready
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a possibly tense and transformative referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can build support rapidly," O’Toole stated. "In my opinion that the governmental framework of our archipelago remains very unstable."
New Title Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The pair have analysed the governmental, financial and societal reasons for any structural alteration in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to stir debate on the topic with a roadshow of lectures that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles everyone, or ought to concern everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We should prevent a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose results have remained undefined because then you end up with an extraordinarily divided society where the losing side are resistant to defeat and the victorious side don't know exactly what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists claim that moment is imminent, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the prospect, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there will be a national vote.
Insufficient Serious Debate
Ideological statements for and against unity has masked the shortage of informed dialogue, noted McBride.
"Many are for or against the idea but the actual thinking which might go beyond that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. Much has gone on in academia but scarcely any politicians or advocates want to engage even with the essentials. As an example, which kind of country should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the publication, no writer supports unity or the status quo. Both authors two essays that seek impartiality in detailing the argument for a united Ireland and the rationale opposing it, gathering financial and societal figures, previous instances and governmental frameworks.
Discussions encompass identity markers, duties, health services, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to enlighten and stimulate discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there hasn't quite been a discussion," said the writer. "Dialogue indicates an acknowledgement of the concept that there could be valid points on either side."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters report they support unification but refuse paying higher taxes or adopting a different emblem to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin must work out what the plan from nationalist groups is other than just saying: 'We want a unified Ireland and we value you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride considers a national vote in his lifetime is probable and that it might occur suddenly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a incompetent secretary of state who says: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, legitimate points, he said. "Somebody will win in this matter and the other side will in the end lose but both parties has possesses important lessons to acquire from the opposing viewpoints."
Appeal for Broader Discussion
Westminster needed to join the dialogue, stated the analyst. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It's a British issue just as much as it is an Irish issue."
