Ten years following the UK entered into a rushed referendum that split the country and triggered disorder, a caution comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and citizens drifted into Brexit and the similar may happen with a referendum on a unified Ireland, initiating upheavals for which nobody is equipped.
That is the message from two prominent journalists from each side of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Structures Unprepared
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are woefully unready for a possibly fraught and transformative public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can build support rapidly," O’Toole stated. "It is my view that the political architecture of our islands remains very unstable."
Book Publication Intends to Stir Debate
The team have studied the political, financial and societal arguments for any constitutional change in a book, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the issue with a tour of speaking events that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What concerns everybody, or must worry every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We must avoid a national vote on a binary, ambiguous question whose results have remained undefined because then you land with an extraordinarily polarised community where people who have lost are unable to accept losing and the people who have won don't know quite what it is that they have achieved."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unification if it seems probable that a most voters would support.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists say such a time is looming, and a organisation named pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the possibility, resulting in ambiguity when or if there will be a national vote.
Insufficient Serious Debate
Partisan language supporting and opposing unity has masked the shortage of serious debate, noted McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in scholarly circles but very few government figures or activists are willing to participate even with the basics. To illustrate, which kind of country might be preferred? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, none of the commentators supports unification or the existing arrangement. Both writes two articles that strive for impartiality in presenting the argument for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, assembling financial and societal figures, historical precedents and structural examples.
Arguments encompass national emblems, taxes, medical care, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to enlighten and stimulate conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the topic but there is still lacking a dialogue," stated the writer. "Debate indicates an acknowledgement of the notion that there may exist reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where voters claim they support unity but reject increased taxation or adopting a new flag to recognise pro-UK communities' British culture.
"The Irish government should work out what the proposal from pro-unification movements is other than just declaring: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we value you'," remarked O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
The journalist believes a national vote in his era is possible and that it might occur abruptly. "It is possible just a mad or a ill-advised or a negligent government minister who states: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have plausible, justified arguments, he stated. "Somebody will prevail on this issue and somebody will eventually be defeated but both parties has possesses important lessons to learn from the opposing arguments."
Call for Wider Dialogue
Westminster should participate in the dialogue, urged O’Toole. "This involves your state. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish question."
