A decade after the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that polarised the nation and triggered disorder, a caution emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and citizens entered unwittingly Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking disturbances for which nobody is equipped.
That is the message from two prominent writers from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a possibly contentious and seismic referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can build support rapidly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our region remains very unstable."
New Title Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have studied the governmental, economic and cultural arguments for any constitutional change in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the issue with a roadshow of public talks that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everybody, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you land with an extraordinarily split population where people who have lost are not reconciled to losing and the victorious side are uncertain quite what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would support.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue such a time is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and pro-UK factions play down the likelihood, leaving it unclear when or if there will be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Partisan language supporting and opposing unity has obscured the shortage of informed dialogue, stated McBride.
"Many are for or against the idea but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has taken place in scholarly circles but very few elected officials or campaigners are willing to participate with the basics. To illustrate, what type of nation might be preferred? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, none of the commentators advocates unification or the existing arrangement. Each writes two pieces that strive for neutrality in detailing the case for a unified Ireland and the case opposing it, marshalling economic and societal statistics, historical precedents and structural examples.
Discussions range over identity markers, duties, medical care, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the threat of loyalist violence. The goal is to educate and provoke discussion.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a dialogue," commented O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an acknowledgement of the idea that there might be good arguments on either side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens say they prefer unification but oppose paying higher taxes or introducing a alternative symbol to recognise pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"Policymakers in Ireland should determine what the offer from nationalist groups is beyond just declaring: 'We desire a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.
Likelihood of Public Vote
The journalist thinks a referendum in his generation is possible and that it could happen suddenly. "There might be just a reckless or a bad or a feckless government minister who declares: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have plausible, justified arguments, he commented. "One side will succeed in this matter and somebody will in the end lose but each side has got something to acquire from the other's arguments."
Appeal for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster should join the discussion, urged the analyst. "This involves Britain. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."
