Ten years following the UK stumbled into a hurried referendum that polarised the country and caused turmoil, a advisory emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and voters drifted into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating disturbances for which no one is equipped.
That is the message from two respected journalists from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a possibly contentious and transformative public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can build support rapidly," the commentator remarked. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our region remains very unstable."
Released Volume Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The duo have analysed the governmental, financial and societal arguments for any constitutional change in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to provoke discussion on the issue with a series of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles everybody, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We must avoid a referendum on a binary, vague proposition whose consequences have not been clarified because then you find yourself with an highly divided society where those defeated are not reconciled to losing and the victorious side are uncertain 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 unity if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups say that moment is approaching, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but both governments and pro-UK factions play down the possibility, resulting in ambiguity when or if there might be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Partisan language supporting and opposing unification has masked the lack of informed dialogue, said the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the notion but the concrete planning which could extend past that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in universities but hardly any elected officials or advocates want to engage with even the essentials. As an example, what type of nation should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, neither author endorses unity or the existing arrangement. They writes two essays that aim for neutrality in laying out the case for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, marshalling financial and social data, previous instances and governmental frameworks.
Discussions cover national emblems, levies, healthcare systems, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to educate and provoke discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there has not yet occurred a debate," commented the writer. "Discussion indicates an acceptance of the idea that there might be valid points on each side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens claim they support unification but oppose increased taxation or adopting a alternative symbol to reflect pro-UK communities' British culture.
"Policymakers in Ireland does need to work out what the plan from pro-unification movements is other than just declaring: 'We want a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," stated the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride considers a referendum in his era is possible and that it might occur suddenly. "It is possible just a mad or a ill-advised or a feckless secretary of state who states: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, valid perspectives, he said. "Somebody will prevail here and the other side will ultimately be defeated but each side has got something to acquire from the other's viewpoints."
Request for Wider Discussion
Westminster needed to engage with the debate, urged the analyst. "This involves your state. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."
