Ten years following the UK embarked on a hurried public vote that split the country and unleashed turmoil, a advisory is issued from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
The government and voters entered unwittingly Brexit and the identical may happen with a referendum on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which no one is ready.
That is the message from two respected writers from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to examine the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a possibly tense and monumental public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "In my opinion that the institutional structure of our region remains very unstable."
Book Publication Seeks to Stir Debate
The duo have examined the political, financial and societal rationales for any structural alteration in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the matter with a series of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster soon.
"What concerns everyone, or must worry every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a binary, vague proposition whose results have not been clarified because then you land with an extraordinarily polarised community where people who have lost are not reconciled to defeat and the victorious side are uncertain quite what it is that they have won."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it appears likely that a most voters would support.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups say such a time is imminent, and a non-profit named pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but both governments and pro-UK factions play down the possibility, leaving it unclear if and when there might be a national vote.
Lack of Serious Debate
Partisan language for and against unity has masked the absence of substantive discussion, stated the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the notion but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to make it possible is mostly absent. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but very few elected officials or advocates are willing to participate with even the essentials. For instance, which kind of country might be preferred? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the publication, none of the commentators endorses unification or the status quo. Each composes two articles that seek objectivity in laying out the argument for a united Ireland and the case against, marshalling economic and societal data, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Arguments range over flags and symbols, levies, medical care, pensions, public liabilities and the threat of unionist unrest. The objective is to educate and provoke conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there is still lacking a dialogue," commented O’Toole. "Discussion implies an recognition of the idea that there could be good arguments on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate claim they support unity but oppose increased taxation or introducing a different emblem to reflect pro-UK communities' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to establish what the plan from nationalist groups is aside from just stating: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist believes a referendum in his era is possible and that it may take place abruptly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a poor or a negligent official who states: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, valid points, he commented. "Somebody will prevail here and the other side will in the end be defeated but both parties has possesses something to acquire from the alternative arguments."
Call for Wider Discussion
Westminster must engage with the dialogue, stated the analyst. "This involves the United Kingdom. It is a British issue equally as it is an Irish matter."
