A decade following the UK embarked on a hurried public vote that split the nation and triggered turmoil, a advisory emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and electorate entered unwittingly Brexit and the same may happen with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating upheavals for which no one is ready.
That represents the warning from two leading commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are woefully ill-prepared for a potentially contentious and transformative referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator said. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our region remains extremely volatile."
Released Volume Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The duo have examined the political, economic and societal reasons for any governmental shift in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the issue with a tour of lectures that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What concerns all parties, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose implications have not been spelled out because then you land with an extremely split population where people who have lost are unable to accept losing and the those successful don't know precisely what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would support.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue that moment is imminent, and a group called pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the possibility, making it uncertain if and when there could be a referendum.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has hidden the lack of informed dialogue, said the journalist.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has taken place in scholarly circles but hardly any politicians or campaigners want to engage with even the basics. To illustrate, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the book, neither author advocates unity or the current situation. Both writes two articles that aim for neutrality in detailing the rationale for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, marshalling economic and societal data, past examples and structural examples.
Discussions cover identity markers, levies, medical care, retirement funds, public liabilities and the risk of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to inform and provoke conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there is still lacking a dialogue," commented the writer. "Discussion suggests an acceptance of the idea that there could be valid points on either side."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where voters report they prefer unity but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a alternative symbol to reflect pro-UK communities' British culture.
"The Irish government must determine what the proposal from pro-unification movements is beyond just stating: 'We want a unified Ireland and we value you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist considers a national vote in his era is probable and that it could happen unexpectedly. "You could have just a mad or a poor or a feckless secretary of state who states: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, valid points, he commented. "Somebody will win in this matter and somebody will in the end lose but each side has possesses something to acquire from the other's positions."
Appeal for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster should engage with the debate, urged O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It's a British issue just as much as it is an Irish question."
