A decade following the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that divided the country and triggered chaos, a caution comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and electorate drifted into Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating convulsions for which nobody is equipped.
That is the message from two leading commentators from either side of the Irish border who have joined forces to examine the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to create a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Establishments Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have determined that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a possibly fraught and seismic referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can come out of the blue and can gather momentum rapidly," O’Toole remarked. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our islands remains highly fragile."
Book Publication Intends to Stir Debate
The duo have examined the governmental, financial and societal arguments for any governmental shift in a volume, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the topic with a series of lectures that will lead them to Westminster soon.
"What haunts everybody, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We must avoid a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose implications have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extraordinarily split population where the losing side are resistant to defeat and the those successful don't know precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups say that moment is imminent, and a organisation called Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there will be a national vote.
Insufficient Serious Debate
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has masked the lack of serious debate, noted the journalist.
"Many are supportive or opposed the idea but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to achieve it has largely not occurred. A great deal has occurred in scholarly circles but scarcely any politicians or advocates are willing to participate with even the basics. As an example, what sort of state should be desired? Centralised? Federal?"
Volume's Strategy
In the volume, no writer advocates unity or the existing arrangement. Each composes two essays that seek neutrality in detailing the rationale for a united Ireland and the case against, gathering economic and societal figures, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Discussions encompass flags and symbols, levies, healthcare systems, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The objective is to inform and provoke conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a dialogue," said the writer. "Dialogue indicates an acceptance of the notion that there could be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where the electorate report they favour unification but reject increased taxation or adopting a alternative symbol to reflect unionists' British culture.
"The Irish government does need to establish what the plan from Irish nationalism is other than just saying: 'We desire a united Ireland and we love you'," stated the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
The journalist thinks a national vote in his era is possible and that it might occur abruptly. "You could have just a mad or a ill-advised or a negligent government minister who says: 'Let's just do this and resolve it.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have credible, legitimate perspectives, he said. "Somebody will prevail in this matter and somebody will in the end lose but both parties has got valuable insights to learn from the other's viewpoints."
Call for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster needed to engage with the debate, stated O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It's a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish question."
