Ten years following the UK stumbled into a rushed public vote that polarised the country and caused disorder, a advisory is issued from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and voters drifted into Brexit and the same might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, triggering disturbances for which nobody is prepared.
That is the message from two leading writers from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a potentially contentious and seismic referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can gain traction very quickly," O’Toole remarked. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our region remains highly fragile."
New Title Intends to Stir Debate
The pair have analysed the political, financial and societal reasons for any structural alteration in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the topic with a roadshow of lectures that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What concerns everyone, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said the analyst.
"We must avoid a referendum on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose consequences have remained undefined because then you find yourself with an extremely polarised community where those defeated are unable to accept defeat and the people who have won don't know precisely what it is that they have won."
Constitutional Provision
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state should call a public vote on Irish unification if it seems probable that a majority would support.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups say that moment is approaching, and a non-profit named pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but both governments and pro-UK factions downplay the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there could be a referendum.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unification has obscured the absence of informed dialogue, said McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the concrete planning which could extend past that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in academia but very few elected officials or activists want to engage with even the basics. For instance, which kind of country might be preferred? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the book, neither author advocates unity or the current situation. Each writes two essays that strive for impartiality in laying out the argument for a united Ireland and the rationale opposing it, marshalling financial and social statistics, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Arguments encompass national emblems, duties, health services, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to enlighten and stimulate dialogue.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a debate," stated the writer. "Dialogue suggests an recognition of the idea that there might be good arguments on either side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where citizens report they favour unity but reject greater financial contributions or implementing a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland must work out what the plan from Irish nationalism is beyond just saying: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," said the commentator.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride considers a national vote in his era is probable and that it could happen suddenly. "There might be just a mad or a poor or a feckless secretary of state who declares: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have credible, valid arguments, he said. "Somebody will win on this issue and the other side will ultimately be defeated but each side has got valuable insights to acquire from the opposing arguments."
Call for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster should engage with the dialogue, urged the analyst. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It's a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish matter."
