A decade after the UK stumbled into a rushed public vote that divided the country and unleashed turmoil, a caution is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, sparking upheavals for which no one is equipped.
That is the message from two respected commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Establishments Not Ready
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a potentially contentious and seismic referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that events can come out of the blue and can gain traction very quickly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our islands remains very unstable."
Released Volume Aims to Provoke Discussion
The duo have analysed the political, financial and cultural reasons for any structural alteration in a book, The Case For and Against Unification, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to provoke discussion on the matter with a series of public talks that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What troubles everybody, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, unclear proposal whose results have remained undefined because then you find yourself with an highly split population where people who have lost are resistant to losing and the people who have won lack clarity quite what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a most voters would support.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue such a time is looming, and a non-profit named pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but both governments and pro-UK factions play down the likelihood, leaving it unclear when or if there could be a national vote.
Absence of Serious Debate
Partisan language supporting and opposing unity has obscured the lack of informed dialogue, said the journalist.
"Many are for or against the idea but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has taken place in universities but very few government figures or campaigners want to engage with even the fundamentals. To illustrate, which kind of country might be preferred? Centralised? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, none of the commentators advocates unity or the existing arrangement. Both writes two pieces that aim for impartiality in laying out the rationale for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, gathering economic and societal data, previous instances and structural examples.
Arguments range over flags and symbols, duties, medical care, retirement funds, public liabilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The objective is to educate and encourage discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there has not yet occurred a discussion," stated O’Toole. "Debate suggests an recognition of the concept that there might be good arguments on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where the electorate report they favour unification but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a alternative symbol to reflect unionists' British culture.
"Policymakers in Ireland must determine what the proposal from pro-unification movements is beyond just declaring: 'We want a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," stated O’Toole.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist believes a referendum in his era is possible and that it could happen unexpectedly. "There might be just a reckless or a ill-advised or a negligent secretary of state who declares: 'Let us proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have plausible, valid arguments, he commented. "One side will win in this matter and somebody will ultimately lose but each side has got valuable insights to acquire from the alternative arguments."
Appeal for Wider Discussion
Westminster should join the discussion, urged O’Toole. "This involves the United Kingdom. It's a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish matter."
