Ten years after the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that polarised the country and caused disorder, a caution comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and citizens drifted into Brexit and the similar could occur with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering disturbances for which no one is ready.
That conveys the caution from two prominent writers from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have determined that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially tense and monumental public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can build support swiftly," the commentator said. "It is my view that the political architecture of our islands remains extremely volatile."
Released Volume Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The team have examined the governmental, economic and cultural reasons for any constitutional change in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to stir debate on the matter with a series of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles everybody, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a binary, unclear proposal whose results have remained undefined because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily polarised community where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the victorious side don't know precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Constitutional Provision
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it appears likely that a most voters would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is looming, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the possibility, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there will be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements for and against unity has obscured the absence of substantive discussion, said McBride.
"Many are supportive or opposed the idea but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has occurred in scholarly circles but hardly any politicians or advocates want to engage even with the essentials. For instance, what type of nation should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the book, none of the commentators endorses unity or the status quo. Each authors two pieces that seek impartiality in laying out the rationale for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, assembling financial and social data, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Debates encompass national emblems, duties, healthcare systems, retirement funds, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to enlighten and encourage conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the issue but there has not yet occurred a debate," said the writer. "Dialogue indicates an acknowledgement of the notion that there may exist reasonable perspectives on either side."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where citizens report they prefer unity but refuse increased taxation or introducing a alternative symbol to recognise unionists' British identity.
"Authorities in Dublin must work out what the offer from pro-unification movements is beyond just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," remarked the commentator.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride considers a referendum in his era is possible and that it could happen abruptly. "There might be just a reckless or a poor or a feckless secretary of state who says: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have plausible, justified arguments, he said. "One side will succeed on this issue and somebody will in the end not succeed but both parties has has important lessons to acquire from the alternative arguments."
Request for Broader Dialogue
Westminster needed to participate in the discussion, urged the analyst. "This is about Britain. It's a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."
