A decade following the UK stumbled into a hasty referendum that split the country and triggered turmoil, a caution comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Policymakers and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the same might transpire with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering disturbances for which nobody is prepared.
That is the message from two respected 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 fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Unprepared
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a potentially fraught and transformative referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our region remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Intends to Provoke Discussion
The pair have studied the governmental, financial and cultural rationales for any structural alteration in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the topic with a series of lectures that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts all parties, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a yes-no, vague proposition whose implications have remained undefined because then you land with an highly polarised community where those defeated are unable to accept defeat and the those successful are uncertain quite what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a referendum on Irish unification if it is indicated that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists say that moment is imminent, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but both governments and pro-UK factions play down the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there might be a national vote.
Absence of Serious Debate
Partisan language for and against unification has hidden the absence of substantive discussion, stated the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the notion but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in universities but very few government figures or campaigners seek to involve themselves with the basics. For instance, what type of nation would you want? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, none of the commentators endorses unity or the current situation. Both composes two articles that strive for objectivity in detailing the case for a united Ireland and the rationale opposing it, gathering financial and social figures, past examples and structural examples.
Discussions range over national emblems, levies, health services, pensions, sovereign debt obligations and the threat of loyalist violence. The goal is to inform and provoke dialogue.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Dialogue indicates an acknowledgement of the idea that there could be good arguments on either side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens claim they prefer unity but refuse increased taxation or introducing a alternative symbol to reflect unionists' British culture.
"The Irish government must establish what the offer from nationalist groups is other than just stating: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we value you'," remarked O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride thinks a referendum in his era is probable and that it could happen unexpectedly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a poor or a feckless secretary of state who declares: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have plausible, valid arguments, he said. "One side will prevail in this matter and the other side will eventually lose but each side has got important lessons to acquire from the other's viewpoints."
Request for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster must engage with the discussion, urged O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter equally as it is an Irish question."
