🔗 Share this article

Ten years following the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that split the country and triggered turmoil, a caution comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.

The government and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating disturbances for which nobody is ready.

That conveys the caution from two prominent writers from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.

Administrative Institutions Ill-Equipped

The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a potentially contentious and monumental public vote.

"The lesson of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can build support swiftly," O’Toole said. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."

New Title Seeks to Encourage Dialogue

The duo have analysed the political, economic and societal arguments for any governmental shift in a volume, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.

They aim to encourage dialogue on the issue with a roadshow of speaking events that will take them to Westminster early next month.

"What troubles all parties, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.

"We do not want a referendum on a yes-no, vague proposition whose consequences have not been clarified because then you land with an extraordinarily divided society where those defeated are not reconciled to losing and the those successful don't know precisely what it is that they have gained."

Governmental Mandate

Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a most voters would approve.

Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups claim that moment is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity if and when there could be a referendum.

Lack of Substantive Discussion

Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unity has obscured the lack of substantive discussion, noted McBride.

"Many are for or against the notion but the concrete planning which could extend past that to realise it has largely not occurred. Much has occurred in academia but hardly any elected officials or activists seek to involve themselves with even the fundamentals. As an example, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Federal?"

Publication's Method

In the volume, neither author advocates unification or the status quo. Both composes two articles that seek impartiality in presenting the case for a unified Ireland and the case opposing it, marshalling economic and social data, past examples and governmental frameworks.

Debates range over national emblems, taxes, medical care, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to educate and encourage discussion.

"There's huge interest in the subject but there has not yet occurred a debate," stated O’Toole. "Dialogue implies an acknowledgement of the notion that there might be valid points on either side."

Dual Referendums

A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where voters report they support unification but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a alternative symbol to reflect pro-UK communities' British identity.

"Policymakers in Ireland must work out what the offer from pro-unification movements is beyond just stating: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," said O’Toole.

Likelihood of Public Vote

The journalist considers a national vote in his era is likely and that it could happen unexpectedly. "It is possible just a mad or a ill-advised or a incompetent secretary of state who states: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"

Both nationalists and unionists have credible, legitimate perspectives, he said. "One side will succeed on this issue and the other side will ultimately lose but both parties has got something to gain from the opposing arguments."

Appeal for More Extensive Dialogue

Westminster should participate in the debate, said the analyst. "This concerns Britain. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."