🔗 Share this article

Ten years following the UK stumbled into a hurried referendum that split the nation and triggered chaos, a caution is issued from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.

The government and voters entered unwittingly Brexit and the identical might transpire with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering convulsions for which no one is equipped.

That conveys the caution from two respected journalists from either side of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.

Political Institutions Ill-Equipped

Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have determined that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a possibly tense and seismic public vote.

"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator stated. "It is my view that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."

Book Publication Intends to Encourage Dialogue

The team have studied the political, financial and cultural arguments for any structural alteration in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.

They hope to encourage dialogue on the issue with a tour of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster early next month.

"What concerns everyone, or should haunt everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented O’Toole.

"We should prevent a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose results have not been spelled out because then you end up with an highly split population where people who have lost are unable to accept losing and the victorious side don't know precisely what it is that they have won."

Legal Framework

Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state should call a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would support.

Nationalist parties and other nationalists say such a time is approaching, and a group called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions downplay the prospect, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there could be a national vote.

Lack of Serious Debate

Political rhetoric for and against unity has masked the shortage of substantive discussion, said McBride.

"Individuals are often for or against the idea but the concrete planning which may surpass that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in universities but hardly any government figures or campaigners seek to involve themselves even with the fundamentals. For instance, what sort of state should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"

Book's Approach

In the book, neither author endorses unity or the current situation. They authors two essays that strive for neutrality in presenting the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, marshalling economic and social figures, previous instances and constitutional models.

Discussions range over national emblems, levies, medical care, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the threat of unionist unrest. The objective is to inform and provoke conversation.

"There's huge interest in the topic but there is still lacking a discussion," said the writer. "Dialogue indicates an acknowledgement of the concept that there could be reasonable perspectives on either side."

Dual Referendums

A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens claim they prefer unification but oppose paying higher taxes or introducing a alternative symbol to reflect pro-UK communities' British culture.

"Policymakers in Ireland does need to establish what the plan from Irish nationalism is beyond just declaring: 'We want a united Ireland and we value you'," stated O’Toole.

Likelihood of Public Vote

McBride thinks a referendum in his lifetime is probable and that it might occur suddenly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a feckless secretary of state who declares: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"

Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have credible, legitimate perspectives, he commented. "Somebody will prevail here and the other side will in the end lose but each side has got valuable insights to acquire from the opposing arguments."

Request for More Extensive Debate

Westminster needed to engage with the debate, urged O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It is a British question just as much as it is an Irish issue."