Ten years following the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that divided the nation and unleashed chaos, a caution is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking disturbances for which no one is equipped.
That conveys the caution from two leading writers from each side of the Irish border who have teamed up to analyse the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Not Ready
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a potentially fraught and seismic public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can gather momentum rapidly," the commentator said. "It is my view that the political architecture of our islands remains extremely volatile."
New Title Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The team have analysed the governmental, financial and cultural reasons for any structural alteration in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to stir debate on the matter with a tour of lectures that will bring them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everyone, or must worry every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We should prevent a national vote on a binary, unclear proposal whose results have not been clarified because then you end up with an extraordinarily split population where the losing side are not reconciled to defeat and the those successful don't know quite what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland government minister should call a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue this point is approaching, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but both governments and pro-UK factions downplay the possibility, leaving it unclear whether or when there might be a national vote.
Absence of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has masked the shortage of informed dialogue, stated McBride.
"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the actual thinking which may surpass that to achieve it has largely not occurred. A lot has gone on in academia but scarcely any government figures or campaigners are willing to participate with even the essentials. For instance, which kind of country would you want? Centralised? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, no writer advocates unification or the existing arrangement. Each authors two essays that seek impartiality in presenting the rationale for a united Ireland and the rationale against, assembling financial and societal figures, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Debates range over identity markers, levies, medical care, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the danger of loyalist violence. The goal is to inform and encourage discussion.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," commented O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an recognition of the concept that there could be good arguments on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where citizens claim they favour unification but refuse increased taxation or adopting a alternative symbol to recognise unionists' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland must determine what the offer from pro-unification movements is beyond just saying: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride thinks a national vote in his generation is likely and that it might occur unexpectedly. "There might be just a irresponsible or a bad or a incompetent secretary of state who states: 'We should proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have plausible, valid perspectives, he stated. "One side will succeed here and the other side will ultimately lose but both parties has got something to acquire from the opposing arguments."
Appeal for Wider Dialogue
Westminster needed to participate in the debate, said O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It is a British question just as much as it is an Irish matter."
