🔗 Share this article

A decade after the UK entered into a hurried referendum that split the nation and triggered turmoil, a caution is issued from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.

The government and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the same could occur with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating disturbances for which nobody is prepared.

That is the message from two leading journalists from either side of the Irish border who have joined forces to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.

Administrative Establishments Not Ready

Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a possibly tense and monumental public vote.

"The crucial insight of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can build support rapidly," the commentator remarked. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our region remains very unstable."

Released Volume Seeks to Encourage Dialogue

The duo have analysed the political, economic and societal reasons for any structural alteration in a publication, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.

They seek to encourage dialogue on the matter with a roadshow of public talks that will take them to Westminster early next month.

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

"We do not want a national vote on a binary, ambiguous question whose implications have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extremely divided society where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the victorious side lack clarity precisely what it is that they have won."

Legal Framework

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 majority would vote in favour.

Nationalist parties and other nationalists say that moment is imminent, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the prospect, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there might be a referendum.

Lack of Substantive Discussion

Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has hidden the shortage of serious debate, stated the journalist.

"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has gone on in universities but very few politicians or advocates want to engage even with the basics. As an example, which kind of country should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"

Publication's Method

In the volume, none of the commentators endorses unification or the current situation. Both composes two articles that seek objectivity in laying out the case for a united Ireland and the rationale against, assembling economic and societal statistics, previous instances and structural examples.

Discussions cover flags and symbols, levies, health services, elderly benefits, public liabilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The goal is to educate and provoke dialogue.

"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there is still lacking a debate," stated O’Toole. "Debate suggests an recognition of the notion that there could be valid points on both sides."

Dual Referendums

A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where the electorate say they support unification but oppose greater financial contributions or adopting a different emblem to reflect unionists' British identity.

"Authorities in Dublin must work out what the offer from Irish nationalism is other than just saying: 'We want a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," stated O’Toole.

Likelihood of Referendum

The journalist considers a referendum in his era is possible and that it may take place abruptly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a negligent government minister who declares: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"

Each of the pro-unification advocates and unionists have plausible, justified arguments, he said. "One side will succeed on this issue and somebody will in the end lose but all factions has got valuable insights to gain from the other's arguments."

Request for Wider Debate

Westminster must participate in the dialogue, said O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It's a British issue just as much as it is an Irish matter."