A decade after the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that divided the country and triggered turmoil, a warning emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
The government and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the same may happen with a referendum on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is ready.
That conveys the caution from two leading journalists from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are gravely ill-prepared for a potentially contentious and monumental referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can come out of the blue and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator remarked. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our archipelago remains extremely volatile."
The team have examined the political, financial and societal rationales for any governmental shift in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the matter with a series of public talks that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What concerns everyone, or ought to concern everybody, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We must avoid a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extremely split population where the losing side are not reconciled to losing and the those successful are uncertain precisely what it is that they have won."
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland government minister is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unity if it is indicated that a most voters would approve.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is looming, and a non-profit named pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the possibility, making it uncertain if and when there might be a referendum.
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has hidden the shortage of serious debate, stated McBride.
"Many are for or against the idea but the detailed consideration which could extend past that to realise it has largely not occurred. A great deal has gone on in academia but hardly any government figures or campaigners seek to involve themselves even with the basics. As an example, what sort of state should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"
In the volume, no writer endorses unity or the status quo. They writes two essays that strive for impartiality in laying out the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, gathering financial and societal figures, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Arguments encompass flags and symbols, taxes, health services, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the risk of loyalist violence. The objective is to inform and provoke conversation.
"There's huge interest in the subject but there has not yet occurred a debate," stated O’Toole. "Discussion indicates an acceptance of the notion that there could be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens claim they support unity but oppose increased taxation or adopting a new flag to acknowledge unionists' British culture.
"The Irish government does need to establish what the proposal from pro-unification movements is beyond just declaring: 'We desire a united Ireland and we love you'," remarked O’Toole.
The journalist believes a referendum in his lifetime is likely and that it might occur unexpectedly. "It is possible just a reckless or a bad or a incompetent secretary of state who declares: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have credible, justified points, he commented. "Somebody will prevail in this matter and somebody will in the end be defeated but both parties has got something to acquire from the alternative viewpoints."
Westminster needed to engage with the debate, urged O’Toole. "This concerns Britain. It's a British issue equally as it is an Irish issue."