Letters

Rethinking the unification debate

A structure of strong regional and local government

Sat Dec 17 2022 - 00:12

Sir, – Michael McDowell writes that a confederacy where the Republic and the North may not share a constitution is the only model likely to garner widespread support at this time (“Confederacy is only model of Irish unity likely to garner wide support”, Opinion & Analysis, December 14th).

While this may be true at present, reunification models must focus on realising the synergies and economies of scale that uniting the communities of the two jurisdictions can bring. Without realising such benefits, there would be no point in proceeding with reunification at all.

By providing reassurance that change on either side of the current Border will be limited, federal and confederal models for a new Ireland may be comforting in the short term. But in the longer term it would be impossible to build a new nation if we continue the existing North-South division. Instead, we must aim to build a nation that will respect, and receive the allegiance of, all communities.

A better approach would be a structure of strong regional and local government. The Nordic countries and Italy are nearby examples of democratic models with strong, highly functioning local government. A similar model can provide assurance that a new Ireland will be democratic, equal and fair to all communities while maintaining its structure as a unitary state.

READ MORE

We must also not shy away from the question of nation building. In addition to agreeing symbols and anthems that represent all, and building State institutions designed for a new nation of eight million or more, we will need education and social structures that integrate the peoples of two jurisdictions that have been apart for over a century. When Germany reunified it was noted that after two generations divided societies move apart in ways that are not easy to mend together again. We will therefore need to consider nation-building interventions such as mandatory education exchanges, relocation of State employees, and perhaps a form of national service that obliges youth from different parts of the country to work together.

Evolving demographics will clarify the momentum towards reunification over the coming decade. A constitutional framework that focuses identity on historic geographic location must be rejected in favour of a framework that builds a national identity that celebrates the strengths of all communities and is firmly rooted in our European identity and relationships with other European countries. To succeed the new Ireland must become more outward looking, more European and more unified than it is today. – Yours, etc,

DAVID GEARY,

Limerick.

Sir, – I heartily agree with Paul Arnold’s idea of Northern Ireland becoming a free-standing region of the EU, occupying the overlapped area of the Venn diagram that is “These Islands” (Letters, December 16th).

The problem is that one of the key parties refuses to engage in the scheme. Northern unionists are being portrayed in the guise of an awkward child who refuses to go to the party, even though all the others are trying to convince it of how wonderful the party will be.

Muscular attempts to lure the child out of its stubbornness in the past have proven to be disastrous. It might help if the perpetrators of that muscularity were to admit to the ill-conceived nature of their gross blunderings. – Yours, etc,

PADDY McEVOY,

Cambridgeshire, UK.

Sir, – Citizens of Northern Ireland have three choices of citizenship. They can avail socially, culturally and economically of the advantages and advances of Brexited UK or the EU or both. They have freedom of movement across the UK, as they have across the EU, should they so choose. Nowhere else across the UK or the continent of Europe has anyone else the privileges that are available to the citizens of Northern Ireland. Citizens of the UK who are from Northern Ireland, whichever community they belong to, are availing of these opportunities.

I see as most welcome the development of the new middle ground in NI politics. And the new identity, the “Northern Irish”, now alongside the more traditional Green and Orange. Coupling this with the current political stand-off, which I would define as “minoritarianism” and not “consent”, resolving this matter too will be another progressive step in political development.

A United Kingdom necessitates a divided Ireland. Conversely, an Ireland that is reunited requires a disunited kingdom. Or does it? It really depends on what defines that unity. Territorially, the governance of the land is a particularly distinguishing characteristic of sovereignty. But aside from territory, there are so many other characteristics of the human condition that facilitate living together that allow elements of sovereignty to be located differently in place and time. As with identity in Northern Ireland, British, Irish, Both and now Northern Irish, so too with other aspects of sovereignty.

I believe that is where we are right now in terms of political and societal progression in NI. But the path ahead to progress is neither prescribed nor will it be perfect. Time and space, give and take are the responses that are needed here. The binary option of either in or out of a unitary political entity is an unhelpful option at this point. For our part, the Constitution has set out very clearly, following the overwhelming vote of support for the amendment redefining our relationship on this island, that there is an open invitation to consider joining together in a new Ireland which protects that time and that space. And we need to think through, not just an outcome, but a progression that enables cohabitation and collaborative development on the island that benefits all of us. – Yours, etc,

JOHN BRENNAN,

Dublin 18.

Sir, – How about something positive in relation to a united Ireland? Instead of telling us what cannot be done, tell us what can. – Yours, etc,

BARRY LYONS,

Dublin 9.