Is it likely Irish unification will happen in years to come?

[cuppateaandabiccie]

I’m in NI and I quite like being a part of the UK so I most certainly am against a United Ireland.

i like our education system and I know the health service is on its knees, but I’d rather not pay every time I need to go to the doctors.

obviously Sinn Fein are now the biggest party meaning they can nominate for First Minister - does this actually pose a risk to the union with the UK?

If the Deputy First Minister and First Minister both hold equal office - then surely they had the same chances of trying to implement a border poll when the they were Deputy First Minister?

if there was to be a border poll, do people think the majority would support Irish unity or go against it?

also, do people think the DUP will refuse to enter government with Sinn Fein as FM?

Seriously get some help @JetTail

That is such a non-answer it is ridiculous! As I said previously, the data does not support your assertion.

From the 2020 YouGov poll:

"Despite more of the British public supporting a border poll than opposing one, more respondents prefer the outcome in which Northern Ireland stays put, with 37% saying it should remain part of the UK. The region sticking in the union has the most support across two of the three main parties, as well as both sides of the referendum."

Just 27% of respondents believe Northern Ireland should leave the UK.

People being in favour of a border poll doesn't necessarily mean they're in favour of a part leaving the union. Those are two different things.

The 2019 Ashcroft poll concluded:

".....most English voters would rather keep the union together if it were up to them – though they recognise it isn’t up to them."

43% of English people felt Scotland should remain in the UK and 35% felt Northern Ireland should remain in the UK.

41% of English feel it's up to the Scottish whether or not they stay and 43% feel it's up to the Northern Irish.

When asked if they had to choose between the UK and EU in the hypothetical they couldn't have both, 45% of English people felt Scotland should stay in the UK and 42% felt Northern Ireland should stay.

In contrast, 36% of English people felt leaving the EU was more important than keeping Scotland and 36% again in regards to Northern Ireland.

Final word to Ashcroft again:

"only a handful say that if either voted to leave the UK they would be happy to see them go. Of those who say it is for Scotland and Northern Ireland to decide, a large minority nevertheless say they would be sorry to see them leave if they chose do so. This means that, overall, most English voters would rather keep the union together if it were up to them – though they recognise it isn’t up to them."

I think it's pretty clear that there's a range of views in England towards the Union with Scotland and Northern Ireland. But the sentiment is clear enough - most respondents would prefer Scotland and Northern Ireland to stay in the Union.

Only a very small minority would be happy to see Scotland and Northern Ireland leave.

I'm not particularly interested in your own impressions or anecdotes as these are fallacies. The data speaks for itself.

None of that changes my actual point which was that in giving up ALL territorial claim over Northern Ireland the people of the Republic of Ireland accepted two things:

1. that Northern Ireland is and has a right to exist separately from the Republic.

2. that Northern Ireland belongs solely to the people of Northern Ireland and it is ourselves alone who have the final say over our future.

Acceptance of this was obviously important for the peace process, but acceptance it was.

And there is no "of course, Ireland will be reunited"! That's nowhere close to being a reality and Nationalism/Republicanism is still stuck on the same percentage as in 1998. Zero growth in 24 years!

2. that Northern Ireland belongs solely to the people of Northern Ireland and it is ourselves alone who have the final say over our future.

Well, not exactly.
If a majority of the people of NI ever decide they do want reunification of Ireland, then that is subject to the wishes of people in ROI as well. Everyone on the island has a say in reunification, not just those in NI.

Yes, the ROI will have a voice in the issue of reunification, but that's a separate issue from the point that Northern Ireland's future is for the people of Northern Ireland to decide.

"(ii) recognise that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively and without external impediment, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given,
North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish, accepting that
this right must be achieved and exercised with and subject to the agreement and consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland..."

In other words, the* *people of Northern Ireland are the only ones who can dictate the fate of Northern Ireland. So, yes, it is ourselves alone who can decide our future. The Republic of Ireland does not and cannot decide the future for Northern Ireland itself. Therefore, my statement is not incorrect.

It is taken as a given that the people of the Republic of Ireland will always say yes. That is why the GFA says absolutely nothing about the possibility of Northern Ireland saying yes, but the Republic saying no.

What the Republic of Ireland has is the right to decide what THEY want to do in respect of a united Ireland possibility.

One point I don't think a lot of people have given much thought to is the reality that the Good Friday Agreement has NO sunset clause. It has no termination date which means the UK Government will continue to be guarantors in the event of a united Ireland.

It also means Stormont, powersharing and Northern Ireland would continue to stand. That's the basis of the international agreement there.

Given the GFA makes it clear that only the people of Northern Ireland can decide its future, it does mean there could not be an island wide referendum on abolishing Stormont, powersharing and Northern Ireland. Not only would that be contrary to the GFA, but it would be a recipe for disaster.

The whole issue is NOT one of simply reuniting Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland into one single sovereign nation state.

Your last paragraphs make an interesting conversation @DownNative as it’s not a conversation ever really held.
it’s widely assumed that NI is part of UK until and if she votes herself out of it and into a UI , and that would then be the end of that. The End

Nobody ever talks about if there would then be a mechanism whereby if it didn’t work out could we then all vote to go back into the UK.

Raises a lot of considerations both good and bad ie
would it reduce the fear factor and the constant tensions for unionists around the idea of UI if they were pacified that they could later vote to go back?

on the other side of the coin would it just cause huge financial expense just to leave us forever without peace and stability? Perpetual state of forever changing self determination.

(Maybe self determination is a bit of an illusion at the moment because it certainly feels as though we are currently stuck in the middle of UK , Dublin, Brussels and now USA all deciding on how things should go here whilst our toddlers in Stormont fight over crumbs)

I think whatever recent years has shown us that whilst the GFA was great for its time, there are certainly a lot of holes and cracks that were never filled in.

It is taken as a given that the people of the Republic of Ireland will always say yes. That is why the GFA says absolutely nothing about the possibility of Northern Ireland saying yes, but the Republic saying no.

Yeah, I think this was the view at the time, but I think once we start thinking about what accepting NI means, it could well have been a mistake.

The ROI population still has the ability to say no which would absolutely massively upset Northern Nationalists and Republicans.

But the ROI still has that right. It certainly cannot be seriously argued that its wrong for the ROI to reject reunification, especially if it negatively impacts living standards which is very likely.

One thing many don't realise is that a yes vote is literally a yes to building consensus as well as agreement on what the new state will look like. And that is a much more complex issue than Brexit ever will be. This takes us back to what I said previously in that ROI citizens could not vote for abolishing Stormont, powersharing and Northern Ireland. Martin certainly acknowledged as much last year, I think. Polls are telling us that ROI citizens are not keen on changing foundations such as flag, anthem and system of governance. Devolution is not solely for Northern Ireland as part of the UK. Its cemented into Northern Ireland's future irrespective of which way we decide to go.

It's not very likely that Northern Ireland's Unionists would accept full absorption into the existing Republic. Nor is it very likely a clear majority of people in Northern Ireland would give up devolution - this is more popular than direct rule from London or Dublin.

So, a yes vote is not a straightforward way into a united Ireland scenario.

One more thing...the Americans cannot interfere in the whole issue since the GFA is very clear states the people's choice must have " without external impediment". It's very clear that it's about "agreement between the two parts (NI & ROI) respectively".

So, Congressman Neal is incorrect in claiming the GFA belongs to the United States of America too. It doesn't and they're not signatories to it either, so I'm afraid American grandstanding on the entire issue is detrimental to relations between people on this island AND within Northern Ireland itself. To say nothing of the impact on relationships between NI and GB. American interference is also contrary to the GFA as it stands.

I agree @DownNative

Both Brussels and USA are using a lot of language which is very counterproductive to peace and they have both shown to have a lack of basic knowledge about GFA. Certainly it seems as if they both think the only issue to maintain peace is to stop a land border which is only showing a one sided sympathetic approach to the issue but is actually quite insulting to Irish Nationalists when you think about it as it suggests they are the only ones capable of violence!

It concerns me that these superpowers are throwing their weight around without actually adding anything of constructive value to the current impasse and potentially upsetting a very delicate balance of peace. Things can escalate very quickly. The irony is that the wording of GFA is that there should be no outside impediment but at the moment all we have is outside interference and decisions being argued about in London Dublin and Brussels and on twitter from POTUS and Pelosi and Neal without one single NI representative present and no willingness or imagination to actually sort out the problems with Brexit and the protocol.

I didn’t realise this thread was still going until @ downnative quoted me! I admit I haven’t read all your posts or all of thread but you seem very very invested in the idea that a united ireland wont happen .
I disagree as I’ve said before but we’ll both see won’t we ?

As for your point about the USA I think you are misguided . The real issue that Irish Americans are a huge voting / influence block and every President pays special attention to Ireland .
The USA has their foot on Boris’s neck re trading deals so the UK will not do anything re Ireland that doesn’t have the tacit approval of the USA ( this won’t be announced obviously). I think Boris’s recent visit to the north rather proves the point - a lot of waffle and bluster and nothing of substance

Problem for you is that none of the numbers come close to adding up to a united Ireland within the next decade. Considering the direction of travel the last 24 years with Nationalists/Republicanism stagnant on 40% with no growth in that time, its very unlikely the numbers will be there in 20 years time.

My point about the United States still stands - the GFA is very clear that there is to be no "external impediment". I'm afraid the US delegation this week has acted in contrary to the letter and the spirit of the GFA.

As for your "boot on the uks neck" quip, this is nonsense as there wasn't any prospect of a trade deal for a long time anyway. The US doesn't conclude trade deals with any nation quickly and it takes years. I'm afraid that's not the leverage you think it is. As I said, you provided zero adequate rebuttal to what I actually said which is the GFA does NOT belong to the Americans too and it states there's to be no "external impediment". And the United States under Biden is now an external impediment. The UK isn't in a hurry for a trade deal with the US either. It'll happen eventually.

The power to call a border poll rests with the UK Secretary Of State. Not the dwindling so-called "Irish"-American bloc. Between that and the no "external impediment" statement, there is nothing the United States can do in this matter.

Yes, this is a well constructed set of observations. Especially your point that there's several external impediments at play here.

Biden, Pelosi and Neal understand the GFA even less than the EU as well. Neal referred to the US as "honest brokers", but he doesn't understand that Clinton's administration were honest brokers whereas Biden's is not. Biden's attitude towards Northern Ireland's Unionists is very out of touch as is Congress Neal's. No-one seriously believes Biden's administration is in any way impartial here.

But you could convincingly argue Clinton's administration were impartial in the 1990s.

Biden's administration are much better off focusing on the deep division, racism, gun massacres and how close the US came to civil war at the Capitol not too long ago. The United States hardly has any moral high ground with which to lecture any other state in the 21st Century.

As for your point about violence over the border, Varadkhar was very enthusiastic in using a newspaper headline of an PIRA atrocity to ram that home to the EU. This certainly had a strong polarising impact on the entire debate and Loyalists saw that as threats working, so were bound to do the same. Just dreadful behaviour from a statesman who ignored the law of unintended consequences. Martin is a much more level-headed politician.

Good lord you really are very angry at the fact that the USA takes a close interest in Ireland .
The Irish American block crosses both Democrat and Republican parties , it is hugely influential and it’s going no where . Did you perhaps notice the change in tone from Liz Truss after a US delegation had a word recently ?
As for the length of time a UK / US trade deal is taking - how on earth is that relevant?

"Good lord you really are very angry at the fact that the USA takes a close interest in Ireland ."

On the contrary, you are attempting to distort and oversimplify what I actually said. The problem is NOT that the United States takes an interest in this part of the world, but that it does not do so in the impartial manner it did.

As I said, Clinton's administration were perceived to be impartial and that attitude was an important aspect of the GFA today. Biden's administration is the exact opposite - if they had to be involved with a GFA process today, they really wouldn't get anywhere.

So, the problem is the one-sided behaviour of Biden's administration. A crucial distinction you've so far failed to grasp.

"The Irish American block crosses both Democrat and Republican parties , it is hugely influential and it’s going no where."

On the contrary, the "Irish"-American bloc has been steadily decreasing for several decades now. And that decline is only continuing in a downwards fashion into the future. The figures are very clear. Indeed, American imperialism is on a downward trend globally. American power is not what it was as we're seeing even this week after Biden's ridiculous threat to China when the US failed to follow through its promise to Ukraine.

"Did you perhaps notice the change in tone from Liz Truss after a US delegation had a word recently ?
As for the length of time a UK / US trade deal is taking - how on earth is that relevant?"

Unpack this and we'll see what there is to add or not add.

Ok I’ll explain it step by step for you :

1. you implied that the fact that the uk/ USA trade deal was taking years would be a factor which affected progress towards a united Ireland . I did not see how it was at all relevant ( in fact the delays ‘help’ nationalists if you want to look at it that way but never mind as you missed that aspect ). So what exactly is your point re the fact that US trade deals take a long time ? The longer it takes the more pressure on the Uk government from Irish Americans .


2. Liz Truss was v gung ho re ripping up the protocol , sound bites about going alone etc. A US delegation arrived . Soon after Liz Truss was saying ( I’m paraphrasing ) the protocol needs changed and we mustn’t take too long to deal with it . Do you see the difference ?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-61549188.amp

The article above just proves what we were saying.
Prior to Liz Truss talking about taking unilateral action she had been asking the EU to relook at things, specifically the problems but they wouldn’t budge. That is a huge problem in the sense that we are living outside the EU but bound by EU rules, and when we have a problem we have no power to fix it it in NI. If we have an issue it can’t be left to fester. Action needs taken. If the EU had been more proactive then she wouldn’t have needed to say it.

the rest of the article just proves that all the US has contributed thus far is inflammatory language and no solutions.

It proves nothing of the sort.
It proves that the EU and the USA will continue to watch over Northern Ireland , never mind expect the UK to follow a treaty they signed !

Look I can see that @blubberyboo and @DownNative are in a ( unionist ) echo chamber agreeing with each other .
When you are ready to leave it the rest of us are looking to a new Ireland .
You are welcome to join . You might even find it relief to be at home instead of clinging to the coat tail of a uk government which is only interested in you when it needs a few votes .

I’ll leave you with this ( don’t read if either of you suffer from high blood pressure )

amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/30/the-end-northern-ireland-unionists-blame-themselves-dup-sinn-fein

No I’m actually an Alliance voter

always have been and have relatives and friends of both persuasions. I’ve made various comments on this thread outlining how I think a United Ireland could be achieved and the tentative steps needed for unionists to feel comfortable.

so please don’t make sweeping statements about my political beliefs. I could vote either way if the time came.

im just intuiative enough to know that these problems won’t be solved unless both sides positions are considered. If the old creators of the GFA were still around they would say exactly the same thing.

Lets be clear the protocol is only a “making the best of a bad job” thing. It is good in some ways but very poor in others.