This is exactly the kind of lose-win or lose-lose discussion that everyone (well 49 % of people) wanted to avoid. Asking who will profit from this or who will be on top is not relevant probably, because each side will lose now (at least in the short term) the question is just how big the losses will be. Also, bear in mind that the UK will not only have to rearrange its terms with the EU, but with more than 50 non-EU countries as well.
Leaving the economic impact aside, the societal and demographic implications are just as important (for me) and a very hard to predict. Great Britain might very well fall apart over this, as Scottish politicians already announced that they will push for a leave if the UK leaves the EU.
For me, this thing is just the biggest and most catastrophically failed political gamble of the century. Times are strange indeed.
The people in N. Ireland have been resistant to a referendum because it's just asking for too much trouble. Few people here want this region to destabilize. However there are two outcomes that I believe would convince residents to risk the trouble of a referendum. 1. If Scotland leaves, or 2. If border/trade restrictions with Ireland become unbearable.
Scotland maybe, though if people have any sense they'll make sure the business is all done first and tell them to cool their heels.
Northern Ireland has absolutely no chance of seceding, they can't go it alone as a separate country, and there's absolutely no appetite for unification from either side.
>> "there's absolutely no appetite for unification from either side."
There is now. Leaving the EU actually brings the Ireland debate away from typically nationalist/unionist politics to actual real issues. If the Republic has to secure it's border with the North (as I believe countries on the border of Europe are required to do so) consider the impact on people who live in border towns. A lot of people living just within the north side of the border work in the south and vice versa - they would have to go through border control every morning and evening. And what happens to the large number of ROI citizens living and working in NI (and vice versa). This actually opens the debate on unity up and brings it past the typical dividing line politics. It will also likely fuel nationalist support as the democratic will of people in NI (and Scotland) is essentially ignored thanks to people in England. It's a very strange situation. I think it's still highly unlikely but if Irish unification is ever going to happen this will be the catalyst.
>A lot of people living just within the north side of the border work in the south and vice versa - they would have to go through border control every morning and evening.
It's just not that there would be border control, there's also question would they need visas to get through the border control?
A visa agreement is very easy. I don't think that's going to be a big problem. But the border checkpoints, they will definitely have to come if NI doesn't reunite with Ireland.
Get real. Stopping at a checkpoint is not going to drive an bid for reunification. You're also forgetting about the majority of people in the republic who simply do not care, or have become completely jaded with, the north or border areas. The further south you go, the less people care.
>> "Get real. Stopping at a checkpoint is not going to drive an bid for reunification."
No need to be condescending. Border controls are one issue. I didn't say they were the only one. Today's decision is going to cause many issues for Northern Ireland and if a persons daily life starts to get affected by the decision they might eventually be willing to put to the side their built-in unionist/nationalist mentality and figure out what's actually best for the people. I don't know what that is but ruling out unification or independence would be silly.
I'm fairly concerned that Northern Ireland has high potential to become a bloody battleground. IRA activity will certainly increase.
Scotland is less messy and would separate fairly easily imo (but you never know British nationalism is on the rise so letting them leave could be seen as something to prevent at all costs)
>> "I'm fairly concerned that Northern Ireland has high potential to become a bloody battleground."
This would be the first time that those who want Irish unity could actually sway a significant number of unionist voters. Violence would ruin that opportunity so I doubt it would happen. This vote has increased the possibility of their goals being achieved politically. If anything I would expect violence to rise on the unionist side if it did look like a border poll was going to take place and not go their way.
A big part of the reason I wanted to remain was to avoid another independence referendum. It looks like it's probably unavoidable now. And it's going to be another horrible round of extremely divisive, poisonous political activity that will leave a lot of people unhappy no matter what happens.
But this time I might actually vote for independence because I'm not sure a Britain outside the EU is one I want to live in.
I think the next Scottish referendum will be a much harder decision for each voter personally. The previous one obvious wasn't a throw-away decision either but Scotland and England being separate EU member states would have meant little difference in daily live for most people.
Now the next referendum will be a lot more significant since it'll effectively be a UK vs EU decision. Either you follow the English into isolation or you suddenly have a very real border between England and Scotland with customs&immigrations checkpoints and similar things.
Why would you think Scotland get to join the EU automatically? There's plenty of speculation Spain won't want it and will veto because it might fuel Catalan independence.
Scotland is part of an existing member state of the EU, but it is not a member state of the EU. Were it to become independent, it would likely have to join the EU as a new member state.
There's perhaps an argument to be made that if the UK broke up, each successor would have a claim to be a successor to the UKs treaty obligations and benefits in general, which might carry some weight (though would be extremely complicated for a treaty arrangement like the EU) if it happened before the UK formally started the process of withdrawing from the EU (if it happened after that, even viewing Scotland as a successor to the breaking-up-UK would leave it a short-term member of the EU in the process of exiting under the Article 50 process, inheriting the exit date that the UK has, and needing to negotiate its own exit agreement if it wanted anything but the default exit terms.)
I don't want another independence referendum: I have a visceral distrust/dislike for politicians anyway and I definitely didn't want a Scottish Parliament in the first place!
That being said, I reckon they will have another indy referendum regardless but I also see three potential scenarios that might stop it going ahead:
1. Britain prospers like crazy now we are out of the EU
2. The EU collapses (I think this is likely. Maybe not in the next 2 years but likely!)
3. A bunch of other countries decide to flee the EU as well. This would bring about 2 I reckon.
Imagine if Germany decided to leave! That would kill the EU stone dead I reckon.
I might be wrong but wasn't one of the arguments made to Scotland to stay in the UK that they need it for the upcoming referendum on decision whether the UK is going to enter the EU or exit the EU. Scotland for sometime voiced their desire for the UK to stay in the EU.
Leaving the economic impact aside, the societal and demographic implications are just as important (for me) and a very hard to predict. Great Britain might very well fall apart over this, as Scottish politicians already announced that they will push for a leave if the UK leaves the EU.
For me, this thing is just the biggest and most catastrophically failed political gamble of the century. Times are strange indeed.