Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
I wonder what Scotland would do with defence.
In a way they could spend hardly anything because they know their security is also of concern to the security of the remainder of the United Kingdom. Would they stay part of NATO? I know the corridor of water that sits above them is deemed as important for NATO. If they were part of NATO they would have to pay for some defence but the SNP can play to their base by disassociating themselves from the British military.
I suspect they would attempt to trade their acceptance of NATO and maybe keep trident in return for something else. However with all their pandering about nuclear weapons it's going to be a hard sell for the SNP to have an independent Scotland keep nuclear weapons, remain in NATO and pay 3% GDP for the privilege.
|
Separatism is a fragile coalition. The only doorstepper I got in 2014 was in it purely because she thought it would end Trident - Scotland would throw it out, England would have nowhere else to put it and therefore it would be decommissioned. All concerns about the economy and the social ties across the U.K., were completely irrelevant in the face of that prize.
She was naive beyond belief, and she isn’t the only one. There is a constituency that wants independence in order to further the aims of CND, a constituency that wants independence as a route to republic, and a constituency that thinks “anyone but England” and believes Scotland’s finest hour was breaking the goalposts at Wembley.
One of the many reasons for not doing it is that after a yes vote, the competing demands of the factions would finally be seen to be irreconcilable, and it would then get extremely messy.