Political Crossfire Forums

[angusrae]

http://www.sundayherald.com/58917

THE US government has made a dramatic intervention into Scottish politics after a senior diplomat said the Bush administration would “probably” prefer independence not to happen.

Lisa Vickers, the new US consul in Scotland, questioned the effect of separation on American energy firms and criticised the SNP’s anti-Nato policy. She also speculated about whether an independent Scotland would become a member of the European Union.

The official’s comments are controversial because independence looks set to be one of the key issues during next year’s Holyrood election campaign.

An opinion poll last week found a majority of Scots favoured breaking up Britain and revealed the SNP was ahead in the popular vote.

The Nationalists’ flagship policy is to hold a referendum on independence during their first four-year term in government. Their election hopes were boosted in recent weeks by a £100,000 donation from businessman Sir Tom Farmer and encouragement from the leader of Scotland’s Catholics, Cardinal Keith O’Brien, who said he expected independence “before too long”.

But the independence debate has taken an unexpected turn in the light of the comments made by Vickers, the US government’s “voice” in Scotland.

In an interview with the Sunday Herald, she said the US would “probably” prefer the UK to remain united and insisted there were “various elements” of the SNP’s independence policy that had not been fully explained.

“Would an independent Scotland be a member of Nato? They don’t know. Would they be in the EU? They don’t know,” she said. “I don’t think the SNP is willing to say with 100% confidence and security that ‘this is what will happen with independence, and this is how you will be, and this is what will belong to you.’”

She added: “I think there are a lot of questions. And I think that, right now, there are not a lot of answers.”

Vickers also said the consequences of a “yes” vote in a plebiscite were unclear: “Even [the] referendum does not say definitely and conclusively, ‘if you vote for this referendum in this first 100 days, Scotland will be an independent nation again after a period of time’. That’s not what they are saying at all.”

In remarks likely to irk the SNP, Vickers claimed independence was not being seriously discussed by ordinary Scots.

“They may find that, as an article I read in the press a couple of weeks ago quoted, people are not sitting down to breakfast and hotly debating ‘should Scotland be independent?’. It’s sort of an idea in the back of the mind that comes up at cocktail parties,” she said.

However, her most pointed criticisms were reserved for the SNP’s defence policy, which is for an independent Scotland not to be a member of Nato.

The US consul said: “I don’t think it’s nearly that simple. I don’t think you just wake up one morning and say ‘we are going to pull out of Nato’. It doesn’t work like that. There are just so many different questions that would have to be answered. I don’t believe there are any countries that have pulled out of Nato.”

Vickers also claimed Alex Salmond’s anti-Nato stance may not be “set in stone”. She said: “No good politician is going to tell you ‘this is absolutely what we are going to do’. They are going to tell you that ‘this may be what we would like to do, if it seems the prudent thing to do’.

On the future of US energy companies in a separate Scottish state, she said: “Would their situation change were Scotland independent?”

The official’s comments provide insights into the US government’s view on constitutional politics in Scotland. Although Vickers said there were “pros and cons” to separation, the US is not thought to favour independence because it would involve the break-up of its main international ally.

Such constitutional change could diminish the UK’s case for staying in the G8 and weaken the argument for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council.

SNP leader Alex Salmond accused Vickers of “inexperience” and criticised her comments.

“I am sure the US consul doesn’t have to be reminded of diplomatic protocol. It’s a curious position to put so much stress on your own country’s self- determination, and not to think it is important for other people. Maybe it’s time for her to get out of the cocktail party circuit and around the country.

“We have had some good American consuls in the past. I am quite sure that once she gets up to speed, then she will know a bit more of Scottish politics.”

George Foulkes, the vice-chairman of Scottish Labour’s Holyrood election campaign, slammed the SNP’s defence policy.

“Most people in Scotland know that breaking up Britain would be bad for the economy and bad for jobs. They also know that the Nationalist position on Nato is frankly ludicrous. Leaving Nato would threaten thousands of jobs and leave Scotland isolated, exposed and vulnerable,” he said.

05 November 2006

I cannot understand why a US consul would comment on Scottish politics after only a few weeks in the Job unless instructed to by the Bush admin as a favor to His lap dog Blair.

[DSwain]

Out of order, this - a US diplomat has no place interfering in internal matters; hopefully the FCO and the Executive will make a big noise about this.

Angusrae - drop the 'lapdog' thing, it's beneath you

[antonio62]

Am I right in thinking that if Scotland became independent they would need to reapply for membership to NATO? I remember the one of the top EU leaders (Barroso?) saying that any break away state would need to reapply for membership to the EU.

[AKAMad]

Would the Scots be paying for the border fence and customs posts ? Assuming we choose to have anything to do with them, in which case it would just be a fence required.

[AKAMad]

This is all because the SNP called for an Iraq inquiry. Shows how spiteful the Bush administration can be.

[Boneman]

I know I'm probably being very ignorant, but woudn't Scottish independance result in those wanting to remain part of the union potentially resorting to violence a la Northern Ireland?

[DSwain]

Boneman wrote: I know I'm probably being very ignorant, but woudn't Scottish independance result in those wanting to remain part of the union potentially resorting to violence a la Northern Ireland?

That's very interesting Boneman - would love to hear some opinions from Scots posters. Personally I'd always thought that if the UK had accepted the concept of a United Ireland, effectively forcing NI to join the Republic, then we would have faced a situation similar to that faced by France during and after the Algerian war, with 'settlers' and former forces personnel turning against the government. I don't think anything of that sort would arise with Scotland, however.

[antonio62]

Boneman wrote: I know I'm probably being very ignorant, but woudn't Scottish independance result in those wanting to remain part of the union potentially resorting to violence a la Northern Ireland?

Definitely not. Just think how active the SNLA has been over the years. There clearly isn't strong enough feeling to mount anything like that.

[antonio62]

AKAMad wrote: Would the Scots be paying for the border fence and customs posts ? Assuming we choose to have anything to do with them, in which case it would just be a fence required.

Is there really any need for one?

[thundertaker]

If the scots are in the EU, they won't have much choice with regards to the issue of border control with England. The whole point of the EU is supposed to be about free travel of people and business within the trading bloc........

[antonio62]

thundertaker wrote: If the scots are in the EU, they won't have much choice with regards to the issue of border control with England. The whole point of the EU is supposed to be about free travel of people and business within the trading bloc........

Even if they didn't join the EU they woudl almost certainly join EFTA with the same results.

[angusrae]

Boneman wrote: I know I'm probably being very ignorant, but woudn't Scottish independance result in those wanting to remain part of the union potentially resorting to violence a la Northern Ireland?

If the search of Scottish Independence most Scots have never even considered violence as a means to gain our Freedom/sovereignty and I doubt the unionists of Scotland would resort to it either.

[Decypher]

[angusrae]

In the modern age Decypher any way The Real William Wallace was a well educated and articulate man who spock French, Latin, Gaelic and Anglo-Saxon (English). He was also the son of a minor Noble.

My personal Hero from this time is Andrew De Moray who fought alongside Wallace at Stirling Brig but who had led the Rebellion in the Highlands after escaping from the Tower of London

I Fcuking hate that Film it's a pile of Jingoistic Dog poo and as about as accurate as a blind bowman.

[Decypher]

I know, I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist. Yeah, hate that film; never heard of Andrew De Moray, will have to research.

[angusrae]

Andrew De Moray

http://www.firstfoot.com/Kulture/demornay.htm

http://members.aol.com/Windhover/index3.html

Here are a couple of sites for you Decypher

[Snow Patrol]

What i don't get is why America would care if an independent Scotland joined, or didn't join, Nato or the EU. Surely a country of 5 million wouldn't matter much in the grand scheme things.

After all as far as i'm aware there are no American bases left in Scotland and the only significant Nato related issue is Britain's nuclear deterrent (Trident) being based at Faslane. Which in all probability would revert to the remainder of Britain anyway and only result in a change of location.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

Snow Patrol wrote: What i don't get is why America would care if an independent Scotland joined, or didn't join, Nato or the EU. Surely a country of 5 million wouldn't matter much in the grand scheme things.

After all as far as i'm aware there are no American bases left in Scotland and the only significant Nato related issue is Britain's nuclear deterrent (Trident) being based at Faslane. Which in all probability would revert to the remainder of Britain anyway and only result in a change of location.

The US cares as it tends to want to discipline ALL Western countries and make them follow the US lead [as they have done during the Cold War]. Indeed, the reason for the American government's outrage over the French, German, and Canadian non-participation in the Iraq war partly stems from this tendency.

[Snow Patrol]

ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Snow Patrol wrote: What i don't get is why America would care if an independent Scotland joined, or didn't join, Nato or the EU. Surely a country of 5 million wouldn't matter much in the grand scheme things.

After all as far as i'm aware there are no American bases left in Scotland and the only significant Nato related issue is Britain's nuclear deterrent (Trident) being based at Faslane. Which in all probability would revert to the remainder of Britain anyway and only result in a change of location.

The US cares as it tends to want to discipline ALL Western countries and make them follow the US lead [as they have done during the Cold War]. Indeed, the reason for the American government's outrage over the French, German, and Canadian non-participation in the Iraq war partly stems from this tendency.
Interesting, a sort of Monroe doctrine applied to the rest of the world then?

[angusrae]

Snow Patrol wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Snow Patrol wrote: What i don't get is why America would care if an independent Scotland joined, or didn't join, Nato or the EU. Surely a country of 5 million wouldn't matter much in the grand scheme things.

After all as far as i'm aware there are no American bases left in Scotland and the only significant Nato related issue is Britain's nuclear deterrent (Trident) being based at Faslane. Which in all probability would revert to the remainder of Britain anyway and only result in a change of location.

The US cares as it tends to want to discipline ALL Western countries and make them follow the US lead [as they have done during the Cold War]. Indeed, the reason for the American government's outrage over the French, German, and Canadian non-participation in the Iraq war partly stems from this tendency.
Interesting, a sort of Monroe doctrine applied to the rest of the world then?

George W can bend over and Kiss My Big Hair A**e before he or any other American will tell me that as a Scot I do not have the right to self determination or as nation we do not have the right to gain our independence through the ballot box. The American Counsul should be given a severe reprimand for getting involved in the internal politics of a democratic country.