Scottish independence
By Andrew Hammond
Scottish National Party leader Nicola Sturgeon confirmed Tuesday that she will ask the U.K. government to approve another independence referendum before the end of this year.
With Brexit the immediate trigger for the decision, it is increasingly possible that the 2020s could yet ― tragically ― witness the unraveling of one of the world's longest and most successful political unions.
What Sturgeon's plans underline is that political worries about Brexit, even if Boris Johnson can get a deal ratified before the end of this month, go well beyond Westminster to the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish legislatures.
Despite the Supreme Court ruling that the U.K. government did not have to consult the devolved administrations before triggering Article 50 in 2017, this has not stopped politicians in Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast being thorns in the side of the U.K. government.
The Scottish and Welsh First Ministers, Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford, who from their different political standpoints of the Scottish National Party (SNP) and Labour, respectively, have both said they cannot support Brexit without membership or full access to the single market, which appears highly unlikely to be realized. Sturgeon argued on Tuesday that the Brexit plan being touted by Johnson, which looks likely to see a very “hard exit” from the European Union, would be particularly disadvantageous to Scotland.
Given this opposition of most key party leaders in Scotland, Wales and indeed in many quarters of Northern Ireland to Brexit, the exit negotiations with the EU are testing existing U.K. constitutional and legal frameworks to their limits.
Here it is not just devolved authorities outside England, but also English local government leaders who have voiced concerns about Brexit, not least given the potential lost funding opportunities.
With the planned repatriation of powers from Brussels, local leaders in England want to assume some of these powers rather than all of them being centralized in Westminster. Take the example of the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, who has made clear his concerns about the implications of Brexit for the metropolis, a city that from 12 percent of the U.K.'s population generates about a third of all U.K. tax income.
Yet, frustrated as some English local authority leaders are, it is in Scotland where the “rubber may hit the road.” Sturgeon is seeking to capitalize on popular discontent with Brexit in a nation that voted 62-38 percent in 2016 to remain in the EU.
Yet, while she has understandable concerns about Brexit, she is leading Scotland, plus the wider United Kingdom, down a potential political black hole that will probably weaken all parties given that their future is better together.
It is more widely accepted is that the wider United Kingdom would be damaged by Scottish independence. For instance, a U.K. parliamentary committee has warned that losing the Scottish tax base, especially at a time of fiscal austerity, could lead to further budgetary cuts to the armed forces.
Moreover, the U.K.'s large overseas aid budget and extensive network of diplomatic and trade missions will also be affected. Together with military cutbacks, this will undermine hard and soft power that has enabled the nation to punch above its weight for so long.
Scottish independence would also erode the U.K.'s post-Brexit voice in international forums, from the U.N., G7, G8, G20 and NATO. Perhaps, most prominently, it could, potentially, be seized on by some non-permanent members of the U.N. Security Council (UNSC) and/or other U.N. members, to catalyze a review of U.K. membership of the UNSC. To be sure, reform of the UNSC is overdue. However, Scottish independence could see this issue being decided on less favorable terms for the U.K. than may otherwise be the case.
All this underscores that Scottish independence, combined with Brexit, would undercut the domestic underpinnings of the U.K.'s international influence. They threaten to undermine the sizeable political, military and economic force that the United Kingdom has preserved, helping bolster international security and prosperity.
Moreover, Sturgeon is charting her pathway toward a second referendum despite uncertainties that the country itself would benefit, significantly, from independence. This is not least given the difference between tax revenue and public spending in the country that rose to a deficit of around 9.5 percent of GDP in 2015-16 ― which it can better stomach as part of the union.
With growing political risks over the integrity of the union, the case needs to be made again for why the future of Scotland and the United Kingdom is better together. There are significant uncertainties for Scotland from independence, while the costs to the United Kingdom of diminished international influence are clear, plus the fraying of the remaining bonds between the rest of the union.
Andrew Hammond (andrewkorea@outlook.com) is an associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics.