#IndyRef2: the SNP’s last throw of the dice?
Andrew Dorman
On the day parliament finally approved Theresa May’s Article 50 Exit Bill the Prime Minister might have thought things were finally going her way: she could now formally get on with negotiating the UK’s departure from the European Union. Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister of Scotland and leader of the ruling Scottish National Party (SNP), had other ideas. The same day, in a speech at her Bute House residence, Sturgeon gatecrashed May’s party by demanding a second Scottish independence referendum for late 2018 or early 2019, i.e. before the UK has formally left the European Union.
Inevitably this set the proverbial cat amongst the pigeons as various politicians, commentators and so forth all engaged in speculation over a whole host of related issues. For Ms Sturgeon two of the early responses must surely have been disappointing. NATO’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg restated that Scottish membership of the organization was not automatic. Even more concerning, a European Commission spokesperson stated that an independent Scotland would have to apply to join the EU. Both views contradicted the argument set out by the Scottish government in its 2013 publication Scotland’s Future which made the case for independence.
Looking back at coverage of the previous independence debate in International Affairs the focus was unsurprisingly on defence and the broader implications for international relations. The May issue in 2014 included my contribution, ‘More than a storm in a tea cup’, in which I looked at the security consequences of independence both for Scotland and the remainder of the United Kingdom. The article highlighted the innate complexity associated with dividing armed forces that had never been designed to be divided. I unpacked the basic challenges for an independent Scotland going forward, highlighting the problems of the proposed future independent defence and security policy for Scotland, the implications for the remainder of the United Kingdom, and what this would mean for the wider international community.
The subsequent July issue included two articles published by academics with greater sympathy to the nationalist cause. Both William Walker and Colin Fleming set out a far more optimistic tone. Replicating the arguments contained within Scotland’s Future Colin Fleming put the forward the case that the remainder of the United Kingdom, NATO and the EU would inevitably agree to the logic of cooperation and inclusion of an independent Scotland and they would all ensure that there was little or no defence impact. Similarly, William Walker argued that the dissolution of the union should not be overstated in terms of its wider impact on the international stage and that both parties would most likely come to a reasonable settlement.
What was particularly interesting about these articles was the contrasting responses they received from the public. All three were published ahead of the election that followed in September 2014. In terms of social media engagement ‘More than a storm in a tea cup’ gained one of the highest Altmetric scores seen in International Affairs, largely as a result of a backlash from pro-independence campaigners. In contrast the other two articles, advancing less pessimistic approaches to the independence question, received less social coverage. ‘More than a storm in a tea cup’ clearly angered those in favour of independence, and that anger was expressed in a way not dissimilar to that seen during the EU referendum and US presidential election campaigns in 2016. My conclusion that an independent Scotland’s automatic membership of both NATO and the EU was uncertain was met with flat-out refutation by some activists, the article being labelled an ‘error-strewn shambles of a report on defence’ by the more vociferous on Twitter. Perhaps even in 2014 the public had ‘had enough of experts.’
So where do we stand today? It has already been made clear that if the Westminster government allows a further referendum it is the preference of the Prime Minister for this to occur after the Brexit negotiations are complete. For Scotland’s First Minister the vote needs to happen before this juncture. The one certainty is that if the First Minister gets her way then just as the negotiations between the EU and the UK reach a critical point — most such negotiations tend to go to the last minute — the machinery of government will find itself in the state of purdah which is expected during the run up to a referendum vote and therefore will be hampered in negotiations with the EU.
It is also worth remembering that the situation is quite different compared to September 2014. Three aspects stand out:
- The referendum vote will either be just before or sometime after the United Kingdom has left the European Union. Thus, a vote for independence will be based on an incomplete understanding of a longer term prognosis for the rest of the United Kingdom post-EU.
- The world looks far less settled than it did at the time of the last referendum. Perceptions of Russia have continued to worsen and questions remain about where China is headed. Moreover the impact of the war in Syria has been felt across Europe; from the logistical nightmare of the refugee crisis to the shocking series of terrorist attacks, most notably in France, Belgium and Germany. In response a number of European states have revised the general decline in their defence budgets with Sweden even announcing the reintroduction of conscription.
- The election of Donald Trump in the US has heightened uncertainty about the future direction of the US in relation to both Europe and NATO. His links to Russia and questioning of NATO’s Article V collective security guarantee has alarmed many, both within and outside the US Republican security establishment. This could be an important factor but it is still too early to tell.
What is clear, should a new referendum go ahead and the decision is made to remain within the union, then Westminster will be able to ignore any further calls for independence for at least a generation. For Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP this is the last throw of the dice.
Andrew Dorman is the Commissioning Editor of International Affairs. He is also a Professor of International Security at King’s College, London.
You can find out more about International Affairs by visiting our website.
If you are interested in contributing to International Affairs, please view our submission guidelines.
