Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
As a member state of the European Union, Scotland would possibly have more of a role in international affairs than now, as its politicians could argue their own case. Unionists have warned that an independent Scotland might not be able to join the EU if the UK was split. However, such a situation is highly unlikely, not least because the same argument of denying membership could be applied to an independent England. Similarly, many countries share overseas embassies and assets and there is no reason why Scotland and England couldn't continue to co-operate...

Hm, we had a long discussion with checking of historical precedents and such in a diary which name I have forgotten ("Nations of Europe"? - anyway widely commented). And according to our conclusion a country that breaks apart from the "mothercountry" does not automatically retain membership and has to apply. The "mothercountry" does however keep their EU-membership.

That the "mothercountry" in this case would be England I think is fairly certain. Even though scots might view it differently England is perceived as the main entity of UK, and just as Russia took over the position of the USSR in for example the UN I think England would carry on the obligations of the UK.

So Scotland would need to apply for membership and England would have a say over its negotiations. If the split is on good terms, this might mean little but otherwise England might block Scotland from joining.

Then there is of course the "Greater Luxembourg"-option. That is making a new union with an already existing member country. Ireland perhaps?

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Wed Jan 17th, 2007 at 06:03:36 PM EST

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series