[Scotland won the right to a “devolved” Parliament in the
late 1990s and has sweeping powers over, for example, its judicial system and
government spending. But full independence would give the SNP the authority to
fulfill a wide array of pledges, including expelling the British nuclear fleet
from Scottish waters, withdrawing from NATO and unwinding Scottish regiments
from Britain’s military forces overseas. It would also give politicians in
Edinburgh the freedom to vote separately from — and perhaps counter to —
Britain in world bodies such as the United Nations and the International
Monetary Fund.]
 |
| Royal Mile in Edinburgh, Scotland. |
EDINBURGH, Scotland
— After centuries of war with England, politicians in this stately city signed
away Scotland’s sovereignty in the early 1700s for the promise of riches and
the glory of empire. Three hundred years later, resurgent nationalists here are
plotting a new rebellion to win it back.
Appealing to the force of tartan pride, the Scottish
National Party won surprise control of the regional Parliament last year, which
thrust the separatist fantasy of hearing “Scots Wha Hae” on the bagpipes as the
national anthem into the realm of distinct possibility. The British government,
boxed into a precarious corner, has opened formal negotiations with the Scots
to set a date for an independence referendum.
Scotland’s independence crusade is emerging as the greatest
threat to the cohesion of the United Kingdom since Ireland achieved
independence — a three-decade process that culminated in 1949, when Ireland
left the Commonwealth.
Scotland won the right to a “devolved” Parliament in the
late 1990s and has sweeping powers over, for example, its judicial system and
government spending. But full independence would give the SNP the authority to
fulfill a wide array of pledges, including expelling the British nuclear fleet
from Scottish waters, withdrawing from NATO and unwinding Scottish regiments
from Britain’s military forces overseas. It would also give politicians in
Edinburgh the freedom to vote separately from — and perhaps counter to —
Britain in world bodies such as the United Nations and the International
Monetary Fund.
As in any divorce, a break with Britain could also set up an
economic scuffle — particularly over the lucrative rights to North Sea oil,
seen as key to the prosperity of the Scots on their own.
The push here is being watched with nervous eyes across
Europe, particularly in countries that have long struggled with powerful
separatist movements, such as Spain and Belgium. At the same time, the prospect
of an independent Scotland is sending shockwaves through Westminster, the seat
of the British government in London.
Fearing a diminished voice in global affairs and an
irreparable split in modern Britain, Prime
Minister David Cameron this month launched his own battle to win the hearts
and minds of the Scots. “I believe that England, Scotland, Wales and Northern
Ireland are stronger together than they would ever be apart,” Cameron declared
here this month in a landmark speech for British unity. “Something very special
is in danger. The danger comes from the determination of the Scottish National
Party to remove Scotland from our shared home.”
His fiercest foe: Alex Salmond, Scotland’s deft political
Braveheart and chief of the SNP. The party’s impressive track record in
government and its efforts to protect the Gaelic language and teach the battles
of Scottish history in schools have touched a nerve in a voting base physically
distant and culturally apart from London, the British capital that sits
geographically closer to Amsterdam and Brussels than Edinburgh.
In a move that could maximize the emotional appeal of
independence, the SNP is pushing for a vote in 2014 — the 700th anniversary of
the legendary Battle of Bannockburn that saw the English Army famously routed
in the First War of Scottish Independence. London, meanwhile, is pressing for a
ballot as early as next year to settle the issue once and for all.
“For the Scots, this is going to be decided 80 percent from
the heart and 20 percent from the mind,” said Alistair Hunter, a 54-year-old
nationalist working for the city of Edinburgh. “I tell ye, I’m not the kind to
wear a kilt at weddings, but I am Scottish before I am British. and I know a
good many of us want our rightful independence back.”
Courting celebrities
Here in Scotland, the campaign on both sides is raging from
the chilly highlands to the glass offices of modern lowland cities. It is a
fight being waged via bumper stickers, street graffiti and informational
pamphlets, as well as in a tug of war for backing from renowned Scots,
including musician Annie Lennox (a high-profile convert to the independence
side) and author J.K. Rowling (publicly undecided; both camps want her under
their spell).
Though polling in the past has shown core support for
independence at about 30 percent, the most recent surveys indicate a race that
is too close to call. Still, analysts say more Scots appear to favor remaining
part of Britain — a union of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland —
than favor independence. One compromise being floated by London could cede more
autonomy to the Scots in areas such as taxation, though a concrete offer would
be made only if a referendum on independence fails.
At the same time, the nationalists are moving to make the
notion of independence more palatable, calling it a natural progression from
already devolved powers that would not deeply alter Scotland’s fabric of life.
Like Canada and Australia, an independent Scotland would, for instance, keep
Queen Elizabeth II as its constitutional monarch. Nationalists say they would
maintain the British pound — a currency already printed with Scottish images
such as Brig o’ Doon and Edinburgh Castle for distribution in Scotland.
The undecideds include 30-year-old Laura Martin, who
bantered with an SNP campaigner on her doorstep on a recent afternoon. “Look, I
do think it’s a nice idea, I am proud of Scotland,” said the homemaker, as her
two young children peered curiously from behind her skirt. “But aren’t we just
too wee to survive alone?”
No, insist the nationalists, who argue that an independent
Scotland would be the world’s sixth-richest nation as measured by income per
person. With an economy larger than Denmark’s and a population of
5 million, they maintain, an independent Scotland would be a tartan utopia
always able to afford the kinds of progressive perks already enjoyed by the
Scots but not the English — including free university education, prescription
drugs and home health care for the elderly.
That dream, however, is based on one big calculation: North
Sea oil. Most agree that a majority of energy reserves in Scottish waters would
need to be ceded by the British to make independence viable. But with analysts
predicting the North Sea could be depleted by the 2030s, even a predominant
share of that revenue might buy the Scots only a few decades to come up with an
economically sustainable plan.
A bit surreal
Still, there is no questioning the movement’s progress. As
recently as the 1960s, Scottish independence was a relatively fringe cause. But
resentment of London grew during the conservative Thatcher era of the 1980s and
intensified during the Iraq war. With the Conservatives’ Cameron in charge in
London, for many largely liberal Scots, even the “devolution” vote in 1997 that
gave them autonomy on many issues is no longer enough.
“I’ve had colleagues even from universities in northern
England come up and say, ‘You Scots aren’t going to go and leave us with that
lot in London, are ye?’ ” said Tom Devine, a University of Edinburgh scholar considered one of the world’s leading Scottish historians. “I’m not saying yet
that independence is probable, but what is surprising so many of us now is that
independence is actually a possibility.”
In staging a referendum, the British and the SNP remain at
loggerheads over a few key points, including the exact wording and number of
ballot questions and whether 16- and 17-year-olds — who are seen as more likely
to support independence than older Scots — will be allowed to vote.
But what scares unionists most is that the three traditional
British parties — Labor, Conservative and the Liberal Democrats — have lost
credibility in Scotland in recent years, with no definitive Scottish voice
emerging to champion the cause to stay within Britain. That has left Cameron,
largely unpopular with the Scots, to lead the charge.
For the English living in Scotland, all the talk of
independence still seems a bit surreal. On a visit to the site of the historic
Battle of Bannockburn, depicted in the film “Braveheart,” Peter Whitham,
48, the English husband of a Scottish wife, frowned as he heard his son chasing
his sister with a play sword, yelling “I’ll get ye, ye English coward!”
“The point is that we shouldn’t be Scottish or English
before we are British,” Whitham said. “Come on. We’re living in 2012.”
