How Should Scotland Vote - Essay Example

How Scotland should vote United Kingdom is a union of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland with London as the administration and political centre. Scotland became part of the union after a series of border battles with England. The most significant war that would earmark the actual defeat and pave way for eventual unification of the two powers happened in 1513 in Flodden when England defeated Scotland in a border dispute. In 1603, England and Scotland agreed to unify their crowns with King James VI of Scotland as the general monarch of the isle of British. In 1707, the union strengthened further when the two countries unified their politics. All political activities and operations transferred to London after the agreement. In 1880s, 1913 and 1979, Scotland unsuccessfully attempted to negotiate for its independence. Continued agitation for independence led to the reestablishment of Scottish parliament in 1999. The parliament would make its own policies and exercise its legal powers but had to be financially dependent on London. The dominance of the Scottish National Party (SNP) led by Alex Salmond in the Scottish parliament after the 2011 election worked to renew calls for independence (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 2). The push for independence succeeded on October 2012 when Alex Salmond and David Cameron signed the Edinburg agreement that will allow for September 18, 2014 referendum vote. Considering various economic, political and social issues, Scotland should vote “No” to secession. Scotland has been a member of the UK for over 300 years and this quantifies the great level of attachment to British. In fact, it is currently difficult to isolate real English from Scottish considering the great freedom of movement and operations of citizens of the two associate countries. According to McLean and Lodge (2013, pg. 3), London oversees most of international politics, economic and security operations and concerns of Scotland. This means that secession of Scotland from the United Kingdom will lead to serious setback for the Scottish. Most of the arguments presented by pro-independence led by Alex Salmond have been vague every time when subject to critical analysis. The need to enjoy economic freedom and control of Scottish internal affairs is unquantifiable considering that many Scots currently enjoy significant economic prosperity and hope under the umbrella of the British union. There is a hidden obsession by the Scottish political class to control the Northern Sea Oil and taxes collected in Scotland (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 3). Such expectations are likely to result to serious corruption in the government and diversion of public funds into the hands of few politicians and powerful business people. Besides, revenues collected from trade of oil from the North Sea Oil have been continually declining. For instance, UK only earned $10.8 billion in 2013 that was 40% below the amount earned in 2012 from the North Sea Oil project. Projections by Institute of Fiscal Studies estimate that the value may decline to around $5.5 billion in 2016 and 2017 (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 7). This translates to a serious warning to the SNP that seems to view oil as fundamental economic driver of independent Scotland. Isolation is among the risks that Scots are likely to face when they vote to approve independence of Scotland the scheduled September 2014 referendum. Scotland has been an adept member of the United Kingdom and European Union in extension. UK is a powerful member of the EU and influences most of the organization’s international decisions. Being part of Britain, Scotland enjoys the described power and position of the union. Despite the purported or expressed willingness to allow and tolerate secession of Scotland, England and UK in general harbours significant pain and regret. Consequently, England may turn to want to punish Scotland for its initiative to secede from the Britain union. In so doing, England may use its power in the international politics to delink Scotland from other countries. England may compromise development of trade relations of Scotland and other countries. Furthermore, London may decide to apply its influence in the EU and World Trade Organization (WTO) to suppress efforts of Scotland to join the organizations (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 5). In fact, EU has already signalled that it will be difficult for Scotland to gain admission into EU. The reasons cited for the expression are that seceding from a powerful and active member of EU like UK is a direct connotation of unwillingness to stay in EU (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 5). From the perspectives of international politics and economics, it is practically difficult for WTO to associate with Scotland when rejected by the closest EU. The rejection of Scotland to join European Union (EU) for protesting association with British will work to expose the country to serious trade and economic dangers. Inability to collaborate with the ever-powerful EU will work to cut off links and access of Scotland to international markets. Trade with EU alone could be sufficient to ensure growth of stability and activeness of Scotland in the international trade. When missing efficient trade links with EU, Scotland will have to succumb to serious, unpredictable and detrimental economic conditions characterized with deprived GDP. This will likely cause jitters among Scots who may wish to migrate to England or other members of UK like Wales and Northern Ireland. The general result of such consequences may be ultimate fall of Scotland nation (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 11). Another reason that is likely to complicate Scotland’s economy upon approving independence in the September 18, 2014 referendum vote relates to confusion in currency. It is noteworthy that Scotland currently lacks internationally accepted currency, but relies on pound and euro for trade. UK has already sounded warning and unwillingness to allow Scotland to continue using its pound if the country secedes from UK. As mentioned, European Union (EU) has also expressed unwillingness to admit Scotland, and this extends to prohibit Scotland’s use of euro for trade (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 9). These facts place Scotland in serious and predictably worse economic future should the secession vote succeed. Obviously, Scotland cannot succeed in marketing and internationalizing its currency among countries that attribute it to UK. Potential trade partners may rather wish to use euro or pound that is internationally accepted and competitive. Scotland’s success to secede from UK in the referendum scheduled for September 2014 may declare the territory insecure and take away its grip in international security affairs. UK is a powerful member of the UN Security Council, NATO, and EU, and enjoys significant distribution of embassies around the world (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 9). Britain also prides for having one of the most rapid and efficient armed forces in the world. Britain has used its established security force to win various international wars that have ensured its position as one of the leading militarized countries. Seceding from the Britain will mean dissociation of Scotland from the stable security standpoint into a less secured and military incompetent country. This will expose the country to numerous attacks and security threats characterized with current rise in terror and piracy threats. Secession from Britain may also work to compromise cross border movements of the Scots considering that they rely on British international association to secure passports and travel visas. Voting “yes” and approving calls for independent Scotland in the September 18, 2014 referendum will make the country experience rise in the cost of business and loans. As a precursor, the Standard life insurance based in Edinburg has signalled possibility of vacating Scottish market should the country gain independence. The Royal Bank of Scotland has also sounded warning about a serious financial and economic harm if the country gains independence. Furthermore, National Institute for Economic and Social Research has released estimates that independent Scotland will experience 0.7% to 1.5% rise in the cost of borrowing compared to that of UK (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 7). This may hurt and even scare local and international investors who require low interest rates to ensure profitable business. Success of Scotland to approve its independence on September 18, 2014 referendum will lead to the transfer of part of UK’s £1 trillion debt. Currently, projections are that UK may transfer a total amounting from £100 billion to £130 billion in form of national debt to Scotland. This value will be a representation of the total UK’s GDP shared by Scotland (McLean & Lodge 2013, pg. 12). Successfulness of the transfer will mean that Scotland will start operating on debts, which may increase later due to predicted financial and trade challenges. In conclusion, Scotland has been an important political member of the United Kingdom from as early as 1707. UK comprises of countries like England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. Scotland involuntarily joined with England in 1603 after losing to England in numerous border conflicts. In 1880s, 1913 and 1979, some political actors in Scotland attempted to call for the country’s independence but failed in each effort. In 1999, UK allowed Scotland to establish its won parliamentary system to foresee approval of policies and transact political activities in the country. However, the parliament relied on London for funding making it lack absolute independence. The domination of members of the Scotland National Party (SNP) in parliament after the 2011 election worked to rejuvenate calls for independence. As the leader of SNP, Alex Salmond in October 2012 signed the Edinburg agreement that proposed for September 18, 2014 referendum. Currently, pro and anti-independence groups are involving in highly charged campaigns to influence public support on their respective sides. With the current standing of the world, Scots should vote against independence if they intend to have a better future. Reference MCLEAN, I., GALLAGHER, J., & LODGE, G. (2013). Scotlands Choices the Referendum and What Happens Afterwards. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press. Read More