Re: Scotland to vote on independence in 2014
 

There might be scare tactics, there might also be the issue of getting people motivated here. I mean it's not really a scare tactic when it comes on how to decouple the economic links, this comes up with the dissolution of any larger political unit. Same thing I believe could be said with say the natural resources in Azerbaijan and Central Asia, and some of their continued relations with firms located in Russia by virtue of former connections from the Soviet Union era. Scotland may continue to be economically dominated by the United Kingdom is what I'm getting at.

I would have to think that if it's the British government willing to do this they think there's not much threat to them. It won't look good for one of this government's legacies to be one that Scotland decided to leave, but maybe to put the matter to rest once and for all by claiming no one in Scotland really wants to see them leave the union. Same way the referendums in Gibraltar and Falklands went.

Re: Scotland to vote on independence in 2014
 

Sure, but making it sound like the EU is falling and that they'll be another greece isn't exactly a very nice tone to be setting specially when Iceland who was able to recover from the banks, didn't suddenly make a about face, they are still pushing to join the EU and the Euro.

I would compare this situation closer to that of when Khrushchev took the Crimean from the Russian Republic and gave to the Ukrainian Republic, they were still in the same union so it it didn't matter it's not as if suddenly the industry in place was destroyed the made changes and that was it, same can be said about scotland and england, they are still in the EU, so it's not as if that much will change, custom trade unions might have to be established, but so what? It's not as if the scots plan on taking a table saw to the isle and float away to norway. They'll just have to work together.

Although I doubt scotland will leave, it makes some english nationalists and politicians depressed, the english are a proud lot, they don't want to see the last real bit of the empire leave.

I doubt any issue ever has been "put to bed", as long as thing are "acceptable" theres no reason for things to change. But if the pound were to sink like the titanic(which could happen) could make those "issues" wake out of bed.

Re: Scotland to vote on independence in 2014
 

I know, it was odd that the

Would Scotland still be in the same union? I was under the impression that this would allow it to exit the UK entirely, rather than a different association as was the case with the transfer of the Crimean republic from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR.

My comparison with Central Asia was one that even if independence is secured, it will not mean total independence from the influence of a larger, neighboring power. James Connolly, one of those involved in the movement for Irish independence, had this to say on the matter:

James Connolly - Wikiquote

[quote]
If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin Castle, unless you set about the organization of the Socialist Republic your efforts would be in vain. England would still rule you. She would rule you through her capitalists, through her landlords, through her financiers, through the whole array of commercial and individualist institutions she has planted in this country and watered with the tears of our mothers and the blood of our martyrs[quote]

Now ignoring the bit about the socialist republic and what not, I think that is a valid point here regarding the difference between a genuine independence, and one that only exists in paper as Scotland might end up having. This is generally the problem that exists with a lot of independence movements when they dissociate from a long occupying force.

And of course, it isn't absolute. Baltic States upon exiting from the Soviet Union guided their relations such that they were presumably tied to other economic circles outside of the collapsing Soviet Union and the successor Russian Federation.

Though some of the stuff there has been nutty. I believe in both Estonia and Latvia for example there was a law passed there as they got independence to rework citizenship standards such that knowledge of the language was a standard to earn the citizenship. This of course was directed against Russian residents of those countries and made the intentions of the new state clear regarding its former relationship with Russia.

Yeah, the drama ensuing from this is amusing.

It can never be squashed but it can be significantly reduced to the point of obscurity and irrelevance. It's the same reason why the movement to say make Sicily an independent country was strong in the 40s and 50s, but gradually died off afterwards such that it's not really a serious political topic now.

Re: Scotland to vote on independence in 2014
 

I was referring to the EU, so unless england plans on leaving the EU, theres no reason why the same trade laws wouldn't be the same.

Of course not, but as I said, it's not as if Scotland will float away, they will still be tied to each other.

As it stands now scots in general don't want to be the host of nato trident missiles, would they not be able to tell nato to gtfo? At what point can you define "genuine independence"? I'd say that one would be a pretty big step forward, as I already said scotland and england aren't going anywhere, but scotland isn't exactly feeble in it's own right, it does have things to offer to the world market(manufacturing especially) let alone the north sea and it's oil and gas, well.... Scotland could be sitting pretty, sure english companies currently have the rigs, but it would be scott oil they are pulling out the ground, besides close them down and build new ones, the US would be willing to help thats for sure, Norway, Russia, China the help is endless =P

Baltic Republics were major investments like all other republics, which because they weren't controlled directly only centrally which ment the transition to an independent state was easy to do, but don't mistake Baltic's current political agendas for anything but what they are, Russia as it stands today still invests in the Baltics as it does in every other former republic because they are still tied, industries were spread out; to build a Antov to carry the buran you need parts from Russia, to Build the rockets to launch the buran you need parts from Belarussia to launch the buran you need Kazakhstan's Baikonur Cosmodrome, to simply cut off trade because of becoming different political entities is silly and pricey, when you can still play your cards and end up getting what you need in the end.

What I ment by that analogy is simple if both parties can agree, theres no reason why they both won't profit.

I won't go over it again, but as I said, it's merely a political agenda, For the Baltic countries to "get out from the shadow" of the soviet union and claim to be victims is a easy way out of many problems.

I don't find it amusing at all, it would be sad to see the UK vanish, but at the same time I look at it from the perspective of the scots, their nobles sold the people and the land off to the King of England, If I was a Scottish national I'd want to break the union just as much as the english want to keep it.

As i said, as long as things are okay, aka "stays the same and doesn't get too much worse for too long" then you can keep the populous quelled for a very very long time, but doesn't last forever.

Re: Scotland to vote on independence in 2014
 

Look, I'm not saying that Scottish independence is a bad thing. I just doubt that it would be able to completely decouple themselves from influence by London, the same driving force behind the issues with economy that has given support to the referendum movement.

Is the issue of the North Sea covered in this agreement? Or is it to be decided afterwards in the event of a referendum vote to secede?