3 thoughts on “Somebody remind Macwhirter about Sweden and Finland?

  1. This is the same line Glenn Campbell was pushing in his belated piece on the FM’s visit to Washington on the BBC Scotland website. Clearly the line from the Scotland Office and Magnus Gardham to his cronies is to attack the SG on the issue of Nuclear weapons. While NATO has within its membership, states which have nuclear weapons, the majority of the members do not have them and most do not permit them to be housed on their territory. It is likely that an independent Scotland would not wish them to be housed in Scotland. Ergo, attack the SG because if Scotland became independent, these weapons would have to be housed in England and closer to London and the Home Counties.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. I have always opposed nuclear armaments but recent events in Ukraine have made me think again.
      Had NATO not been nuclear armed,would Russia have been encouraged to use theirs against Ukraine or anyone else who tried to thwart their objectives?
      It may still happen but seems less likely due to MAD certainty.
      Disarmament will have to be multi-lateral if we are to deter every nuclear armed dictator from blackmailing the rest of the world into submission.
      Putin has changed things dramatically in Europe and beyond.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. There will be many decisions for the democratically elected government of Scotland to make after independence. These will certainly involve big and controversial decisions on international relations and defence policies. And positions do change as we’ve seen over Sweden/ Finland and NATO.

    I spotted this ‘straw in the wind’ recently: ‘Could Spain be the first NATO State to sign the Nuclear Ban Treaty? ‘ (https://www.icanw.org/could_spain_be_the_first_nato_state_to_sign_the_nuclear_ban_treaty)

    ‘.. in exchange for their support on the 2019 budget, political party Podemos obtained a commitment from the Spanish government to sign the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). The government has not yet announced how and when they will implement this decision.

    ‘Spain’s signature would represent a significant breakthrough for the TPNW among NATO states. Spain would be indicating that it supports a future for the Alliance without nuclear weapons. As several studies have acknowledged, there are no legal impediments for NATO states to join the TPNW. But there is significant political pressure within the Alliance to steer clear of the treaty.’

    Recall that the TPNW was adopted at the United Nations in 2017. After reaching the threshold of 50 ratifications or accessions, it entered into force on 22 January 2021, becoming a permanent part of international law.

    The many countries that have now signed the Treaty (as of April 2022) are listed here: https://treaties.unoda.org/t/tpnw In the UN jargon, there are now 86 Signatory States and 60 State Parties.

    Interestingly, one of the countries to ratify the Treaty is New Zealand. Notwithstanding this position, New Zealand remains a member of the ‘Five Eyes’.

    According to the BBC News website on 4 May 2021, ‘the Five Eyes alliance is an intelligence-sharing arrangement between five English-speaking democracies: the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. … It is often DESCRIBED AS THE WORLD’S MOST SUCCESSFUL INTELLIGENCE ALLIANCE.’ (my emphasis)

    Another country to ratify the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is Ireland. Notwithstanding this, the UK is willing to maintain an ‘interesting’ defence alliance with Ireland.

    See: ‘Why do British jets ‘protect’ Irish airspace?’ – at https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-jets-protect-irish-airspace/

    ‘The agreement reportedly permits the British military to conduct operations over Ireland in order to intercept aircraft in the Flight Information Region shared by both nations. Make no mistake however, this agreement is mutually beneficial. The UK needs to be able to intercept aircraft even as far south west as Ireland.’

    ‘The Russian air force knows that it can approach or even enter Irish airspace with far less immediate and serious consequences than if it did the same to other north Atlantic countries such as Iceland where there is a Nato air policing mission – or NORWAY, WHICH HAS A WELL-RESOURCED AIR FORCE capable of quickly intercepting suspected incursions.”

    On 19 December, 2015 the UK government announced the signing of an MoU with the government of Ireland: this ‘represents a major step forward in the process of formalising the already broad and strong relationship the UK and Ireland have, RECOGNISING THE 2 COUNTRIES’ SHARED INTERESTS, VALUES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The MoU will provide both the UK and Ireland with a means for developing and furthering their ALREADY EXCELLENT DEFENCE AND SECURITY RELATIONS and will help to enhance cooperation in exercises, training as well as peacekeeping and crisis management operations.’

    All this despite Ireland not being a member of NATO and also signed up to the TPNW! Points to an independent Scotland being perfectly able to reach a position close to meeting our own needs and wants in cooperation with all these pragmatic third party countries seeking the same – is it not?

    Liked by 4 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.