The Green Ribbon

Kosovo, Europe and Scotland

The FT has an article today that will make unwelcome reading for Scottish nationalists. Nevertheless, even though it comes from the usual suspects at the Constitution Unit, it warrants serious consideration:

The diplomatic fallout
over recognition of the newcomer has ominous implications for the
separatists in minority government in Edinburgh. Half a dozen European
Union states fear the example that is being set for ethnic minorities
within their borders. If Scotland ever votes for independence these
states could easily make an example of it by blocking Scottish
membership of the EU. (Simon James, Financial Times)

Of course, an independent Scotland would be in a fundamentally different position from Kosovo since it would almost certainly be applying in the wake of an agreed secession in line with international legal precedent.

James’ point is that Scottish membership of the EU might nevertheless be blocked by governments obstinately determined to make a point. In reality, taking such a stance against an agreed secession, might only strengthen the hand of unilateral seccessionists.

It would in effect impose Spain’s reactionary constitution on the European Union, since their would be no democratic way for national communities to pursue their aspirations, even where they are in the majority, and remain in the EU. Such an approach might repress secessionist movements in the short run, but ultimately it would make the union a dangerously rigid structure.

Posted

in

,

by

TomGriffin

Tags:

Comments

5 responses to “Kosovo, Europe and Scotland”

  1. Masaryk avatar
    Masaryk

    Spain’s reactionary constitution gives ETA a thin veneer of reason to continue with their actions. As ETA says (and the Spanish parties agree) it is illegal (or unconstitutional if you wish to use the more official sounding word) for the Basque Country to hold a referendum on independence. That is, it is democratically impossible for the Basques to secceed from the Spanish state.
    The Spanish Cortes threw out the ‘free association’ plan of Basque Premier Ibarretxe in 2005 – a step below independence which would have given the Basques a free referendum on more power (or not).
    The Basques could point to the Kosovars and say, the only reason the Albanians there now have independence is because of the power of the gun. The stance of Serbia is the same as Spain. Had the Albanians followed the path of Raguva, the pacifist nationalist leader, they’d have been denied independence. It’s only military action and the threat of military defeat which has gained and will keep Kosovar independence.
    Now allowing historic nations of Europe the option of democratically leaving and existing state is bad news from the EU’s perspective. It’s short-sighted and undemocratic.
    The borders of Easter Europe are mostly settled now, the borders of Western Europe are about to change. The big, imperial states of Western Europe need to realise that and work with democracy and not against it. Sooner or later, no matter what Spain or France especially believe, they’ll have to recognise the independence of Flanders, the Basques, Catalans, Scots and some half a dozen other potential nation-states. It will be a good day for Europe when they do.

    Reply
  2. DougtheDug avatar
    DougtheDug

    “James’ point is that Scottish membership of the EU might nevertheless be blocked by governments obstinately determined to make a point.”
    And the point they’ll make is ensuring that they lose the EC’s main oil producer and most of the EC’s productive fishing grounds.
    200 mile limit anyone?

    Reply
  3. technomist avatar
    technomist

    Its a very interesting question. The mechanics of how Scotland would fund itself or annoy its neighbours in retaliation won’t be in the forefront of governments’ minds which are trying to avoid the break up of their ‘nation’ states. They may in any event calculate that the oil would not be ‘lost’ – it would, as ever, be sold on the international oil markets to the highest bidders and thereby be part of the available energy resources to fuel European industrial and consumer demand. I don’t think a fishing dispute would cause Brussels to quake in its boots, where major countries really to press for Scotland’s exclusion. But I am not so sure they would do that if an English government were to agree with the principal of separation of Scotland within the EU.

    Reply
  4. Tom Griffin avatar
    Tom Griffin

    the point they’ll make is ensuring that they lose the EC’s main oil producer and most of the EC’s productive fishing grounds.
    Is that an argument for the Norwegian option?

    Reply
  5. WorldbyStorm avatar
    WorldbyStorm

    It’s fascinating how contradictory the outcomes of the Kosovo situation are. Thanks for bringing that link to light Tom.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *