If Scotland were to go independent in the next few years what kind of foreign policy might it pursue and how might it best establish a new diplomatic service?
Given the rapidity of change in global affairs (the rise of China, a more assertive Russia, the impact of Trump, the Covid-19 pandemic, climate change,migration…), flexibility should be a key principle. Larger countries and groupings will continue to dominate the world stage but smaller nations such as Norway and New Zealand have shown they can also play an influential role.
Scotland will surely be willing to continue to play the role of good global citizen, building on what everyone hopes will be a successful COP 26 conference in Glasgow later this year. There is a long-standing, strong consensus in Scotland for supporting multilateral cooperation, free trade, conflict prevention, human rights and the rule of law.
Nations of course cannot escape their history or geography and in Scotland’s case this means that there is unlikely to be a sudden break with its three centuries of union with England, its closest neighbour and only land border.
But an independent Scotland will surely wish to chart its own course in foreign policy and one of its top priorities will be to join the EU. This will immediately show the world that it is heading in a different direction from the rest of the UK.
Scotland will also seek membership of other international organisations from the UN and IMF to the OECD and NATO. It will surely seek closer ties with its historic Nordic and Baltic partners. Whether or not Scotland retains the nuclear facility at Faslane will be a major discussion point for any new government in Edinburgh. Apart from the nuclear question, Scotland will also have to decide on the role and structure of its armed forces.
Europe or bust
But it is the EU that will dominate the landscape. The government in London has made clear that it does not wish to work with the EU on its common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and there are already indications that it may wish to diverge in other important policy areas. Given the increasing interplay between domestic and foreign policy (trade, climate change, migration), Edinburgh will have to pay close attention to how EU-UK relations develop as well as the evolution of the CFSP.
As an EU member, Scotland will be obliged to support that CFSP. Established three decades ago under the MaastrichtTreaty, and despite the difficulties of achieving consensus among the 27 member states, the EU has gradually developed common positions on dealing with China,Russia, Iran, the Middle East and many other thematic issues from climate change to disarmament.
But each member state is still free to conduct its own foreign policy and hence it is worth reflecting on the experience of other small states in the EU such as Denmark, Finland, Slovakia and Ireland. While staunch EU supporters, they have nevertheless managed to carve out their own separate identities in foreign policy. Two are members of NATO and two are not, reflecting different historical and geographic experiences.
All are outward looking, taking pride in their support for the UN, development assistance, and climate change. All have produced top notch officials serving ininternational institutions. Ireland alone has produced two of the most senior officials in the European Commission in the past decade. All are good at networking and leveraging their relations with regional bodies such as the Nordic Council and the Visegrad group or, as with Ireland, maximising its special relationship with the US.
Niche expertise
Scotland should thus learn from similar-sized states and seek to establish its own niche areas of expertise. By hosting COP 26 in November, Scotland has the perfect stage to showcase its continued commitment to climate change mitigation, the circular economy and sustainable energy. It already has a good record. In 2019, Scotland became the first country to declare a climate emergency and subsequently amended its national climate change target to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045. The Scottish Government was one of the first to set out a Circular Economy Strategy in 2016. With top-class academic centres working on sustainable energy, and resource use, it could build on this record with investments that will support net-zero and climate resilient employment, such as jobs related to carbon recycling, hydrogen technology, “green” builders and architects.
Conflict prevention is another area where Scotland could build on the experience gained in 2016 when it hosted a UN conference involving women from several Middle Eastern countries. Cultural diplomacy, with strong assets in tourism, sport, education and music, should also be further developed to help improve Scotland’s global brand. There will be other areas that should emerge from a broader national discussion on how Scotland should seek to develop niche capabilities in foreign policy.
A new diplomatic service
Scotland could also learn from a number of countries how to establish adiplomatic service. While the Baltic states essentially had to start from scratch, Slovakia and the Czech Republic had to divide the assets of former Czechoslovakia as did Slovenia and Croatia as regards the former Yugoslavia. In Scotland’s case, there would need to be a division of the UK’s diplomatic assets which could lead in some cases to co-location with England, co-location with the EU delegation or, the most expensive option, an independent property.
An increasing number of member states do co-locate with EU delegations around the world as it saves money and sends a clear signal about cooperation. Scotland will also have an opportunity to send officials to work in the EU’s external action service (EEAS) which has some 3,000 permanent and seconded staff in Brussels and over 150 delegations around the world.
By way of comparison, Denmark, Finland, Slovakia and Ireland each has between 60 and 70 diplomatic missions around the world plus an average of 25 consulate generals/trade missions. The UK has over 200 missions and employs some 14,000 staff of which 70% are locally engaged. No doubt many current UK diplomats of Scottish origin would seek to help establish a Scottish diplomatic service but it would also require hundreds of new home-grown officials.
Conclusion
An independent Scotland may be some years away but it is not too early to start thinking about these issues and developing the required expertise. There is little coverage of global affairs or EU foreign policy in the media, think tanks or inacademia. A little seed money from public or private sponsors could go a long way to remedy these defects.
Scotland should also develop its own niche areas of expertise, starting with the gamut of environmental issues related to climate change. Indeed, the aim for the coming years should be: ‘Scotland – the Green Capital of Europe.’
Further reading: Anthony Salamone, The Global Blueprint, Edinburgh Merchants; Colin Imrie, Independent Scottish foreign policy, Sceptical Scot; Daniel Kenealy, Scotland and the CFSP, SCER; Kirsty Hughes, Scotland’s European/International Policies, SCER
graham watson says
Fraser Cameron’s article on Scotland’s foreign policy is both timely and thought-provoking. Importantly, it builds on the reflections of Anthony Salamone and others in Kirsty Hughes’ SCER paper of May 2019 and subsequent papers.
The challenges posed by the need for external representation in the form of a Scottish Foreign Office would be substantial, but not insurmountable.
An independent Scotland within the EU would need representation in the other member states, of which there may be 29 by the time of Scotland’s accession. If push came to shove, it might get away with twenty offices initially, some serving more than one other member state. Currently we have just four ‘Scotland hubs’ in the EU.
Scotland would also need representation at the headquarters of the major supranational bodies, UN or other.
For countries beyond the EU it should not be forgotten that as EU citizens, Scotland’s passport holders would have a right to consular and diplomatic help from the representation of any other EU member state in any third country. And Scotland as a whole could benefit from the EU’s own representations (the EU eschews the term ‘embassy’). Indeed, other small EU countries have closed embassies as the EU’s diplomatic service (the EEAS) has expanded.
In some cases, history might provide building blocks. The role of expatriate Scots in colonial times in building some of the world’s capital cities – Ottawa, Buenos Aires, Hong Kong, Blantyre, even Moscow – has left residual ties which could be leveraged. One might expect that Scotland would wish to remain a member of The Commonwealth, as have other countries which have gained independence from London, and perhaps continue to participate in the work of cultural diplomacy done by the British Council. Membership of the Council of Europe is also important in promoting the values of which Fraser Cameron writes.
None of this, of course, comes without a cost. The single greatest barrier to European Union membership remains the lamentable state of Scotland’s public finances. The toytown idea that all the UK’s oil reserves are Scotland’s and all its debt is England’s does not withstand even superficial scrutiny. If, for the sake of argument, England were to withdraw from the United Kingdom – perhaps not such a far fetched idea these days – Scotland would be obliged to deal with this issue. She would be well advised in any case to follow advice given by Adam Smith in a different context and ‘accommodate her future views and designs to the real mediocrity of her circumstances.’
Joe Mellon says
> idea that all the UK’s oil reserves are Scotland’s and all its debt is England’s.
Well that is the legal position. There may be negotiations around that but you don’t give anything away in a negotiation unless you get something for it.
So: the baseline is the legal position. Do you think England will be offering us a share of Falklands oil revenue?
Joe Mellon says
The CFSP is problematic. The EU for instance supported extreme right wing CIA asset Juan Guaido as ‘President of Venezeula’ after he was appointed to the role by the US. Currently it is participating in the sanctioning of Russia in supposed outrage at the jailing of one man while being quite unmoved by the jailing, torturing and murder of thousands of regime opponents in tame puppets like Egypt.
Tony O'Donnell says
The relationship with the ex – as with interpersonal relationships post-divorce – will be crucial.
Constructive, or obstructive? The chance of productive cooperation with the EU looks to be more favourable than with England, judging from London’s hostile post-Brexit stance towards Brussels. Negotiating with a team of David Frost clones would impede the crucial early days of independence.
Conor I McMenemie says
Scotland’s official position on Global Warming and Climate is horrendous! Surprised you may think? In the attached zoom presentation it is a Scot whos research is convincing the former head of science policy at the arch republican Heartland Instute (Dr Jay Lehr) that GW and CC are man made. Across to the opposite end of the US political spectrum, the arch socialist Bernie Saunders Progressive Party hosted the same research on its website (https://progressivepartyusa.com/climate-change/climate-change-causes-in-question-weather-system-interference-may-displace-carbon-emissions-as-key-factor/). Yet why have you never heard of this awsome homegrown feat, described by former NASA meteorologist Tom Wysmuller as ’emminently worthy of Nobel Prize consideration’? Because institutions like the RSE and our parliament find it contrary to the ‘strategic objectives’. Publications find it ‘outside their editorial guidlines’. In reality the CC/GW franchise is jealous of its self elevating intilectual pedistle and does not broke any waver from the official doctrine. The great fear here in the NiCE team is that this censorship and dogma may ultimatly win in this conflict between science and aspirations.