Scottish independence would weaken the UK’s defence posture and hand Vladimir Putin a “win,” according to Defence Procurement Minister Luke Pollard.
Speaking to Scottish journalists in London, Pollard said that removing the UK’s nuclear deterrent from Scottish waters, as proposed by the Scottish Government, would make Britain less secure and risk thousands of defence jobs.
“The thing that Putin fears most about the UK is our nuclear deterrent,” Pollard said, as reported by the Daily Record. “So why make the argument that gives Putin a win, that removes jobs and makes Britain less secure? I don’t think, in an era of threat, that’s a credible position for anyone.”
He continued: “If I was sat in the Kremlin and I was looking at the nation that is at the forefront of support for Ukraine, that has a commitment to support Ukraine after a peace, and there was a way of being able to erode its defence capabilities, I would regard that as a win.”
Pollard added that the future of Scotland was “very much down to the people of Scotland,” but warned that weakening the UK’s integrated defence posture would play into Russia’s hands.
The remarks came alongside an announcement by Scottish Secretary Douglas Alexander of a new £177 million defence export deal between Saab and the Royal Thai Air Force, which will see Leonardo in Edinburgh produce radar systems for Gripen fighter jets.
Alexander described the deal as “further proof that Scotland is globally recognised as a centre of defence excellence,” crediting UK government support in securing it amid “stiff international competition.
If the Iran-Israel war taught us anything, it is that Russian and Iranian bot accounts represent a large proportion of the anti-western comments, ‘likes’ and general anti-British and anti-western sentiment seen on social media platforms. It could well explain, at least partially, the ‘closet tory’ phenomenon that emerged over the last 10-15 years, whereby actual election results generally turn out to be more right wing than the social (and mainstream) media would indicate in the run-up to elections. Scottish independence and Irish unification seem to be some of their favourite topics.
give Scotland its independence, I for one could’ve give a shit anymore Scotland should be told no that in the event of independence, that it would be responsible for its own defense and, like Ireland, as they get away with the expectations of protection from the rest of the UK will d it for them.
Funny isn’t it when the cousins bombed Iran all those bots calling for independence closed down!
until they find another reason to start again
Why are they talking about independence, it is not likely to happen any time soon or even ever. Maybe if Farage and his bunch of clueless minion get in but that is a long shot at best.
The media just won’t let it go, and it stoked the divisions and open wounds in Scotland .
Why would independence weaken defence? Such statements are not usually accompanied with anything other than a biased opinion piece. The UK already collaborates on defence, with many other countries. Is that proposed to be changed? The UK cannot defend itself for very long based on our own resources so independence (presumably from Scotland) will hardly make much of a difference. Since Scotland ‘only’ contributes about 9% to the total it doesn’t make much impact. Scotland’s defence and potential enemies are the exact same that affect England and Wales. so what difference does it make? What stops defence collaboration, aside from pig-headed refusal?
Think about it. An independent Scotland would have to have its own military. The warshipc built in Scotland do not belong to Scotland England, Wales or Northern Ireland. The belong to the British government and are managed by the MOD. If Scotland left, the whole of the defence sector would move out of Scotland, Faselane would close and all the ship yards on the Clyde eould close down. Warships must be built within the Union, that is written into law. The same for any air bases. All owned by British government and managed by the MOD. Sure you get to keep the base but nothing else.
So please explain how Scotland can afford it’s own military? One fighter jet costs around £100 million and requires, fuel, weapons and ground crew, fire crews, soliders, medics, air traffic controllers and not forgetting thr pilot’s, they work on rotation so you need two per aircraft. Say another 500 million per year. So times that by 20 aircraft a small Scottish airforce would probably cost £12 billion to start up and require £2 billion per year after that. Now a Scottish navy, well you would need 2x type 45 or equivalent and 4 x type 26 or equivalent and 6 small patrol craft. You need to arm it, crew it feed it and fuel it. For that small navy initial outlay would be around £10 billion plus around £2 billion pounds per year. An army of around 20,000 the same requirements as the other 2, you’d probably want 20 tanks and helicopters you would be looking at around £5 billion initially outlay and £1 billion per year after. So just taking the initial outlay of £27 billion ( you should probably double) where is this money coming from? Plus the 5 billion per year after thar?
How does it make us weaker? Well, we are now relying on a foreign military ( Scotland) to defend itself agsinst a hostile invasion. Because if you can’t, we’ve now got Sottish airports controlled by a foreign military…on our doorstep.
Bare in mind, you wouldn’t be part of Nato. So, as long as they didn’t attempt to invade us, they could just sit in Scotland, plant a Russian or Chinese flag in Holyrood house and declare Scotland as an overseas territory. So ultimately, a not very Independent Scotland then!
Not to mention the SNP expects us to transfer said ships,aircraft and military equipment to them because the y have already paid for them🙄Bearing in mind NO Scottish armed forces personal will be forced to transfer to a SDF from the British armed forces it would leave them in a bit of a pickle to say the least!All those personnel you have mentioned would have to be trained north of the border so that’s another massive superstructure to set up and run and it would take years to get qualified personal out of the door.
Infrastructure
Don’t need to think about it as it is obvious. There is a lot of very ill-informed opinion on this subject from people who a) are not involved, b) are ill-informed, c) have created theor own opinion aboujt what would possibly happen at a future date. What makes anyone think Scotland won’t be in NATO? Who would have thought we would need our own military? What a wonderful idea. Scotland is already in NATO, and would be in no different position to any of the other countries. People would not dragooned into Scottish Forces and it would largely be a re-badging exercise anyway. Scotland has already paid for its share of the existing military so would inherit the balance. UK wouldn’t close Faslane, that sovereign component would merely move elsewhere, leaving the base to be repurposed as planned. Silly unfounded assertions based on little or no knowledge do not help the debate. If rUK objected to Scotland being in NATO then it leaves a gaping hole in overall defences – a rather puerile suggestion. In any event what would happen in the scenario of Scotland becoming independent would be a period of negotiation and transition. Nothing to do with imagined assertions from some contributors. This is clearly an argument from some people who are affronted at the thought of a possible independence scenario, so what they are implying is that Scotland cannot be allowed to be Independent because Englandshire would lose out! Some rather silly arguments in this thread!
Now who’s making assumptions? The UK is in NATO if Scotland was to leave the UK it leaves NATO,to rejoin could the SNP spend 5% of GDP on defence?
Agreed regts will be rebadged but those regts will have no personal if servicemen and women don’t voluntarily transfer!
Even if you did take over jets,ships tanks etc all service contracts to keep said equipment current will have to be renegotiated with the various companies supplying their services!
All military trade schools,trng establishments etc will have to be paid for places if the Scottish servicemen were to attend.
To set up s Scottish MOD would take £bs and take many years however if it’s voted for go for it but don’t expect the rest of us to give Scotland more than legally obligated👍👍
1. We are already in NATO as part of the UK, therefore it is only a case of transitioning. Where in the NATO articles does it say that Scotland would leave? What would NATO gain by insisting on Scotland leaving? What would rUK gain by Scotland leaving? Think about it.
2. We already do pay the NATO precept as part of the UK, we would merely continue to do so..
3. Scotland also pays taxes like rUK.
4. Scotland contributes to UK funds through its taxes. So instead of it going to HM Treasury it would go to Scot Treasury instead.
5. Yes contract negotiations are part and parcel of any transition.
6. What facts give you the information to state so categorically your the last sentence, which has just been dreamed to suit your opinion?
7. What has obligated got to do with it? Where has ANYONE ever said that rUK would have to maintain Scotland’s contribution? Another imagined comment to try and justify your position.
8. Whether or not people would or would not transfer is mere speculation on your part. Speculation is not certainty, fact or contracted agreement.
9. Bearing in mind that we would not be paying for nuclear submarines, speculative police actions, Pacific naval jaunts, or aircraft carriers and their support we would actually get far more defence bang for our bucks than UK does, and we would focus on our geographically local interests along with Scandinavia and others.
10. The transition to independence is just that, a transition during which time there would be lots of negotiations.
11. Inferring that Scotland would not join NATO is cutting your nose off to spite your face.
IIRC your argument and stance on this subject has been discussed in a different thread on this site hasn’t it?
Obviously you didn’t listen then and you’re not listening now so there’s not much point in carrying on is there?
Have a good night!
To add, it appears you don’t read and neither are prepared to think. Your response is typical of someone who has no ability to debate or provide a coinsidered response! Just someone who has a blinkered opinion based on misleading facts.
Old debate mate it was done to death on another thread as you know,not worth the time and effort going over the same thing all over again.
It would, because Scotland could not afford the expense of infrastructure and mass needed to guard the North Sea against intrusion from an aggressive Russia.
There is a simply truth in life, you can make any choice you want in life but you have to pay the cost, part of the problem we face in the modern world is we try to deny the cost and yet still take the choice.. one of the costs of an independent Scotland is a massive weakening of the defence of the Uk as well as a general weakening of the west, as one of the more active defenders of western values spilts into two. The choice for many Scot’s may still be that independence is the correct choice for them but it does not change the cost.
It’s like Brexit, it was alway going to cost the UK a shit ton of money as it impacted on trade with the EU nations, it was always going to cause disruption in Northern Ireland.. that was the cost of the choice of greater sovereignty.. now you got a load of people who denied that and still do..it does not make Brexit the wrong choice, but the denial of cost is the problem.
And why would Scotland not be able to afford anything? Do you actually believe the tripe some people offer as an excuse. FYI, Scotland pays taxes as well. Scottish identifiable GDP is higher than many other countrie. Also FYI Scotland has less than one tenth of the population so there is absolutely NO weakening as you suggest. England/Wales contribution would of course diminish slightly but collectively it would actually be no change. Another FYI UK alone also cannto defend the North Sea, it relies on the Nordic countries to assist. Since England likes to pretend that Scotland is a net drain on finances then how does that square with the insistence on making Scotland follow without regard anything that England wants? And what makes you think that Scotland would not also defend shared values?
As i said on the Edinburgh Tattoo post.. “wait for it”, so predictable
The oncosts of moving manufacture to UK/NI/Wales from Scotland would be horrendous for those nations.
The removal of financial support for industry north of the border would have an appalling series of economic effects there
There could be no winners if Scotland left the UK military industrial base.
Leaving the UK would not provide Scotland with any advantages should the other nations of our islands go to war.
A serious nuclear conflict (God please no) will involve the Scots whether they hold nuclear subs within their physical confines or not
Radiation from the South will find it’s way over the border whether Scotland declares itself non nuclear or not.
Physically preventing invasion would require the commitment of huge numbers of personnel or advanced costly weaponry or both…..it’s a big country and a small population…..
The Scots and the rest of the island nations all need allies….we have to stick together whether we like it or not…..
Speaking of Gripen. Ukraine and Sweden are signing a deal that will see Ukraine purchasing 100 to 150 Gripen E/F. Surprised George hasn’t done a piece on it?