Defense Technology & Military Forum

Defense Technology & Military Forum (http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/)
-   Geo-strategic Issues (http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/geo-strategic-issues/)
-   -   Implications of Scottish Independence (http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/geo-strategic-issues/implications-scottish-independence-11811/)

Ricey March 8th, 2012 07:59 AM

Implications of Scottish Independence
 
Hi All,

Just wanted to start a topic on the Implications of Scottish Independence if the Scottish were to vote for full Independence.

Such as what would happen to the :

Trident nuclear weapons
Defense industry as a whole
EU implications
NATO Implications
Permanent seat at the UN

will we both have to re-negotiate memberships?
My main question is what effect this would have as a whole to the UK and its military, any input would be grateful :)

RobWilliams March 8th, 2012 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricey (Post 240983)
Such as what would happen to the :

Trident nuclear weapons
Defense industry as a whole
EU implications
NATO Implications
Permanent seat at the UN

IIRC the SNP has catagorically said it will not allow any Trident systems to be based in Scotland and has a strong stance against the Trident replacement, an idea i've seen tossed around is the idea of the government to pay Scotland in order to use the current facilities (an idea if - provided my thoughts on the SNP view are correct - would most likely not happen).

I have no idea on what the other alternatives are, AFAIK plans to relocate Trident are non-existant as currently there are very few bases where it could be located, not to mention the massive costs of fitting out any prospective base, although this is all based on if the vote is successful.

I'd welcome any info on current plans in regards to Trident

Equinox March 8th, 2012 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricey (Post 240983)
Hi All,

Just wanted to start a topic on the Implications of Scottish Independence if the Scottish were to vote for full Independence.

Such as what would happen to the :

Trident nuclear weapons
Defense industry as a whole
EU implications
NATO Implications
Permanent seat at the UN

will we both have to re-negotiate memberships?
My main question is what effect this would have as a whole to the UK and its military, any input would be grateful :)

In regards to the EU, NATO and the UN, Scotland is the one which would have to negotiate entry into each body, as a new nation. There would be no passing on, or splitting, or automatic membership for Scotland in any of those bodies. Wouldn't be an issue to gain membership to the UN, but they'd definitively have no chance for the permanent seat on the UNSC. For the EU, I imagine their membership would heavily depend on what the Scottish Government want to do, in addition to whether the EU actually wants them--the viability of an independent Scottish economy would probably be an issue there.

As for NATO, again it would depend on what the Scottish Government want to do. And if NATO want them.

Ricey March 9th, 2012 02:19 AM

Thank you for your reply's, if Scotland want independence then i am all for them to have it, even though in my opinion it would be a shame,

And how would the military be split? such as would they require a percentage of current military equipment, Challengers, Eurofighters, etc, or could it be argued that they are not entitled to it.

Im not really sure on how it would work so if you could spread some light on the issue that would be great :)

StobieWan March 9th, 2012 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricey (Post 241041)
Thank you for your reply's, if Scotland want independence then i am all for them to have it, even though in my opinion it would be a shame,

And how would the military be split? such as would they require a percentage of current military equipment, Challengers, Eurofighters, etc, or could it be argued that they are not entitled to it.

Im not really sure on how it would work so if you could spread some light on the issue that would be great :)

In so far as Trident, if they insist we move the missiles, we then announce we're closing all bases and moving them south of the border.The SNP then crap themselves and have a rethink. They can't afford to lose the various conventional bases, plus the aircover by implication that they'd be getting.


As to various bits of kit they'd want, I suspect they'd end up with an defence force that more resembles the republic of Ireland. They'd be losing any future ship orders (why place them with Scotland, now a foreign country, as opposed to yards south of the border or with more competitive yards in the remainder of the UK?)

There's plenty of kit spare in mothballs if they want to play with tanks and stuff but given the SNP's rather inward looking policy I can't see them running Cr2 or anything like it.

Ricey March 9th, 2012 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StobieWan (Post 241051)
In so far as Trident, if they insist we move the missiles, we then announce we're closing all bases and moving them south of the border.The SNP then crap themselves and have a rethink. They can't afford to lose the various conventional bases, plus the aircover by implication that they'd be getting.


As to various bits of kit they'd want, I suspect they'd end up with an defence force that more resembles the republic of Ireland. They'd be losing any future ship orders (why place them with Scotland, now a foreign country, as opposed to yards south of the border or with more competitive yards in the remainder of the UK?)

There's plenty of kit spare in mothballs if they want to play with tanks and stuff but given the SNP's rather inward looking policy I can't see them running Cr2 or anything like it.

But surely the cost of moving the storage and manufacturing capability's south of the border would be a huge and expensive undertaking?, and with Cuts in defense spending/loss of hulls in the Navy surely it wouldn't make business sense to move bases and the manufacturing sectors as i cant see UK making a significant order anytime soon? and i can't see Scotland wanting to lose that amount of jobs?

StobieWan March 9th, 2012 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricey (Post 241052)
But surely the cost of moving the storage and manufacturing capability's south of the border would be a huge and expensive undertaking?, and with Cuts in defense spending/loss of hulls in the Navy surely it wouldn't make business sense to move bases and the manufacturing sectors as i cant see UK making a significant order anytime soon? and i can't see Scotland wanting to lose that amount of jobs?

We're ordering or placing orders for 13 Type 26 frigates, BAE has contracts for that amount of hulls which will probably be built in a similar way to Type 45, ie , in blocks. If Scotland gets independence, they're getting none of that.

So, Rosyth's order book will be the tail end of fitting out for the CVF's and maybe a new build order of a few OPV's.

Base wise, frankly, it'd cost us a shed load of money to move Trident - I'd make it an all or nothing deal and if they're so wedded to their nuclear free future, they can have a *base* free one too.

This is why I get very annoyed with Salmond, he's presenting this as a complete win for Scotland as if it'll be all roses, no losses, all gains.

Ain't gonna happen that way,

Ian

Ricey March 9th, 2012 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StobieWan (Post 241057)
We're ordering or placing orders for 13 Type 26 frigates, BAE has contracts for that amount of hulls which will probably be built in a similar way to Type 45, ie , in blocks. If Scotland gets independence, they're getting none of that.

So, Rosyth's order book will be the tail end of fitting out for the CVF's and maybe a new build order of a few OPV's.

Base wise, frankly, it'd cost us a shed load of money to move Trident - I'd make it an all or nothing deal and if they're so wedded to their nuclear free future, they can have a *base* free one too.

This is why I get very annoyed with Salmond, he's presenting this as a complete win for Scotland as if it'll be all roses, no losses, all gains.

Ain't gonna happen that way,

Ian

But is there a political will to do such a thing? and if you look at the Type 45's, we originally ordered 12 that has gone down to 6, so isn't this the likely outcome for the Type 23's? and it will be a lose lose for both Scotland and England.

And Scotland i will doubt be able to field any frigates at all, so my main point really would be to move to the shipyards and manufacturing the UK will have to give assurances thats these orders will go through? as this will represent significant investment. Does that sound right or am i talking out of my Arse :)

StobieWan March 10th, 2012 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricey (Post 241059)
But is there a political will to do such a thing? and if you look at the Type 45's, we originally ordered 12 that has gone down to 6, so isn't this the likely outcome for the Type 23's? and it will be a lose lose for both Scotland and England.

And Scotland i will doubt be able to field any frigates at all, so my main point really would be to move to the shipyards and manufacturing the UK will have to give assurances thats these orders will go through? as this will represent significant investment. Does that sound right or am i talking out of my Arse :)

There are yards enough to do the work in the UK, and if there weren't, we could just bung the hulls out to Korea - why place the orders in a foreign country (which is what Scotland would be) when we could buy cheaper elsewhere?

It's irrelevant whether we build 13 Type 26 or 6, there's no reason at all to give any ship yard work to a newly independent Scotland. It's just another foreign country at that point - France builds cheaper and quicker and they're just over the road, Korea builds *much* more cheaply and quickly.

The whole point of doing surface combatant construction in Britain is to retain a core strategic capability in the country. If the country stops at the Scottish border,so do the orders.

The SNP are very shy about talking about this but a lot of cash comes into Scotland via Lossiemouth, Kinloss, Rosyth. That's all going South come independence, which the SNP are very opposed to on account of their having the usual "we want to keep the cat but not the credit card bills" approach of most separatists.

dHAKAPETE March 13th, 2012 06:19 AM

Scottish entitlement
 
Scottish govt and taxpayers may take view it's entitled to @10% of uk military hardware!

How would RN fill the gap

StobieWan March 13th, 2012 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dHAKAPETE (Post 241174)
Scottish govt and taxpayers may take view it's entitled to @10% of uk military hardware!

How would RN fill the gap

That 10% wouldn't be a sensible force structure for an independent Scotland - it'd add up to the equivalent of a Type 23 and a sliver of an LPH - they need a force of OPV's for protecting their coastal waters. A high end frigate or two would be expensive to run and overkill for their requirements.

Ditto, a lot of the kit the army and RAF use is going to be too expensive to run for a tiny country like Scotland with no ambitions to be a world actor.

dHAKAPETE March 13th, 2012 07:15 AM

10%
 
Given Scottish independents have made it clear that they have no easier fr anything nuclear then It can be argued that a 10% entitlement would represent 2 or 3 type 23,s and a handful of mine and patrol vessels plus an LPH and @ 12 assorted helis.....given the volume of islands in Scottish waters...an essential capability.

The danish navy would provide a descent blueprint of capability v scale required by the maritime zone scotland would be responsble for ...together with its strategic geography.

Funding would come from the oil and gas royalties over the coming 20 years or so..an industry which Scotland would also need to protect. Oil revenues have been less significant for uk in recent years but would be a massive revenue source for Scotland.

Not advocating it myself but I know there is much talk along these lines and my interest is trying to understand how, if it materialized, a capability gap would be filled by the RN.

Pete

swerve March 13th, 2012 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StobieWan (Post 241177)
That 10% wouldn't be a sensible force structure for an independent Scotland - it'd add up to the equivalent of a Type 23 and a sliver of an LPH - they need a force of OPV's for protecting their coastal waters. A high end frigate or two would be expensive to run and overkill for their requirements.

Ditto, a lot of the kit the army and RAF use is going to be too expensive to run for a tiny country like Scotland with no ambitions to be a world actor.

Weelll . . . . they wouldn't have any use for F-35C, so what about 50+ Typhoon Tranche 1? Enough to operate a couple of squadrons, cycling aircraft in & out of storage to spread the airframe hours. Their share of the RAF combat force, & given their large airspace in relation to population & wealth, a lot of AD-equipped aircraft is desirable. They could take over the entire C-130J fleet (as A400M enters service) on the same basis: too many for their needs, but the spares make up for the airframe hours. They could re-fit a few as KC-130Js, to support the fighters. All of a single type or configuration is easier to maintain than a mixed force. And so on, as far as possible.

The navy is more difficult. They could have a lot more than their share of the OPV fleet (in recognition of their large EEZ), & maybe three of the newest Type 23s, in place of any bigger ships. The SNP has traditionally been opposed to NATO membership, but there are indications that is changing, in which case the frigates would fit in nicely.

The army is the easiest to split neatly.

StobieWan March 13th, 2012 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swerve (Post 241195)
Weelll . . . . they wouldn't have any use for F-35C, so what about 50+ Typhoon Tranche 1? Enough to operate a couple of squadrons, cycling aircraft in & out of storage to spread the airframe hours. Their share of the RAF combat force, & given their large airspace in relation to population & wealth, a lot of AD-equipped aircraft is desirable. They could take over the entire C-130J fleet (as A400M enters service) on the same basis: too many for their needs, but the spares make up for the airframe hours. They could re-fit a few as KC-130Js, to support the fighters. All of a single type or configuration is easier to maintain than a mixed force. And so on, as far as possible.

The navy is more difficult. They could have a lot more than their share of the OPV fleet (in recognition of their large EEZ), & maybe three of the newest Type 23s, in place of any bigger ships. The SNP has traditionally been opposed to NATO membership, but there are indications that is changing, in which case the frigates would fit in nicely.

The army is the easiest to split neatly.

Tranche 1 Tiffy was something I'd thought about - we need to shift out some 1's anyway. Can't see where they'd want or need to be running frigates as I suspect once they get to grasps with how near the knuckle their economy is, they'll be wanting to keep costs low. One idea that did occur to me was that they could possibly trade out for the four type 22's that have been paid off to give Rosyth some rework experience - they're a reasonably large and capable escort, take a leaf out of the Chilean experience with their own 22's.

They'd need to generate some ship yard work in the near future to offset the lack of work coming from south of the border is what I'm thinking.

RobWilliams March 13th, 2012 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StobieWan (Post 241201)

They'd need to generate some ship yard work in the near future to offset the lack of work coming from south of the border is what I'm thinking.

I wouldn't be suprised if the orders remained in Scottish shipyards in an attempt to create a good relationship with Scotland, the current projects (like Astute) would stay there for sure in my opinion.

Later projects like the T26 are different.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2003-2011 DefenceTalk.com. All Rights Reserved.