Implications of Scottish Independence

[RobWilliams]

Posts were made in relation to "defence and military upheaval" because that's what this is; a defence forum.

It's inevitable that defence topics stray into politics every now and then due to controversial decisions made or industrial policy or whatever, but your direct call to know the political ramifications of an independent Scotland on the continent is too much.

Nothing gets the blood up and the chest thumping going than politics and I have no wish to see the thread go down that route as it's neither fun nor pleasant to witness.

 

[swerve]

United Kingdom comprised with England & Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. If Scotland gets its way and got separated from UK union then what would be the political ramification of this move. Will that provide impetuous to the separatist movement in Northern Ireland? How the experts see the future of United Kingdom after this happening.

I was watching the discussion on Russian Television (RT) talk show “cross talk” where experts were saying that SNP wants to remain within European Union after the perceived independence..

This is an exact repeat of a previous post of yours, & fails to address any part of what it was posted as a reply to.

The question I asked over that why the Scots want to come out from the federation of United Kingdom, a veto wielding major regional power.

That has been answered. The answer is that we don't know that they do want to leave the UK. They've never voted for it. The highest ever vote for a pro-independence party is 23% of the electorate. The question is wrong.

 

[explorer9]

This is an exact repeat of a previous post of yours, & fails to address any part of what it was posted as a reply to.


That has been answered. The answer is that we don't know that they do want to leave the UK. They've never voted for it. The highest ever vote for a pro-independence party is 23% of the electorate. The question is wrong.

Kindly evade the repeated points and address the below mentioned point:

Economic crisis and ethno-linguistic nationalism aggravated the pro-independence movement in a number of European Countries. How the internal dynamics of UK different from Spain and Belgium?

 

[RobWilliams]

Something which you have in turn done to the last reply from swerve. So hardly in a position to point the finger IMHO.

Enough of the politics, this isn't the place to discuss the political effects of the independence of Scotland which may or may not happen.

 

[swerve]

Kindly evade the repeated points and address the below mentioned point:

Economic crisis and ethno-linguistic nationalism aggravated the pro-independence movement in a number of European Countries. How the internal dynamics of UK different from Spain and Belgium?

You can not demand replies from anyone to anything you post. All members can choose what they reply to.

You repeated a question which had already been answered, while quoting the answer. I suggest you modify your posting style, & read the replies to your posts more carefully.

 

[StobieWan]

I was watching the discussion on Russian Television (RT) talk show “cross talk” where experts were saying that SNP wants to remain within European Union after the perceived independence. The question I asked over that why the Scots want to come out from the federation of United Kingdom, a veto wielding major regional power.

I'll expand a little bit on this point in that the SNP apparently have been under the impression that they'd automatically enter the EU retaining all the waivers and rights the UK has, but it's been recently suggested that in fact Scotland would have to apply from scratch, in effect much as any other new entrant to the EU would.

That's troublesome for the SNP as it'd erode some of their ambitions in terms of retaining controls on borders, immigration etc.

With reference to the rest of the UK, Wales is a principality, not a country (although best not raise that in a pub with a Welsh Rugby team present, you might have to leave sharpish..) Ireland and Wales both have regional assemblies with some local powers of government, although neither assembly has much in the way of tax raising powers etc.

There's no serious possibility of Scottish independence causing a stampede for Wales and Ireland to follow suit, put it that way.

As has been indicated, there's very likely to be a "no" vote for Independence in any event - most polls show the Scots are broadly opposed to dissolving the union and as the more complex and troublesome issues emerge.

Some of those issues will be the impact of reduced defence based jobs for instance, and this is where a large chunk of the discussions on this thread have focussed.

Ian

 

[the concerned]

Just asking if scotland did gain independance what is the UK going to do about air defence that would leave just conninsby would they consider leeming again one air defence base is not enough,what happens when conninsby needs its runway replacing stuff like that.

 

[t68]

But even so would Scotland be able to man vessels like that? The whole Scottish military will be around 20k including reserves (15,000 full time 5000 reservists) so would be operating vessels ~180 be worth it? A River class OPV is manned by about ~30 so right there that's enough crew for roughly 6 OPVs, they need vessels with as much manpower efficiency as they can get.

In terms of manpower that’s double the size of the NZDF (8500 regulars, 2200 reserves). With only about 2500 uniforms in the RNZN which for its size performs at a level beyond its weight.

Ships of the RNZN; 1x Strategic Sealift ship, 2x Frigates, 6x Patrol boats, 1x Replenishment oiler and Diving Support Vessel and 5x helicopters.

It’s the budget and the spread of uniforms will dictate how the Scottish Defence forces performs, any indication on how they want to spread the numbers?

 

[1805]

In terms of manpower that’s double the size of the NZDF (8500 regulars, 2200 reserves). With only about 2500 uniforms in the RNZN which for its size performs at a level beyond its weight.

Ships of the RNZN; 1x Strategic Sealift ship, 2x Frigates, 6x Patrol boats, 1x Replenishment oiler and Diving Support Vessel and 5x helicopters.

It’s the budget and the spread of uniforms will dictate how the Scottish Defence forces performs, any indication on how they want to spread the numbers?

True other comparisons above and below could be: Danish Navy have about 3500 and will operate 5 major combat ships, about 11 sizable patrol/OPV and c60 over vessels and the Irish Naval Service with c1450 and 8 OPV/patrol vessels. I suspect the SNP would rather be in the INS space, but to buy votes will present a case nearer the Danish.

 

[StobieWan]

In terms of manpower that’s double the size of the NZDF (8500 regulars, 2200 reserves). With only about 2500 uniforms in the RNZN which for its size performs at a level beyond its weight.

Ships of the RNZN; 1x Strategic Sealift ship, 2x Frigates, 6x Patrol boats, 1x Replenishment oiler and Diving Support Vessel and 5x helicopters.

It’s the budget and the spread of uniforms will dictate how the Scottish Defence forces performs, any indication on how they want to spread the numbers?

Hard to tell from what little concrete statements the SNP has made I'm afraid. I suspect the bulk of the force will be army personnel, reviving some old cap badges as that's the cheapest way of providing the visible portion of the defence.

There's discussion of "ocean going ships" for sea control but that could well mean a fleet of OPV's rather than anything like a frigate.


In terms of fast air, I'm seeing more and more comments from Scots indicating they're wondering why they'd bother so perhaps something more like the Irish Republic is in line.

 

[explorer9]

I'll expand a little bit on this point in that the SNP apparently have been under the impression that they'd automatically enter the EU retaining all the waivers and rights the UK has, but it's been recently suggested that in fact Scotland would have to apply from scratch, in effect much as any other new entrant to the EU would.

That's troublesome for the SNP as it'd erode some of their ambitions in terms of retaining controls on borders, immigration etc.

With reference to the rest of the UK, Wales is a principality, not a country (although best not raise that in a pub with a Welsh Rugby team present, you might have to leave sharpish..) Ireland and Wales both have regional assemblies with some local powers of government, although neither assembly has much in the way of tax raising powers etc.

There's no serious possibility of Scottish independence causing a stampede for Wales and Ireland to follow suit, put it that way.

As has been indicated, there's very likely to be a "no" vote for Independence in any event - most polls show the Scots are broadly opposed to dissolving the union and as the more complex and troublesome issues emerge.

Some of those issues will be the impact of reduced defence based jobs for instance, and this is where a large chunk of the discussions on this thread have focussed.

Ian

Thanks,
yes i am agreed with the points that you explicated.

 

[1805]

The Defence Select Committee was discussing the up coming white paper from the SP on 2nd July. After they questioned the SNP, they followed on with Hammond. He was quite open about future Type 26 orders, indicating it was not likely that the UK would simply source from an independent Scotland for: strategic, European competition laws and cost grounds.

Some interesting comments about the timescales of a SSN/SSBN switch from HMNB Clyde, 10 years+.

The SNP stance seems to be completely focused on votes (bringing back cap badges, jobs & locations). They propose to base a non nuclear surface fleet of OPVs at the Clyde...surely the wrong side to protect the Oil Rigs...right place for votes though!

The White Paper is due out in the Autumn.

 

[Kampgruppe1970]

The Defence Select Committee was discussing the up coming white paper from the SP on 2nd July. After they questioned the SNP, they followed on with Hammond. He was quite open about future Type 26 orders, indicating it was not likely that the UK would simply source from an independent Scotland for: strategic, European competition laws and cost grounds.

Some interesting comments about the timescales of a SSN/SSBN switch from HMNB Clyde, 10 years+.

The SNP stance seems to be completely focused on votes (bringing back cap badges, jobs & locations). They propose to base a non nuclear surface fleet of OPVs at the Clyde...surely the wrong side to protect the Oil Rigs...right place for votes though!

The White Paper is due out in the Autumn.

fyi their is larger oil and gas reserves off the west coast of Scotland than their ever was in the North Sea at it's peak ... a geological survey was done in the mid 1990s off the west coast of Scotland including the firth of Clyde ... now how would Scotland's defence forces look like if we vote yes 8.4% of the UK makes up 9.9% of the UK taxes (kinda blows away the subsidy junkies myth) the UK currently has 6 type 45 destroyers, 12 type 23 frigates and will have 2 QE2nd class carriers by 2016 ... so that is basically 70% of a type 45 and 1 and 1/4 type 23 and 20% of a QE2nd carrier as an example of some of the navy hardware ... now how can that work you say ..... that is when the negotiations come into play with bartering at a top level ie for that 20% of a carrier we will give you a type 45, the naval forces inherited by Scotland could look like this 1 astute class sub, 1 Trafalgar class sub, 1 type 45 Destroyer and 2 type 23 frigates (remember their is 2 lpds and 1 LPH and other large vessels) 1 mine sweeper and 1 mine hunter and 2 patrol boats and the same system will be used with the RAF and Army hardware, last year a audit was done on the UK military hardware it stood at £88 billion Scotland would be entitled to something like £8.5 billion .... the Scottish taxpayers pay £3.7 billion per year towards the UK armed forces so I think you will find we will be able to maintain the equipment that we receive.

I've seen a lot of grumbling about where the nuclear deterrent should go and how much it would cost to remove it from faslane, well maybe successive UK governments brought this dilemma on themselves, they were told from the start that Scots did not want nuclear weapons on our soil they ignored this and still put Trident in our country, Westminster put them in our country against the wishes of the people so it is only fitting that Westminster removes these weapons from our soil at their expense ... why should we pay to remove a system we never wanted in the first place

 

[StobieWan]

I can't see any of the existing naval units being useful (1 and a 1/3 of a Type 23 is effectively useless as you'd need three to keep one on task) Same goes for the aircraft etc. Scotland would need a radically rebalanced group of forces, and this is where we're all a bit stuck as the SNP have been robustly forthright but unendingly vague about their actual plans for a future Scottish defence force.

Don't forget, they'd been losing access to the bulk of the training facilities that the RN, RAF and Army currently use and would have to reconstitute those in some way. I'm unclear as to if the SNP actually intend to operate an air force for instance? If so, taking the Tranche 1a Tiffy as a block might be the smartest idea - it'd be a homogeneous fleet and there'd be enough cabs to allow for low hours, assuming the intention was to keep a QRA fleet plus training hours only. There's still a solid line of thinking to suggest the SNP won't even maintain fast jets of any sort - they've made no definitive and costed statement.

As to the relocation of Trident, hard lines I'm afraid, as it was all constructed during a labour majority in Scotland for the main part, the bulk of the money went into Scots pockets as wages. Scotland as I seem to recall, hasn't been any more or less anti nuclear than the rest of the UK in the main, and 2011 was the first time ever that the SNP got a majority government. You can't translate that back across twenty years of Trident.

Post independence Scotland would be losing a large chunk of bases, access to the rUk military shipping market and would have to scramble to place some rapid vote winning orders for a manageable fleet of OPV's surely or lose the yards in Scotland?

 

[RobWilliams]

Before people get carried away with kit lists, one key question needs to be answered

• What role does an independent Scotland play globally (or not) ?

Which basically boils down to securing the countries land, sea and air plus peacekeeping.

Therefore, for starters you can throw out SSNs as a worthless waste of money to maintain in that instance. If you want submarines, get SSKs. But even then they might be too much, not to mention Scotland doesn't have submarine building experience anyway so that'll be a rather expensive undertaking.

 

[1805]

fyi their is larger oil and gas reserves off the west coast of Scotland than their ever was in the North Sea at it's peak ... a geological survey was done in the mid 1990s off the west coast of Scotland including the firth of Clyde ... now how would Scotland's defence forces look like if we vote yes 8.4% of the UK makes up 9.9% of the UK taxes (kinda blows away the subsidy junkies myth) the UK currently has 6 type 45 destroyers, 12 type 23 frigates and will have 2 QE2nd class carriers by 2016 ... so that is basically 70% of a type 45 and 1 and 1/4 type 23 and 20% of a QE2nd carrier as an example of some of the navy hardware ... now how can that work you say ..... that is when the negotiations come into play with bartering at a top level ie for that 20% of a carrier we will give you a type 45, the naval forces inherited by Scotland could look like this 1 astute class sub, 1 Trafalgar class sub, 1 type 45 Destroyer and 2 type 23 frigates (remember their is 2 lpds and 1 LPH and other large vessels) 1 mine sweeper and 1 mine hunter and 2 patrol boats and the same system will be used with the RAF and Army hardware, last year a audit was done on the UK military hardware it stood at £88 billion Scotland would be entitled to something like £8.5 billion .... the Scottish taxpayers pay £3.7 billion per year towards the UK armed forces so I think you will find we will be able to maintain the equipment that we receive.

I've seen a lot of grumbling about where the nuclear deterrent should go and how much it would cost to remove it from faslane, well maybe successive UK governments brought this dilemma on themselves, they were told from the start that Scots did not want nuclear weapons on our soil they ignored this and still put Trident in our country, Westminster put them in our country against the wishes of the people so it is only fitting that Westminster removes these weapons from our soil at their expense ... why should we pay to remove a system we never wanted in the first place

Well when they build some rigs in the West, it might make sense to have a base there, but until then it just looks like keeping the good people of Faslane on board.

I don't think much of the UK kit makes sense for an independent Scotland, certainly not the SSNs, as they are nuclear. As mentioned Scotland needs to look at what place it want's to have in the world.... I assume is just the odd peace keeping battalion, which is what far to many countries think is an acceptable contribution to international peace and security.

I have been working in Ireland for about 8 months and despite the challenges of the Eurozone, from what I can see, devolved government work has worked over the past 20 years. I am increasingly moving to the camp that independence would be financially better for Scottish, and the rest of the UK. But I think it is naïve to think the UK will keep the yards on the Clyde & Rosyth in business with heavily subsidised orders.

Equally HMNB Clyde is a very generous facility for even the current activity, there are c5,000 personnel onsite. The UK would probably save money consolidating to an existing facility, even if it had to moved the giant syncrolift. I can't see anything like that number for a few OPVs and maybe a couple of Frigates.

I don't think any of these are issues to an independent Scotland, I just wish the SNP would be a bit more honest, than saying there will be no change in jobs.

 

[StobieWan]

Before people get carried away with kit lists, one key question needs to be answered

• What role does an independent Scotland play globally (or not) ?

Which basically boils down to securing the countries land, sea and air plus peacekeeping.

Therefore, for starters you can throw out SSNs as a worthless waste of money to maintain in that instance. If you want submarines, get SSKs. But even then they might be too much, not to mention Scotland doesn't have submarine building experience anyway so that'll be a rather expensive undertaking.

I thought the SNP was anti nuclear in any event so retaining nuclear propelled submarines of any type would be a no-no.?

I believe the SNP has an aspiration of retaining some international presence, so some land based peace keeping units for overseas deployments would be desirable.

Beyond that, hard to say - there've been no solid suggestions, just references to to cap badge units.

 

[Kampgruppe1970]

The Snp white paper was basing a independent armed forces similar to Denmark with a budget of £2.5-£3 billion , as people have said what we will receive from the UK armed forces (that's if we vote yes) will be sufficient in some areas and in other areas won't be ... it could take up to 10 years to get the right levels of equipment we need, we will inherit fast jets based at Leuchars and Lossiemouth, yes we will have to set up our own training facilities among other things, the Snp are envisaging the SDF (Scottish Defence Force) as a self defense force that will take part UN missions like Bosnia etc but we won't be involved in a Iraq or Afghanistan situation ... we will work with our neighbours including the UK, the shipyards won't be idle as you all know Scotland is anti nuclear that includes energy, I would be expecting the shipyards to diversify by building wind turbines and wave turbines .... everything is in early stages if we get a yes vote more than likely it will not be the Snp that will be negotiating for Scotland because their would be a election in 2015 that government might decide the budget could be less or the same as the £3.7 billion Scots contribute to the UK armed forces budget or more (highly unlikely) most of it is guess work just know we would have 2 full years to try and put something in place for 2016.

What people have to understand is we have different priorities from the rest of the uk the Holyrood parliament has highlighted this ... their isn't going to be barbed wire fences between Scotland and England and armed forces built up along both borders ... what is evident is Scotland is more pro EU than the rest of the UK, it is not what unites us that is the problem it is what divides us ... I would rather be a good neighbour than a disgruntled partner which we are just now, I don't hate/dislike England or the English my brother in law is Cornish

 

[Todjaeger]

The Snp white paper was basing a independent armed forces similar to Denmark with a budget of £2.5-£3 billion , as people have said what we will receive from the UK armed forces (that's if we vote yes) will be sufficient in some areas and in other areas won't be ... it could take up to 10 years to get the right levels of equipment we need, we will inherit fast jets based at Leuchars and Lossiemouth, yes we will have to set up our own training facilities among other things, the Snp are envisaging the SDF (Scottish Defence Force) as a self defense force that will take part UN missions like Bosnia etc but we won't be involved in a Iraq or Afghanistan situation ... we will work with our neighbours including the UK, the shipyards won't be idle as you all know Scotland is anti nuclear that includes energy, I would be expecting the shipyards to diversify by building wind turbines and wave turbines .... everything is in early stages if we get a yes vote more than likely it will not be the Snp that will be negotiating for Scotland because their would be a election in 2015 that government might decide the budget could be less or the same as the £3.7 billion Scots contribute to the UK armed forces budget or more (highly unlikely) most of it is guess work just know we would have 2 full years to try and put something in place for 2016.

What people have to understand is we have different priorities from the rest of the uk the Holyrood parliament has highlighted this ... their isn't going to be barbed wire fences between Scotland and England and armed forces built up along both borders ... what is evident is Scotland is more pro EU than the rest of the UK, it is not what unites us that is the problem it is what divides us ... I would rather be a good neighbour than a disgruntled partner which we are just now, I don't hate/dislike England or the English my brother in law is Cornish

At a guess, it would likely take 15+ years to achieve a balanced Scottish Defence Force. As already mentioned, there is the whole issue of what sort of 'presence' does Scotland wish to have internationally. That will then drive what sorts of kit Scotland would require as well as in what quantities. Also as mentioned, some thought needs to be given to numbers required for capability sustainment. For instance in order to maintain a frigate on station and/or available for deployment a total of ~ three frigates are required. Now some might think, "Well Scotland has nn people and contributes yy to the UK defence budget so many vehicles and vessels should get transferred over..." That would distort both the UK and Scottish forces.

-Cheers

 

[RobWilliams]

I thought the SNP was anti nuclear in any event so retaining nuclear propelled submarines of any type would be a no-no.?

I'm not sure about them being 100% anti-nuclear totally just not in favour of nuclear weapons. SSNs are politically more acceptable than SSBNs because they're not armed with SLBMs.

I believe the SNP has an aspiration of retaining some international presence, so some land based peace keeping units for overseas deployments would be desirable.

Light infantry batts then probably, otherwise that's airlift/sealift required to get them anywhere.

Beyond that, hard to say - there've been no solid suggestions, just references to to cap badge units.

Yup things like the Royal Regiment of Scotland being the "core" of a SDF, while they currently suffer from recruitment and personnel retention anyway.