With the referendum on the future of Scotland coming soon, I am surprised to the extent the discussion is not yet realizing what independence really means. Based on the comments from the SNP, you get the impression that it means “Life will continue as usual, but Scotland will keep its oil revenue.”
In reality it much more useful to look at Ireland to see how an independent Scotland would fare, that it would become a reasonably prosperous member of the EU with close to no power to shape EU policy.
Since every member of the EU must vote in favor of Scotland joining the EU, with especially Spain not keen to see a secession, it is highly unlikely that it will be able to negotiate special terms. Given that the Euro must eventually be adapted by new members, Scotland will likely have the choice between:
- Keeping the pound by following UK monetary policy, and forgoing EU membership, opting to become a member of the EEA instead.
- Adopting the Euro and becoming a full EU member.
In addition, should it become an EU member, it will definitely loose the British membership rebate, and should it decide to want to continue its policy of free university education, it will no longer be able to charge fees to rUK students.
I believe the core problem for Scots lies in the fact that England constitutes 85% of the population of the UK, and so they feel marginalized in their ability to shape policy. As such, it might be better policy to break up England into more equal pieces, and maybe more importantly, to create a British football team to forge a common national identity (Maybe, with the ability to call upon Dalglish, Giggs, and Bale at different times, a British team would have even managed to win more trophies).
Scotland has certainly increased my appreciation of the extent the breakup of Prussia has helped in forming a stable German state, with no Bavaria or Saxony vying for independence.