Nation to Nation E-Book

Stephen Gethins

• Herausgeber: Luath Press
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 422

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2021

Beschreibung

Scotland has a distinctive place in the world. Nation to Nation explores how this unique relationship with the rest of the world has developed over the years and how it manifests itself today. In this book Stephen Gethins combines his knowledge from years of work in the field - from the conflict zones of the former Soviet Union to the corridors of power in Westminster and Brussels - with insights from political, cultural and academic figures who have been at the heart of foreign policy in Scotland, the UK, Europe and North America. Gethins looks at Scotland's foreign policy to better inform the debate about our country's future and its relationships with its neighbours near and far.

Leseprobe

STEPHEN GETHINS was the Member of Parliament for North East Fife from 2015 to 2019. He was appointed the SNP’s Europe Spokesperson when he was elected to the House of Commons in 2015. After the 2017 General Election he was appointed Foreign Affairs and Europe Spokesperson and led the SNP’s Scotland in the World Team at Westminster. Stephen was the first SNP Member of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee and he served for two terms. Before his election Stephen worked in democratisation and peacebuilding overseas including in the Western Balkans and South Caucasus. He also worked in the EU Committee of the Regions and Scotland House in Brussels. Stephen was a Special Adviser to Scotland’s First Minister from 2009 to 2013 and focused on energy, climate change, rural affairs, Europe and international affairs. He is currently a Professor of Practice at the School of International Relations at the University of St Andrews. Stephen Gethins is a Trustee of the John Smith Trust, a Special Adviser at Beyond Borders Scotland and the Convener of EU+ME.

Praise for Nation to Nation

Nation to Nation is a vital contribution to the burgeoning debate surrounding Scottish foreign policy, within or outside the United Kingdom. Stephen Gethins uses his experience and expertise to present a clear-eyed view of where Scotland’s interests lie and how best to advance them.—TOM MACLEOD, SKY NEWS

This book is both authentically Scottish and borne of Gethins’ own eclectic international experience – a political hinterland stretching from Brussels to Nagorno-Karabakh. Nation to Nation is a perceptive, highly readable, and very timely reflection on the place which Scotland has always had on the world stage, as well as on the role that beckons her in future.—DR ALASDAIR ALLAN MSP, SCOTLAND’S MINISTER FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND EUROPE, 2016–18

If you are curious about Scotland’s role in the world – what it is today and what it could be in the future – then this engaging, informative book is what you need. Full of new ideas, helpful examples, and fun historical details, from an author who knows the ins-and-outs of Scottish foreign policymaking first-hand.—DR TAYLOR ST JOHN, SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS

Stephen Gethins brings deep knowledge, wide experience and sharp insight to the consideration of not just what the current relationship is between Scotland and the rest of the world, but to what it could be if we spoke for ourselves and looked to our own interests like every other normal nation in the world. Debating how we achieve that and what we do to develop it is a key task for the next few years as we build forward from the pandemic and Gethins has kicked off the debate in a constructive and informed way.—MICHAEL RUSSELL MSP, FORMER CABINET SECRETARY FOR THE CONSTITUTION, EUROPE AND EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

This is an excellent and very timely book, bringing new understanding and illumination to a subject of vast importance and topicality and much in need of both, namely the place of the Scottish nation in the modern world.—LORD HOWELL OF GUILDFORD, FORMER FOREIGN OFFICE MINISTER, THE HOUSE MAGAZINE

[This book] benefits greatly from Gethins’ own extensive experience of the UK and Scottish presence on the international stage; and from his insight into Scotland’s huge potential to play a constructive and bridge-building role among the north European family of nations.—JOYCE MCMILLAN, SCOTSMAN

With an increasing appetite for Scottish independence now, Gethins’ book is a timely account of Scotland’s potential place in the world, drawing on history, cultural ties, Scotland’s brand and its existing efforts in forging international relations and exerting soft power.—SOPHIA AKRAM, BRUSSELS MORNING

First published 2021

Revised edition 2022

ISBN: 978-1-910022-51-1

The author’s right to be identified as author of this book under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 has been asserted.

Typeset in 11 point Sabon LT Pro by

Main Point Books, Edinburgh

© Stephen Gethins 2021, 2022

Contents

Acknowledgements

Foreword by Mark Muller Stuart

Introduction

Chapter 1 Scotland: An International Actor Throughout History

Chapter 2 Scotland’s Diaspora: ‘You’re In!’

Chapter 3 Foreign Policy Without a Foreign Ministry

Chapter 4 Scotland and the EU: An Unwanted Divorce

Chapter 5 The Other Neighbours: Scotland and the High North

Chapter 6 Britain Divided: The UK’s Foreign Policy Divergences

Chapter 7 Building Scotland’s International Future

Endnotes

With thanks to my wife Anya for her endless patience and support. In hope of a better world for our two citizens of the world, Mairi and Patrick.

Acknowledgements

IN WRITING THIS book I relied heavily on speaking to thoughtful people from throughout the UK, Europe and the world. I have drawn from their experiences and observations and am grateful to everyone who took time to share their insights. I was particularly grateful to those who do not share my world view. During a time when political divisions can get far too personal, it is worth bearing in mind that most people are able to disagree agreeably. Our society is richer for those differences.

Over the months of lockdown, I spoke to dozens of people internationally about Scotland’s foreign policy footprint and our place in the world. They shared many excellent insights and helped build on conversations I’d had over the past few years. Some of these interviewees support independence, others don’t; and some have no opinion on the subject. The same applies to the views expressed about the UK’s decision to leave the EU. Across the board, there was recognition of the need for greater debate and discussion and a willingness to think about Scotland’s global footprint. Some of the interviewees have been happy to be named, others, for entirely understandable reasons, haven’t. In these days of political polarisation, it is always good to be reminded that there are many thoughtful people with a wide range of views, all of whom are worth listening to. I hope that this will generate and spur further debate and discussion about an increasingly important topic.

This book has been developing in my mind for several years. I am grateful to all of those who have helped me in my journey.

Firstly, my thanks to all of those who have helped inform this book. To friends at school and university, who opened my eyes to the world such as Luke Reader, Gillian Donoghue, John Fellows, Nick Bibby, Johan Nilsson, Christine Sabaditsch, Norbert Schöenbauer, Lars Olsson, Johan Venken and of course Dug Cubie who joined me on an unforgettable year in Antwerp. To the educators who helped guide us, my belated thanks to Brian Toner, Ken Alexander, Mark Edie, Liz Kirk and Christine van den Wyngaert among many others.

I will always be grateful to Andrew Wilson, who gave me my first job, colleagues such as Duncan Hiscock, Craig Oliphant, Dennis Sammut, Goga Simonishvili, Zviad Mukbaniani, Johanna Petersson, Jonathan Cohen, Anna Matveeva and others who helped me find my way in the NGO community.

In Brussels I worked with a fantastic group of committed Europeans including Micheal O’Conchuir, Helen Frew, Ian Duncan, Kathryn Hallet, Lachie Muir, Pilar Santamaria Gonzalez, Levante Banvalfi, Ian Hudghton, John Edward, Kirsty McVicar and Victoria Bowman as well as the late and much missed Donald MacInnes, Colin Imrie, Eamonn Gallagher, Kirsty MacDonald and Neil MacCormick.

I am also grateful to my SNP colleagues from Government, Party and Parliament. Special thanks to Angus Robertson, Alex Salmond, Ian Blackford, John Swinney and Nicola Sturgeon for the opportunities they gave me. To all my Special Adviser colleagues in the Scottish Government for their camaraderie and commitment as well as the Westminster staff team ably led by Emilie-Louise Purdie with her crucial knowledge of all things Europe. I am most indebted to the local team who worked so hard, including my Head of Office, the irreplaceable Lindsey Alexander, my agent, the unflappable Rhuaraidh Fleming, Kirsty Watson, Rhona McLaren, Scott Taylor, Elaine Collier, Callum Riddle, Steven Marwick, Mat Cassen, Henry Orr and constituency convener Moira MacKenzie among many others.

I am fortunate to have also worked with some exemplary officials and colleagues from other political parties who have given me some excellent insights. My thanks to my parliamentary colleagues Crispin Blunt, Tom Tugendhat, John Baron, Keir Starmer, Elizabeth Smith, Nadhim Zahawi, Richard Luce, Alistair Burt, Ann Clwyd, Caroline Lucas and Nick Boles as well as Nick Beech, Ariella Huff and the rest of the Foreign Affairs Committee team.

Over the years I was fortunate to benefit from the insights of those who have thought deeply about Scotland’s place in the world such as Chrissie Hirst, Malcolm Fleming, John MacDonald, David Pratt, Billy Kay, Colin Fleming, Stewart MacDonald, Jennifer Erickson and Patrick Grady. I am particularly grateful to Mark Muller Stuart for his contribution and thought leadership on this issue.

I am also grateful to my colleagues at the University of St Andrews who work so hard to make the institution truly, Globally Scottish, not least Principal, Sally Mapstone, Senior Vice-Principal Brad MacKay and the former Head of the School of International Relations, Ali Watson. I would also like to thank students Harry Stage and Campbell MacPherson for their invaluable research assistance.

Most importantly I am indebted to my family. My parents and grandparents who brought me up to be aware of the world around me and my wife Anya who has made these past few years possible doing the heavy lifting with two small, wonderful but exhausting children.

Finally, a huge thanks to everyone at Luath Press for their hard work and understanding in helping a first-time author turn an idea for a book into a reality.

Foreword: Mark Muller Stuart

STEPHEN GETHINS’ TIMELY book on Scotland’s foreign policy footprint could not have arrived at a more opportune moment. This new volume of essays on Scotland’s relationship with and to the world will surely entice all those who have or share a vital interest in Scotland’s future, whether at home or abroad.

As the UK repatriates certain diplomatic, external and foreign policy powers back to itself from the European Union, the obvious question arises as to how such powers should be exercised in this post-Brexit world, particularly in respect to Scotland and its relationship with and to the world.

This question is, of course, of no small academic interest. It not only goes to the very heart of the terms and spirit of Scotland’s devolved settlement within the UK but to the future hopes and aspirations, the lives and livelihoods, of millions of Scottish and EU residents, to say nothing of the potential impact on its cultural, educational and economic institutions.

How Scotland sees and positions itself in this post-Brexit environment, both within the British Isles, and abroad will have critical consequences for the student, worker, business, musician or artist wanting to study, work, trade or perform abroad.

Gethins’ book looks at this critical question from both a historical and contemporary perspective. It not only maps out Scotland’s past relationships with Europe, the British Empire and other more obscure parts of the world, it also centres those relationships within the myriad of existing ties of kinship and acts of concord that continue to bind Scotland to these countries and regions.

In doing so, Gethins corrects Boris Johnson’s unbounded assertion that there ‘are no borders between Scotland and England’, to reveal a distinct history of Scotland’s own unique international relations with other countries. A set of international relations that not only came to influence the development of its own legal, educational and religious institutions but which also led to a set of separate strategic alliances distinct from those enjoyed by England, many of which still carry resonances to this day.

Such old alliances include ones with vital EU countries such as France, Poland and the Netherlands, which Gethins believes stand ready to strengthen their relationship with Scotland whatever the outcome of any possible referendum on independence.

The book is also useful as it charts how a succession of First Ministers of different political hues have, over the last 20 years, not only promoted Scotland economically and culturally within the European Union and elsewhere through the setting up of hubs and Scotland Houses, but also expressed its commitment towards human rights, respect for the rule of law, climate change and peacemaking in its role as a global citizen of the world.

Elsewhere, Gethins uncovers the strong links that have existed between Scotland and the small states of northern Europe – from William Wallace’s early written overtures to the Hanseatic League in the 13th century to the sharing of social democratic, pluralist, rules-based, multilateral, soft power values with countries like Norway and Denmark today, which makes it a credible potential member for the Nordic Council.

More importantly, the book charts out how these values have led to the development of a new civic and inclusive form of nationalism within Scotland. A nationalism that is based not on ethnicity but on a sense of belonging not only to Scotland but also to a wider sense of European identity – in which national sovereign powers are happily pooled and shared for the greater comparative good, rather than jealously and exclusively guarded, irrespective of the economic and social consequences.

It makes the important point that the Blackstonian conception of national sovereignty that lies at the heart of the Brexit project – and which led George III to lose America after accusing American patriots of sedition for protesting against the English Parliament’s unilateral imposition of English taxes on America – is very much an English rather than Scottish concept. It is partly why the 62 per cent of people resident in Scotland who voted against Brexit have gone on to consistently vote for parties who advocate in favour of remaining in the European Union.

Indeed, it is within this historical and contemporary political context that a majority of people in Scotland now express their support for independence or at the very least a new vote on independence. Whether or not a majority end up voting for independence, is in some sense beside the point. What Gethins makes abundantly clear is that, whatever happens, people in Scotland want their country to have a greater voice and role in international affairs in order to promote its interests and articulate and make good on its values.

Such a finding echoes my own experience of Scotland in the world over the last 20 years. As an international human rights advocate and mediator of conflicts for both the UN and other international organisations, I have seen the role that small nations like Scotland can play in supporting the multilateral, rules-based order particularly in the field of climate change, human rights protection, support for the rule of law and the amelioration of conflict through the promotion of mutual understanding between nations and cultures.

I have been constantly struck by how emerging leaders, from around the world, have embraced Scotland as a small but vibrant, soft power nation with an extraordinary historical brand and important constitutional journey to tell. Its strong and separate identity appears to exercise a powerful hold over the world’s collective imagination. Whether deserved or not, Scotland is perceived as a proud, independent, small nation which has managed to preserve its distinct culture and identity, despite the presence of a much more powerful neighbour.

This gives it particular traction with other small nations and groups not only in the European Union, but also with those embarking on a political transition of their own. Its devolved settlement, including within the context of the EU, constitutes one of the best examples of how a smaller nation within a larger state can transition towards greater democratic autonomy in a peaceful and consensual manner, without a bullet being fired.

Since 1998, I have worked in a myriad of conflict situations such as in Turkey, Iraq, Sri Lanka, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Zimbabwe, Spain and the Caucasus. All of these conflict situations featured issues that touched upon the issue of autonomy and the devolution of power, and virtually all of the conflict parties I talked to became fascinated by Scotland’s political journey and referendum process.

That is partly why in 2010 I established Beyond Borders Scotland with the help of patrons across the political divide. Apart from its cultural festivals promoting international cultural exchange it has hosted numerous international delegations who have come to Scotland to either learn lessons about its constitutional journey or to use it as a safe space in which to engage in dialogue to explore their own journeys. These delegations and groups have often been aided by a range of Scottish elder statesmen and women who have experience not just of government but of multilateral diplomacy within the EU, NATO and the UN Security Council at the highest level. Scotland then, is not wanting for expertise as to how to conduct itself within the highest diplomatic forums.

This capacity, together with its world class cultural festivals, universities, research centres and legal institutions, gives Scotland a commanding platform from which to promote its interests as well as peace and mutual understanding between nations, groups and cultures. It is why Beyond Borders, with the help of the Scottish Government, has been able to help over 250 women peacemakers promote peacemaking across the world through its innovative 1325 Women in Conflict Peacemaking Fellowship Programme, aided by the expertise of the United Nations. It is but one of a growing set of examples as to how Scotland can and should allow itself to play a greater role in international affairs.

Gethins explores some of the assets that Scotland can deploy to advance its interests and promote its values around the world, beyond its world famous educational, cultural and sporting institutions, such as the potential power of its diaspora. He is careful not to be starry-eyed about Scotland’s history or the political issues it now confronts. He is not shy to recognise some of Scotland’s darker connections to the history of slavery and imperial domination or how others seek to portray his own cause as being ‘separatist’ rather than ‘internationalist’ and cooperative in nature.

This book tries to debunk that myth through its examination of Scotland’s international footprint. It places Scotland’s desire to have a greater say in international affairs as part of a natural political development based around its history and the emergence of a post-imperial set of northern European-orientated social and political values. Whether that voice is to be expressed through a separate sovereign state or within the context of a reformed, devolved, new post-Brexit political arrangement within the UK remains up for grabs – but two matters now appear beyond doubt.

Firstly, people in Scotland are no longer content to let other non-devolved institutions speak exclusively on their behalf or to be promoted and represented merely through their sporting and Walter Scott-type heritage. In a recent interview Douglas Alexander, the former Labour Minister, described how devolution was essentially an experiment in ‘social justice’. I believe the people of Scotland have moved on from that more limited vision.

Secondly, both Scotland and the world around it has transformed since the UK first joined the EU and pooled its diplomatic, external and foreign policy powers with it. It is surely beyond contention that as it leaves the EU the UK cannot simply return to the status quo that prevailed before it joined. The devolution settlement cannot be undone. Powers are now being returned to it and with them comes an urgent and vital new debate and dialogue about the future direction of all four nations in the UK post-Brexit, including in relation to the efficacy of its current foreign policy institutions. It is a debate and dialogue which cannot be ducked, whatever some politicians might have us believe.

Thus, as the four nations of the UK, and indeed Europe and the wider world begin to digest, process and come to terms with the full implications of the UK leaving the European Union, it ill behoves any policymaker serious about securing Scotland’s political future not to recognise its growing capacity and desire to promote its own interests and values on the international stage, whether that be through a devolved setting or not. For the positive values that underpin Scotland’s current civic nationalism, internationalism and humanitarianism can only make it a greater force for good in the world, whatever its constitutional future turns out to be.

That is why Stephen Gethins’ book is so timely and important – it sets the scene for one of the most important debates and dialogues that Scotland is likely to face for a generation. He should be applauded for his even-handed inquiry and for placing this important debate within its proper historical and contemporary context.

Introduction

Then let us pray that come it may,

As come it will for a’ that,

That Sense and Worth, o’er a’ the earth

Shall bear the gree an’ a’ that.

For a’ that, an’ a’ that,

It’s comin yet for a’ that,

That Man to Man the warld o’er

Shall brithers be for a’ that.

Robert Burns, ‘A Man’s a Man for A’ That’

FOREIGN POLICY IS at the heart of the conversation around Scotland’s future. How Scotland manages its relationships with its neighbours and other international partners is more relevant to decision-making today than it has been for centuries. The UK decision to leave the EU coupled with Scotland’s vote to remain has brought differing views of our place in the world within these islands into sharp focus. This is a debate that has come and gone through the centuries so now, just as Burns was influenced by our relationship with Europe and the impact of the French Revolution in ‘A Man’s a Man’, once again our relationship with the rest of Europe has forced us to consider our place in the world.

The EU Referendum in June 2016 and the subsequent difficult negotiations with European Member States was the result of Westminster re-establishing the traditional view of the supremacy of parliamentary sovereignty. That is a view that now differs from the 27 remaining members of the EU who are comfortable with the idea of pooling sovereignty in exchange for economic prosperity, expanded rights for citizens and sustainable peace.

The EU Referendum decision resulted in years of parliamentary stalemate. There is a consensus in the UK Government that close relations with the EU are incompatible with its ideas of sovereignty even if those ambitions have come at the expense of the economy and damaged relations with our closest neighbours. Uniquely the UK has undertaken a negotiation with the aim of establishing more trade barriers and fewer rights and opportunities for its citizens.

These developments have met with a sense of bewilderment in Scotland. The idea of parliamentary sovereignty is considered a distinctly ‘English principle’ north of the border.1 As a consequence, there has been a significant increase in public support for Scotland re-joining the EU as a Member State in its own right.

The Scottish Government is looking at how our external affairs should evolve, as are academics, journalists, business leaders and others in civic society. Even though foreign policy, our relationships with other sovereign states, is reserved to Westminster, the devolved administration still interacts with the outside world. Devolution has seen a strengthening in our international affairs, including increased interaction with the European institutions, a greater role internationally on issues like climate change and using the Scottish brand to promote trade and investment. It has also allowed greater engagement with the diaspora, the millions of Scots living overseas.

Independence would strengthen that international engagement as Scotland would become a full state actor on the world stage with the rights and responsibilities sovereignty brings. If Scots are serious about independence more thought must go into our international affairs. And if we are not to regain independence, we must decide what our role will be within the Union and where Scotland fits into a post-Brexit UK that has dramatically changed since 2016 with an ambition for ‘Global Britain’.

We need a debate on Scotland’s foreign policy, and I hope that it is one focused on substance and reality. No one else is going to have that discussion for us. Too often questions of Scotland’s place in the world are focused on the travel plans of Ministers. They are blamed for ‘skipping town’ rather than scrutinised for the policy and diplomatic goals that are being pursued. At the same time there should be an assessment of what can be achieved. We need to recognise the positive benefits that a strong foreign policy, if delivered correctly, can bring, from trade to education and increased stability and opportunity.

In researching this book, I spoke to wide range of practitioners and experts including serving and former diplomats, the Chair of the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, members of other parliaments, senior members of the Biden and Obama White House teams, former Conservative Government Ministers and both surviving Labour First Ministers. They agreed there is a need for a wide-ranging conversation about Scotland’s global footprint. That reaffirmed a view that I have had for years, that Scotland is an international actor but one that often goes unrecognised even at home.

This discussion must not be restricted to politicians and officials since foreign policy is not restricted to inter-governmental relations. Local authorities, universities, businesses, and community groups interact with each other across borders. One of the great achievements of the European project was to bring people closer together. An integral part of the EU’s objectives. The EU has made business easier, allowed young people to work and study elsewhere regardless of wealth or family background and made cross-border cultural and economic collaborations easier; and my generation have benefited from that project.

Ever since I first travelled outside of the UK, I have thought about Scotland’s place in the world and our foreign policy. School trips to France involving long bus journeys from Perth were more joyous for us than I suspect for the teachers. However, they were a source of interest of the world beyond our borders that continued during my Erasmus year at the University of Antwerp. Even then Scotland’s international profile was clear and other students had a distinctive idea of the country. It helped that it was 1996 and the film Trainspotting was taking the world by storm.

My interest in foreign policy continued throughout my career working overseas including stints in the EU and former Soviet Union as well as in the political arena at Westminster. Over the years I have been fortunate enough to work in countries as diverse as Nepal and Namibia. I have also gained firsthand experience of the cost of war in places like Bosnia-Herzegovina that I first visited at Christmas 1996 and South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh in the South Caucasus and more recently the Donbass in Ukraine and the borders of Syria meeting combatants and refugees alike.

I spent four fascinating years in Brussels between 2005 and 2009 while the European Union was rocked over debates about the Lisbon Treaty, rejected by voters in France and the Netherlands. I made firm friendships and connections that helped me in my work as the UK went through an even greater crisis in its relationship with the EU.

As one of the few MPs to have worked in the EU and the international NGO community, I was able to bring a unique perspective on European and foreign affairs from experiences outside politics. During the Brexit Referendum and subsequent debates, I was struck by the lack of knowledge or interest in how the EU, made up then of 28 independent and sovereign Member States, actually operated.

As one of only a small handful of parliamentarians to have lived and worked in Brussels, the lack of knowledge or understanding of the EU hindered the debates and discussions. The lack of knowledge of the EU and how it worked was one of the many problems faced by British negotiators in the Brexit process. I spoke to countless officials frustrated by the failure of Ministers to understand the EU. Former British Ambassador to the EU Ivan Rogers even said that Prime Minister May and her advisers ‘didn’t know very much about European councils or that much about the EU’ ahead of triggering Article 50 to start the withdrawal process.2 Boris Johnson and those around him know even less.

This international experience was especially useful when I was on the Foreign Affairs Select Committee. Parliamentary committees are where MPs consider issues in greater depth and without the partisanship that dominates debate in the House of Commons Chamber. I worked closely with parliamentary colleagues such as Ian Murray, Crispin Blunt, Catherine West, John Baron, Nusrat Ghani, Tom Tugendhat, Priti Patel, Ann Clwyd, Royston Smith, Chris Bryant and Nadhim Zahawi. Their perspectives were valuable, even if we didn’t agree on everything.

My frontbench role as an SNPMP for North East Fife was also important in the development of my thoughts on foreign policy. In 2015 the SNP had become the third biggest party in Parliament and gave us access to some of these key committees as well as frontbench speaking slots in the House of Commons for every debate. That experience underlined the need for greater debate and discussion from a Scottish perspective, which is not always the same as a British perspective. I raise some of these differences later in this book such as the potential of the Scottish diaspora, our connections with our near neighbours in northern Europe and the relationship Scotland has developed with the EU. This is not simply of consequence to those of living in Scotland and the different perspective can provide another viewpoint at Westminster. The former British Ambassador to Lebanon and Yemen, Frances Guy observed that: ‘The SNP at Westminster do have influence by providing a different perspective on multilateralism.’

It is evident from my research that this was not a new issue or one that was simply of concern to the SNP. Philip Rycroft, who has enjoyed a long and distinguished career in the civil service, told me:

It was clear to me even in my early days in the Scottish Office that Scotland needed to be able to project its interests overseas.

Donald Cameron MSP, the Scottish Conservative Party spokesperson on External Affairs recognises this and told me that ‘Scotland has long had an international footprint’.

The issue of Scotland’s place in the world, also led Mark Muller Stuart who has worked internationally on some of the thorniest global issues, including as a senior UN official, to reflect: ‘Surely the time has come to ask how Scotland can play a greater role in international affairs.’3

At the 2021 Scottish parliamentary elections the SNP, Labour and Liberal Democrat manifestos all committed to the establishment of a Scottish Council of Global Affairs. This initiative with its cross-party backing as well as support from several Scottish universities reflects the recognition across the political and constitutional divides that there needs to be a more informed debate and discussion ‘to explain the complexities of world politics to Scotland and, just as importantly, to explain Scotland to the rest of the world’.4

Given the impact of Brexit, the continued debate about independence and Scotland’s long-standing international footprint, there is also interest among the international community in what is happening in Scotland. In researching this book, Antonia Chambers, a long-serving senior US State Department analyst who has advised Presidents and other policymakers in her country told me Scotland also needs to build its international role, saying:

Scotland needs to build these links be it with business, academia, science and a range of other actors to get them accustomed to a Scottish perspective.

Ms Chambers also stressed that the world needed to pay attention to what was happening in Scotland, saying the world ‘needs to get used to Scotland as an international actor’.

***

Foreign policy is often thought of as the interactions of one sovereign state with another. The Cambridge Dictionary defines it as ‘the official ways in which a government has decided to deal with other countries’.5

It is rarely that simple and straightforward. A sovereign state’s foreign policy is defined by a range of actors within that country who interact with other actors across the world. In modern western Europe, the old ideas of state sovereignty have sometimes been cast aside in favour of nations working more closely together, especially since the end of the Second World War and the creation of the EU. Inside these European states, powerful entities such as those in Germany, Denmark and Belgium, have asserted their interests at an international level as well as domestically.

For centuries Scotland has been no exception, pursuing its own foreign policy interests and ambitions. Scotland has influenced the world and in turn been influenced by the world. This is nothing new, national bard Robert Burns and the Scotland in which he lived was heavily influenced by global events especially the American and French Revolutions inspiring work including ‘A Man’s a Man’. In turn his work has influenced the world along with the ideas of the Enlightenment that spread from Scotland’s major cities.

As part of the UK, Scotland continues to have a significant international footprint and brand. This brand has been exploited by successive Holyrood administrations and even, to a lesser extent, by Westminster to achieve foreign policy objectives in order to boost trade, attract tourists and win influence in supra-national bodies such as the EU and even the UN. Scottish Ministers have also sought to develop their own bilateral relationships with countries as diverse as Malawi, Japan, the USA and after the EU Referendum in seeking to define a different relationship with other European countries.

In recent years both the increase in support for independence and the reestablishment of a Scottish Parliament have led to a renewed discussion about Scotland’s place in the world.

During the first Independence Referendum campaign, foreign affairs were part of the debate, but less so than other issues. There was little focus on where an independent Scotland might find its place in the international community and how that would be different from its place in the world if Scotland remained part of the UK. Rather attention was on domestic issues such as currency, the economy and pensions for instance.

Scotland’s membership of the EU was an important factor, with pro-Union campaigners arguing that Scotland was better served as part of the UK, a large and well-established Member State. There was even an argument put forward by some of the ‘No’ side that an independent Scotland would be barred from joining the EU. The circumstances for any future independence vote changed radically on 23 June 2016 with the majority UK decision to leave the EU. This result triggered several constitutional crises in the UK including in Scotland and Northern Ireland, where people had voted, overwhelmingly to remain.

The 2016 EU Referendum crystallised the increasing divergences between London and Edinburgh, which had been there for years, but most especially over how these two parts of the UK saw themselves in the context of the world stage. One had embraced a future that was comfortable with multilateral cooperation and the sharing of sovereignty. The other had rejected it and was seeking a more unilateralist role, out of sync with its neighbours in the rest of Europe.

With another independence referendum likely, and the legacy of the UK’s decision to leave the EU set to dominate politics for years to come, how we see ourselves in the world is at the heart of policy discourse. The world will be reshaped by the ongoing Covid pandemic and the resultant economic shock. This aftermath will be made worse for the UK now sitting outside of the EU and more isolated internationally than it has been for generations. Analysis undertaken by the UK Government’s Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) makes clear the devastating impact of leaving the EU. The Chair of the OBR, Richard Hughes, said that leaving the EU ‘would reduce our long run GDP by around 4 per cent’ whereas ‘the effect of the pandemic will reduce that (GDP) output by a further 2 per cent’.6

The UK will emerge from this health crisis and Brexit as a very different state. Certainly, the UK that goes to the polls at the 2024 General Election will be quite distinct from the UK that left the EU in January 2020. The prospectus for independence and the choices that voters in Scotland make in the future will be very different from the decision they faced in 2014.

The Europe of 2024 will also be a profoundly different place. This book was written before the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Although we do not know the outcome of that conflict or the long-term consequences of this devastating act of aggression, we know that it will change Europe forever. The first days and even hours of the invasion prompted changes almost unimaginable in European politics with Denmark’s significant decision to revisit its defence opt-out from EU Treaties and Germany’s even more significant decision to join European partners in sending arms to Ukraine and increasing its defence spending, upending decades of policy in a matter of hours. Poland, like others bordering Russia and Ukraine, once again became a front-line state hosting millions of refugees.

The EU began as a peace project that sought to make war unthinkable among its members and once again it is set to strengthen its security role. Meetings between EU Leaders including a major summit at Versailles during the French Presidency in March 2022 have sought to look at how the Union can strengthen its energy independence, food security and defence capabilities. At the same time there is a fresh debate in EU Members who sit outside NATO such as Sweden, Finland, and even neutral Ireland about their relationship with that defence partnership. European foreign policy norms are being re-thought.

Our debates in Scotland are insignificant compared to the horrors that Vladimir Putin has unleashed on the people of Ukraine. However, we are not immune to its consequences. The UK’s decision to leave the EU leaves the country more exposed than ever before in terms of security and the economic consequences with increases in food and energy costs adding to the cost-of-living crisis. We must also be realistic that the EU many Scots seek to re-join is quite different from the one the UK left. It also affects how we are viewed and given Scotland’s strategic location it is understandable that European partners will want to know Scotland takes its security and foreign policy responsibilities seriously.

There will also need to be a time for reflection about foreign policy misjudgements. Russia has unleashed a hellish conflict on Ukraine costing and ruining the lives of innocents. Yet the warning signs were there all along as Putin’s victims will attest to in places such as Grozny and Aleppo. This is a thuggish gangster regime that has robbed, abused and waged war on its own citizens as well as those of other countries. It is the reason why Russia is feared not respected by its neighbours who seek sanctuary in the twin security pillars of EU and NATO membership.

Yet during this time many in the UK, of all political persuasions and none, turned a blind eye to this murderous regime. Those who accepted Putin’s cash, spread his disinformation, and ignored security warnings must bear some responsibility for our failure to act effectively against him. The warnings were always there, and Scotland was in no way immune to the damage done by those associated with the Kremlin. Like allies in other countries across the world we too must learn and act upon those difficult lessons as part of our journey as an international actor. We owe this reckoning to ourselves as well as those Russians who have paid the price of standing up to Putin’s murderous regime and certainly the Ukrainians, Syrians, Chechens and others who have paid such a heavy price for the inaction and negligence of others.

***

During my time working overseas, there was global recognition of Scotland as a nation with its own distinct brand. From farmers and peacekeeping soldiers in the remotest villages of the Caucasus to those holding high office the corridors of power in Brussels, Scotland has an international profile. You can have a conversation about Scotland’s future with politicians across the divide in some of the world’s most intractable conflicts. The world over leaders are aware of Scotland as a nation even if they hold no view on its constitutional future.

Over the years I have spoken to some of Scotland’s leading thinkers about our role in the world from a range of sectors including Neal Ascherson (journalism), Winnie Ewing (politics), Angus Grossart (business) and Neil MacCormick (academia). That debate has sharpened up since the EU Referendum and there is now a greater understanding of Scotland’s distinctive place in the UK. Brexit will continue to change the backdrop to the debate over Scotland’s future at home and overseas. ‘The Europeans get it now in a way they didn’t before’ as one pro-independence and long-term Brussels resident told me.

Since the summer of 2016, like it or not, the UK has irretrievably changed the way that it is perceived by our partners. Some trace this back further than 2016, to the war in Iraq and its aftermath. Many people in the rest of Europe are now taking Scottish independence and our increased international presence seriously as a result.

Internationally Scotland is now an established story. Scottish journalist David Leask has observed, noting, that when he is writing about Scottish independence in a foreign newspaper his story no longer requires an ‘explainer’ or standfirst introduction. Scotland’s history and politics is part of the international repertoire of news. That has certainly been my experience too when discussing the issue with influencers in other countries.

We must be mindful as to how we conduct our debate on foreign policy however, now that the world is paying attention. That said, the world has limited attention, and this goes for Scotland as it does for Brexit. I was reminded by one MP from another European national parliament, who had taken a strong interest in Brexit, to remember that ‘we [Europe] have other problems’. He represented a view in several Member State parliaments that the rest of Europe is keen to move on from the negotiations with the UK. Brexit is receiving less and less coverage in the European media and fading in importance to the rest of Europe politically.

As the rest of Europe moves on without us there is little doubt the whole of the UK has been damaged by the process. Chris Deerin of the think tank Reform Scotland told me that Scottish Ministers need to be out there ‘selling the Scottish brand’ and that ‘economics is the number one priority’. He warned that they might get stick, even from him on occasion if he thinks Ministers are getting it wrong, but ‘Scotland needs to develop its foreign policy footprint’ and, as he and others have said, we need to differentiate ourselves from a disastrous Brexit within or outside of the Union. Independence supporters argue that the Scottish Government should step up and be more involved in foreign policy, acting like it already has responsibility for foreign affairs.

***

There is work to be done if Scotland is to take a greater role internationally but it would not be starting from scratch. The groundwork has been laid over centuries. One of Wallace’s first acts in the aftermath of the Battle of Stirling Bridge was to write to Scotland’s European partners in the Hanseatic League to tell them that the country was again open for business. Throughout history, Scottish monarchs would seek political matches for their children from throughout Europe to enhance diplomatic links.

Devolution and the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament has seen an increase in interest in Scotland’s international affairs. I am grateful to both surviving former Labour First Ministers, Henry McLeish and Jack McConnell, who spoke to me about this book. We may have different views about Scotland’s future, but no one can deny their commitment to Scotland’s role in the world. In our interviews, Jack spoke about challenging outdated perceptions of Scotland and Henry discussed Scotland’s role in the world at the very highest levels and how he used his contacts from his time at Westminster.

The Scottish Government has won praise for its work on issues as diverse as climate justice, helping women peacebuilders from regions affected by conflict and, of course, in its response to Brexit. As one London-based foreign policy observer told me: ‘Scotland has been creative’ because it doesn’t have formal powers over foreign policy.

Scotland has enhanced its profile and soft power clout since the Brexit decision. This has been duly recognised in Brussels, London and Washington and even in the UN. Jonathan Cohen of the peacebuilding NGO Conciliation Resources, who increasingly sees a role for Scotland as a safe space internationally, said that ‘foreign policy is about making others think well of you when you don’t have much time together’. This international footprint was on full display as the world descended on Glasgow for COP26 and even though Scotland was not a full participant the Scottish Government engaged fully and enthusiastically.

As COP26 illustrated, Scotland’s global brand continues to be held in high esteem but there has been a reluctance to tap into that resource at a UK level. I have heard frustrations from diplomats in our overseas embassies that we don’t make enough of Scotland’s foreign policy footprint such as engaging with the diaspora and Scottish soft power. That said I have also heard from those who think that the UK branding should take priority and that Scotland does well out of being part of a bigger entity.

Whatever your view, this is a debate that can no longer be ignored. Scotland’s foreign policy footprint has a big impact on our lives from trade and the economy to education and opportunities for our citizens. We are now at another turning point in our history and our relationship with international partners. Now is the time to figure out what the next stage of Scotland’s story is.

CHAPTER 1

Scotland: An International Actor Throughout History

We are the last people on earth, and the last to be free: our very remoteness in a land known only to rumour has protected us up till this day.

Calgacus before the Battle of Mons Grapius

(according to Tacitus)

ON 1 JULY 2020 Prime Minister Boris Johnson was facing his weekly slot at Prime Minister’s Questions. There was understandably a big focus on the Covid-19 crisis and the actions of government administrations across the UK. In response to a question about those crossing the border from high risk parts of England to Scotland the Prime Minister remarked that ‘there is no such thing as a border between England and Scotland’.7

His comment was met with an immediate reaction from historians and lawyers and those working in devolved areas of the public sector. He was even criticised the following day in an editorial of the Union-supporting Times newspaper:

By proclaiming that ‘there is no such thing as a border between England and Scotland’ Boris Johnson writes off a fair swathe of Scottish history. Blithely, he ignores the 73 miles of Roman wall running from coast to coast; a couple of wars of independence, fought over disputed territory; a Treaty of Union that defines the divisions between two kingdoms; a separate parliament in Edinburgh; and a memorable occasion when the Westminster government closed the border with Scotland after the theft of the stone of destiny in 1950.

The newspaper went back 800 years referencing the treaty establishing the Anglo-Scottish border:

The Treaty of York, which was signed in 1237 and ruled that Northumberland, Cumberland and Westmorland were subject to English sovereignty, formally established the border in a form that has remained largely unchanged.8

There is a clear idea of Scotland and its history regardless of the view that Scots took of the country’s constitutional future. It is instructive to learn from history and if we are to consider Scotland’s foreign policy footprint today and how it may evolve in the future it will be important to learn about the past.

***

In all recorded history Scotland has had a distinctive international footprint. Professor Mary Beard tells us in her history of ancient Rome, SQPR, Roman historian Tacitus argued that ‘true Roman’ virtue was to be found in the ‘barbarians’ of Scotland and ‘not Rome’.9 To this day Hadrian’s Wall, lying just south of the current border, is a standing testament to that distinctiveness. There is also a long-established idea of some kind of border stretching from the Solway Firth in the west to the Tyne and Berwick in the east. In his book on the impact of the Scots-Irish in the USA, former Virginia Senator Jim Webb refers to their development. He believes that, through history, you can watch the border

grow and evolve over the centuries, from the first moments of its spiritual, collective birth in the crags and hollows just north of Hadrian’s Wall as the Roman Empire structured a very different England to the south.10

The Romans, despite having failed to conquer Scotland, had an impact on Scotland’s laws, values, education and how Scots see themselves in the world.11

Scotland, like other nations, has its own founding myths. The Declaration of Arbroath talks of the origins of the Scots in Scythia. The Scots of Ulster referred to the marriage of the Pharaoh’s daughter Scota with a Scythian general who it was said ‘refused to pursue the Israelites’ when they fled across the Red Sea. Interestingly the word for Scotland and Scythia is the same in ancient Germanic, Scutten.12

This idea of a founding myth and links to the ancients and the Holy Land was tremendously important to medieval Scots. Rome was said to have been founded by Trojan refugees with Romulus and Remus being descendants of the Trojan hero Aeneas. Billy Kay’s radio programme on the Declaration of Arbroath refers to the English foundation links to Troy and the Scots to Greece.13 That branding and links to the ancients was important to Scotland when setting out a distinctive identity and making the case for independence.