CAN a crumbling world order bring Scottish independence closer to reality?
With Donald Trump suddenly declaring support for a united Ireland, it feels like the old certainties have all gone out the window.
That’s the view of writer and campaigner Jonathon Shafi, who has argued that the President’s comments showed that America’s “historic support for the unity of the British state is subject to change”.
He told the Sunday National: “The global system is undergoing a period of transition. What that means is that the range of alliances and institutions, which we've all understood are subject to revision.
“The unipolar system, American globalisation, and all of those institutions and norms are at a conclusion. And what's happening now is that there is a period in which there is a negotiation taking place about what the multipolar system is going to look like.
“That entails all kinds of conflicts and disruptions, some of them military, some of them economic and diplomatic, and so the relationship between the United States and the UK is equally subject to change in that geopolitical environment.”
He insisted that the US president’s comments were not “a faux pas or a slip of the tongue”, adding: “They’re taken seriously because what he's signposting there is that as part of this process of geopolitical bargaining, they are willing to be a disruptive force to the UK. That is a break from what we've understood the relationship to be, but it's transforming necessarily because the world system is restructuring.”
This reorganisation is becoming more apparent by the day. Last week, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen invited Canada to become the first “associate member” of the EU.
Some have seen this as evidence of liked-minded liberal democracies banding together in the face of Trump.
Dr Bernhard Blumenau, a senior lecturer in international relations at St Andrews University, said: “There’s a lot of shared interests between Canada and the EU countries: the rules-based international order – whatever that means, with all the caveats that come with it – free trade, defence cooperation.”
This works along the lines that Canadian premier Mark Carney set out in his speech in Davos at the World Economic Forum at the beginning of the year, where he spoke of the “middle powers” and their need to work together internationally, warning: “If we're not at the table, we're on the menu.”
Trump reads this as a threat, according to Dr Blumenau: “The middle powers, I think Trump basically sees it as an alliance against him.”
The perception of the US against the world can bolster the president’s claim to champion an “America First” agenda, but the St Andrews academic was unconvinced there would be a return to the interwar isolationist position.
“I think the US, for all the rhetoric that’s coming out of it, they simply cannot withdraw from the world,” he said.
“They can focus a little bit more on their own interests and they’re doing that, but ultimately, they’re a global power with global interests so they will always have global interests that they need to defend.”
Trump, in another off-the-cuff comment, last week cast doubt on Britain’s ability to defend the Falkland Islands from Argentinian invasion, having previously indicated that he could review American support for the UK’s claim on the territory.
Prof Arno van der Zwet, chair of European governance at the University of the West of Scotland, saw this as evidence of the “transactional” nature of Trump’s foreign policy, which has seen the world’s premier capitalist power enthusiastically engage in trade wars with its allies.
“That [the US’s global role] has now has become much more of a transactional relationship where the US is seemingly very willing, under Trump at least, to challenge its partners and to at least put doubts in some minds about how committed it is to those pre-existing alliances,” he said.
But Prof van der Zwet argued against placing too much emphasis on Trump’s interventions on Ireland or the Falklands: “With Trump, you don't know where that comes from, really, whether that is a deliberate strategy because he is almost annoyed with somebody, something that the UK has done, not given any access to its military bases or whatever that may be.”
Observers are generally agreed that one of the overarching themes of Trump’s world view is the separation of the globe into “spheres of influence”, with America holding sway in the Western Hemisphere.
The US is in the process at the moment of attempting to integrate and anchor the Western Hemisphere as its sphere of influence in a reconfigured multipolar system, and that's why, for example, they are entertaining the idea of the Falklands falling under Argentinian territory,” said Shafi.
Into this lion’s den step the first ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for a joint summit on Monday about ending the Union.
But does a chaotic new world order really benefit the causes of Scottish and Welsh independence or Irish reunification.
Dr Blumenau is not convinced. “At the moment, what they’re trying to build is European unity towards Russia, towards the United States, towards China, potentially and that includes, in the bigger sense, the UK so I don’t think that anyone has any interest in anything that would be perceived to be weakening the position of the UK,” he said.
“If you’re looking at it from the geopolitical, global context, it’s not a great time for Scottish independence at the moment, simply because there are so many other issues going on that no-one really wants this to pop up now.”
But the shifting realities on the global stage do change the context in which these debates take place, according to Prof van der Zwet.
“I wouldn't say, looking at these global changes, that there's a direct causal link with the integrity of the UK as it is at the moment,” he said.
“I don't think there's a straightforward causal line between the changes in the national international order and the Scottish or, for that matter, Irish reunification.
But what you do see is that the context of constitutional politics then changes. So questions around sovereignty are – they've always have been more complicated than just independence or being part of the UK – but that is becoming increasingly so the case.”
Meanwhile Shafi has a warning. As far as he’s concerned, the end of America’s role as the self-described guarantor of Western security and Britain’s isolation from Europe force the UK into a crisis of identity.
He said: “The issue is for the British state is: where does it fit within the multipolar system?
“Because it can no longer rely on the transatlantic alliance with the United States, and at the same time, it's not part of the European Union. Now, in that context, there is going to be geopolitical and other measures which must come to bear on the integrity of the Union itself.”
But he urged scepticism of the SNP’s enthusiastic celebration of the burgeoning relationship between Canada and said Carney’s embrace of AI companies and his privatisation agenda showed the limits of John Swinney’s ambitions for Scotland.
“Rather than this leading towards any meaningful form of independence, it leads towards vassalisation,” he said.
“The SNP leadership see Canada as a model. For a very specific reason, which is that Canada has been using the language of national sovereignty, they've been using the language of Canadian patriotism.
“But what they have been doing in practice is to have is to have an organised fire sale of Canadian assets.”
