Freedom's path

England comprises over 84% of the population of the United Kingdom and yet has no vote when it comes to independence referenda (if and when reluctantly granted) on the future of the Union - is this fair?

I pose the question in light of yesterday's historic meeting of the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in Cardiff - dubbed the 'Celtic Summit' - in pursuit of a perfectly legitimate common aspiration to independence and the dissolution of the United Kingdom. To answer my own (probably rhetorical) question, I would say that one can hardly envisage a situation where a constituent nation in a liberal democracy is kept forever in thrall to a union against the settled will of its people. In a UK marriage one partner has only to state that the union has broken down irretrievably for the unwilling partner to be unable to contest this reason. It's known as a no-fault divorce. 

In reality, the United Kingdom was a series of shotgun weddings. As I have written about previously, the move toward enforced union began in the sixteenth century when Henry VIII absorbed Wales into the legal and administrative framework of England. At this point Scotland was an independent kingdom with its own monarchy and government, though Henry's sister, Margaret Tudor, had been married off (aged thirteen) to King James IV of Scotland in 1503 under the 'Treaty of Perpetual Peace' signed the previous year.

Several Scottish kings, most famously perhaps John Balliol, had been vassals to the English crown but it was never a straightforward transaction, as a disgruntled Balliol's 'Auld Alliance' with France was to prove. English monarchs had also claimed the Lordship of Ireland since 1175 but in 1542 Henry attempted to bring Ireland finally under the control of the English crown. However, it wasn't until the very end of the Tudor era, long after Henry, at the Battle of Kinsale in 1602, that Gaelic Ireland was subjugated. Even then the island wasn't entirely brought under English crown control, taking until the union of the crowns of Scotland, England and Ireland under King James VI of Scotland in 1603 for the concept of a United Kingdom to emerge. 

By 1604 James, styling himself 'King of Great Britain, France and Ireland', aspired to what he called "a perfect union" but it was not to be. Scotland and Ireland both retained their own parliaments but only Scotland kept its own legal system, James having abolished Irish Brehon law, replacing it with English Common Law, on taking the throne. Meanwhile, Henry IV of France gently mocked James's pretensions to his throne, calling him "the wisest fool in Christendom" in a backhanded compliment. In 1607 James was finally obliged to abandon his hopes of achieving 'perfection' when faced with the opposition of the Scottish and English parliaments, doubtless full of MPs who were also lawyers keen to protect their vested interests. Perfidious Albion had won the game.

The United Kingdom continued as very much a work in progress for centuries. In 1707 the Scottish parliament was abolished, with all Great Britain's MPs sitting together in Westminster. Irish MPs continued to sit separately in Dublin until 1801 when the Irish parliament was also abolished on the creation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. In 1927, following the gaining of independence by Southern Ireland in 1922, the united Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was declared and this remains the name of the nation to this day. But for how much longer?

Nailing my colours firmly to the mast, I wholeheartedly support the aspirations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to independent statehood. If they want it, they should absolutely have it and England, having lorded it over these proud nations for centuries, should butt out. However, England will need to consider its own position under such a new dispensation. Hopefully it will be generous-spirited and not vindictive; Force majeure in such circumstances is not a good look. The future of Ireland, once reunited and fully in the European Union, I have few concerns about, but Scotland, and more especially Wales, could face a tough time as independent sovereign nations. England, having bled its satellite nations dry of their natural and human resources for centuries, must agree a generous divorce settlement. The EU also needs to step up to the plate and its members with their own independence struggles, such as Spain with Catalunya, get with the programme. At such a critical moment in world history, legalistic nitpicking is not an option - or not a viable one.

If the Anthopocene is drawing to a close, at least let's try to go out on a high note.


Popular posts from this blog

Myth take

In an essay for the openDemocracy newsletter on the future of Ukraine, Aman Sethi discusses national.myths. As he puts it, "we are all shaped by our myths, but we needn’t be bound to them. We are all born into our respective national identities, but we can each choose to reinterpret what they mean to us". On the 50th anniversary of the death of the Spanish dictator, Francisco Franco, modern Spain is doing precisely that; re-examining its post-Franco settlement, with strong challenges emerging from the left to the prevailing narrative of a successful parliamentary democracy guaranteed by a constitutional monarchy - a myth if ever there was one. While the United Kingdom is clearly not experiencing the same kind of existential crisis facing Ukraine as a result of Russian aggression, or dealing with the troubled legacy of a forty-year fascist regime like Spain, it is nevertheless in the throes of a crisis of identity. It could be argued that this is merely the latest iteration of...
Read more

A hope in hell

Any self-respecting independent island nation ought to be able to secure its own borders, right? Well, patently not if that nation happens to be the UK under a clapped-out, morally bankrupt Conservative government. When you've just wilfully severed almost fifty years of co-operative links with your nearest continental neighbours and totally fucked up your immigration system, no wonder thousands of desperate migrants are willing to risk the dangerous Channel crossing in small boats from the French coast to gain access. They cannot and will not wait forever in unsafe and insanitary encampments,  within sight of the White Cliffs of Dover on a clear day, without chancing their luck. No wonder, either, that the French authorities for their part seem unable or unwilling to do much to prevent them. Short of blasting these boats out of the water (something I suspect many xenophobic Brexiteers, including Tory MPs, would enthusiastically welcome) the only realistic response from the UK is to...
Read more

Political sketch - on the campaign trail

Only just into the second full week of a six-week general election campaign and already the campaigning seems to have trickled into the sand. Maybe this is down to the hiatus before finalising the official candidates' lists while awaiting publication of party manifestos (the excitement never starts) or, more likely, that parties (perhaps with the honourable exception of the Greens) seem bereft of any new policy offers. Those they have managed to cobble together, like the Tories' National Service dog-whistle nonsense, have fallen flat as a fart. Meanwhile, Sir Ed Davey for the Lib Dems has been gamely falling into water, admittedly in a worthy effort to highlight illegal sewage discharges into our waterways, but such images run the risk of becoming hostages to fortune. Falling over on the beach at Brighton did for Neil Kinnock's chances in 1992 when a clip was featured mercilessly in the opening sequence of the satirical puppet show, 'Spitting Image'.  Rishi Sunak...
Read more