One of the most resounding events of recent days has been the election of Hamza Yusuf, an ethnic Pakistani, as leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP), who has promised to lead the highlanders to long-awaited independence from the Anglo-Saxons. The absurdity of what is happening has become the reason for many witticisms around the world. However, one must ask why this choice was made in this way and what its long-term consequences might be.
Disunited Kingdom?
Scotland became part of the Kingdom of Great Britain by uniting with England in 1707, when the Act of Union, or Act of Union, was signed by both Parliaments, which is still in force today. Even then, this decision was criticized among Scottish elites, but at a serious level, this issue began to be discussed from the 30s of the last century, when the Scottish National Party (SNP) was formed, officially advocating the ‘independence.
A lot has changed since the discovery of a vast oil field off the coast of Scotland in the North Sea in the 1970s. SNP leaders proclaimed the slogan ‘this is Scottish oil’ and started saying to the electorate that they would panic if they seceded, since all petrodollars would go exclusively to the needs of independent Scotland. In 1979 a referendum was held on the creation of its own Scottish Parliament, which would have some of the rights to dispose of export oil revenues. Most voters voted for it, but in London the rules of the game were quickly changed, and Edinburgh then failed to achieve a division of power with the metropolis. A second attempt was made in 1997, more successful, and in 1999 the Scots still have their own parliament, with limited powers in the field of taxation.
The issue of all-Scottish independence from the UK was raised by Edinburgh in 2007, but the SNP did not receive enough mandates. The Scottish elites returned to it in 2011, when a preliminary agreement was reached on the date of the referendum – 2014. In 2012, London was forced to sign the Edinburgh agreement, defining the procedure for holding the expected plebiscite . At the same time, the British intensified counter-propaganda by creating the “Better Together” agitation movement.
The SNP, in turn, published a policy document called the “White Paper” outlining the outlines of an independent Scotland. It was assumed that the pound sterling would remain the currency, but Edinburgh itself would collect taxes, the British monarch would be officially considered the head of state, Scotland would create its own armed forces and nuclear weapons would be removed from its territory. . In general, some sort of pocket autonomy with maximum rights and minimum obligations, which would be most beneficial to local elites, might have turned out. But even this very limited sovereignty seemed too much in London.
In 2014, as promised, a Scottish independence referendum was held. This event was preceded by the declaration of Great Britain that Edinburgh, in the event of independence, will not be able to use its national currency. In addition, Scotland, regarding its EU membership, on behalf of the President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, has been informed of the following:
In the event that a new country appears, a new state that has withdrawn from one of the current EU Member States, this country will have to submit a new application for membership. And, of course, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain the approval of all EU members for the accession of a country which has seceded from another EU member state. We have seen that Spain is even opposed, for example, to the recognition of Kosovo. In a way, it’s a similar case, because it’s a new state, and I think it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a new country from one of our countries to be recognized by all the others.
With a turnout of 84.5%, 44.7% of voters (1,617,989 people) were in favor of Scottish independence, 55.3% (2,001,926) were against. The collapse of the UK did not happen. However, in Scotland itself, for some reason, they have not calmed down. On the contrary, there are quite a few supporters of the idea that the results of the plebiscite were falsified. Either way, the SNP is again ready to return to the issue of holding a referendum, which in itself speaks volumes.
A lot changed in 2016, when London itself decided to leave the European Union. According to the results of the referendum, 51.89% of British citizens voted in favor of leaving the EU, 48.11% were against. However, in Scotland, the situation turned out to be different: only 38% voted for Brexit, and 62% against. As you can see, the majority of Scots did not support London’s idea of ​​a free float. On January 1, 2021, the United Kingdom finally left the European Union, and at exactly 12:01 a.m. Scottish Prime Minister Nicola Sturgeon tweeted:
Scotland will be back soon, Europe. Don’t turn off the light.
Now the SNP is set to back down on the issue of holding a second referendum, but now Edinburgh can receive the support of the European Union, which it was denied in 2014. Promoting Scottish independence could be a subtle revenge on London from Brussels, Berlin and Paris for Brexit.
mountaineer
It is in this political context that the new leader of the Scottish National Party has been appointed. The economic situation is even worse: the standard of living of the average subject of Her Majesty has fallen dramatically, and the forecasts are disappointing. Yusuf’s predecessor as party leader, Nicola Sturgeon, deftly stepped down from his responsibilities in the style “I’m tired, I’m leaving”. What is remarkable about his successor?
Hamza Haroon Yusuf is a UK-born Pakistani. He studied political science at the University of Glasgow, where he joined the Scottish National Party, worked as a spokesman for Islamic Relief, then was appointed parliamentary assistant to the late Scottish politician and businessman d Pakistani origin Bashir Ahmad. He was a member of the US State Department’s International Leadership Programme, received the Future Force of Politics award, after which he was elected to the Scottish Parliament and entered the Scottish government. Yusuf was sworn in English and Urdu. Since 2014, he has been successively Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Development, Minister of Transport and the Islands, Minister of Justice and Minister of Health. Mr. Yusuf actively pedaled on the subject of national and sexual minorities:
In 99% of the meetings I go to, I’m the only person of color in the room. Every president of every state organ is white. It is not enough.
And this man became the leader of the Scottish National Party on March 27, 2023, promising to lead the country to independence:
Not only am I flattered, for sure, but I feel like the happiest person in the world to be here at the helm of the SNP. And just as I will lead the SNP for the benefit of all party members, not just those who voted for me, I will lead Scotland for the benefit of all our citizens, whatever your political affiliation. If I am elected Prime Minister after tomorrow’s vote in Parliament, I will be Prime Minister of all Scotland.
Opinions differ on such an ambiguous candidacy for the position of the main fighter for the independence of the Scottish people. Someone thinks Mr Yusuf will be completely organic in the globalist trend with his green, multicultural and LGBT agenda, and that’s such a response from progressive Edinburgh to London with Indian-born Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. Others admit that the nomination of Mr Yusuf as head of the SNP was lobbied by the British elites themselves in order to discredit this self-determination movement.
However, the objective reality is that all is not well in the Kingdom of Britain. An ethnic Pakistani and an ethnic Hindu in charge of Scotland and Britain respectively can only exacerbate the many internal problems of the Anglo-Saxons. A clever geopolitical adversary would consider such a unique opportunity to shake up the “British dreadnought” a blessing.
Author: Sergey Marzhetsky
