Scottish separatists urge a do-over

When Scotland voted convincingly not to leave the United Kingdom two years ago, innocent minds may have thought it settled the issue of independence. But Canadians know better: the inviolable rule of separatist movements is that you keep trying, as often as required to wear down the opposition. Separatists only have to win once; their opponents have to win every time.

Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon understands that dynamic and has announced Round Two in her Scottish National Party’s breakaway plan, telling a party conference she will unveil draft legislation preparing for a second referendum, to take place within two years. Not at all by coincidence, that timetable coincides almost precisely with Britain’s anticipated negotiations to leave the European Union.

The Brexit vote means that “Scotland is now faced with one of the specific scenarios in which this government pledged that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold an independence referendum,” Sturgeon said. “We face unacceptable risks to our democratic, economic and social interests and to the right of the Scottish Parliament to have its say.”

Although English voters supported quitting the EU, Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain. As part of the U.K., it has no choice but to leave, but as an independent country, it could stay, retaining all the benefits of open borders and a 28-country market.

Quitting the U.K. is not as cut-and-dried as Scottish nationalists would like, however. The power to call a referendum lies with London, and the first plebiscite only took place because thenprime minister David Cameron agreed to it. There’s no guarantee his replacement, Theresa May, would be so accommodating, especially after the first one turned unexpectedly into a last-minute nail-biter.

Sturgeon could hold a “consultative referendum,” hoping to obtain overwhelming support that she could hold over May’s head. It would have no legal status, but if May ignored it, Scots might take it as an insult, boosting the separatist cause. Sturgeon is hoping for just that effect: she has already indicated that Scottish discontent might be mollified by “substantial additional powers for the Scottish parliament.”

Yes, just as Quebec used the threat of separation to squeeze regular concessions from Ottawa, the SNP sees it as a useful means of shifting as much authority as possible to the Scottish legislature in Edinburgh. The ideal result would be something along the line of René Lévesque’s “sovereignty-association” — Scotland gets all the pleasant parts of independence, without actually having to undergo the messiness of leaving.

Avoiding the messiness is important, because there is no guarantee a second referendum would be more successful than the first. The 2014 plebiscite was predicated on the claim that Scotland’s share of North Sea oil wealth would see it through any financial woes once ties to Her Majesty’s Exchequer had been broken. But oil prices have collapsed and no one knows when, or if, they will rise again. They usually do, eventually, but you can’t run a country on eventually.

Sturgeon knows this, too, so she’s adopting the same approach Quebec used so successfully for so long: make demands and dare London to defy them. Scotland “will put forward constructive proposals” for new powers, she said, but “if it becomes clear that it is only through independence that Scotland’s interests can be protected,” she plans to put it to a vote before Brexit takes effect.

London has yet to respond to Sturgeon’s threat. May is a person of more apparent backbone than Cameron, and has already signalled there will be no going back on the decision to leave the EU. That has set off a debate over a “hard Brexit” versus a “soft Brexit,” the difference lying in whether Britain can leave the union while retaining trade access and other prerogatives. While Britain tries to negotiate as favourable a departure as it can, Sturgeon will be pressing May to offer the same treatment for Scotland.

For Sturgeon and her fellow nationalists, uncertainty is the key. It enables them to make threats and angle for special treatment, all while London is preoccupied with Brexit details. The more their campaign unsettles England, the more likely it is that annoyed voters will suggest it’s time for Scotland to pack its bags and go. Which is precisely what Sturgeon and her separatists are hoping for.