Amy international law experts around?

[andrewducker]

I am confused by some of the reporting around Independence, so hopefully someone can clear things up for me*.

My understanding is that if Scotland becomes independent, then that ends the United Kingdom (which is named after the uniting of the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland into one Kingdom). We are not left with The United Kingdom, and "that bit which used to be part of it, but isn't any more". We have two new countries.

So why is it that I keep reading stories about how Scotland will have to renegotiate X and Y with Europe, NATO, the UN, etc. - which also assume that England+Wales+NI won't have to negotiate anything at all. Surely either both new nations will have to negotiate their relationship with various organisations, or both will inherit the relationship from the nation they are successors to.

Anyone care to put me right? Or at least tell me that everyone disagrees?



*Although the experts also seem to be confused, so probably not.

Comments

[andrewducker]

As mentioned upthread somewhere, it depends on what the "United Kingdom" bit means. If it means "the unity of the crown of England and the crown of Scotland" then that's one thing, if it means "This whole bit of land that is united under a crown" then that's another.

And, as most people won't care, that's a third :->

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

IIRC James VI and I declared that he was King of Great Britain in 1603 rather than separately King of England and King of Scotland, thus unifying the Crowns. The Treaty and Act of Union in 1707 unified the Parliaments and some bit not all of the apparatus of state.

There was a bit of to-ing and fro-ing over the unification of the crown during the English Civil War and the War of the Three Kingdoms when Charles was crowned King of Scotland.

So Great Britain as a concept pre-dates the 1707 Act.

Of course, we are dealing with a legal and constitutional set up back then that (somewhat) viewed kingship as special and holy and the person of the king as connected with the personhood of the state. The creation of the King of Great Britain meant something to people living in 1603 that perhaps it wouldn’t mean to us if say Elizabeth II declared herself Queen Regnant of the British Isles including the Isle of Man, Jersey etc into one regal entity.

I concur with commentators who have said this is going to be a political judgement.

If I were Salmond I would start to set expectations with bodies like the UN. Specifically, I’d ditch the SNP’s anti-nuclear stand point, claim one of the boomers and demand a seat on the UN Permanent Council thingie.

There is an interesting point out there on the EU which I’m not sure I’ve seen resolved. I am both a citizen of the UK and a citizen of the EU.

Can my citizenship of the EU be revoked by an act of parliament?