Emmy Bost

9-17-14
English 104
Comparative Analysis Essay: Scottish Independence
The United Kingdom consists of four countries: England, Scotland, Northern
Ireland, and Wales. On September 18, 2014, a national poll will take place in Scotland
over whether or not Scotland should gain their independence from the rest of the United
Kingdom, due to dissatisfaction with the methods that the British government have used
to govern and treat Scotland. The question, Should Scotland be its own independent
country?, proposes various solutions and problems that would arise in response. This
essay will map out various perspectives that would arise with an independent Scotland,
taking prevalent issues into account, including defense and security, currency options,
and university funding.
In Andrew Dormans article, More Than A Storm In A Teacup: The Defence And
Security Implications Of Scottish Independence," he explains the different mechanisms
that Scotland will have to construct in order adapt to potential security and defense
changes. Those in favor of independence began to construct plans for security and
defense issues in Scotland. A great deal of change would not be required, because these
issues were kept constant with the UKs previous plans: Scotland wished to remain a
member of the European Union and NATO, and remain in the Common Travel Area with
the UK and Ireland (Dorman). Scotland would create an armed force consisting of 15,000
human resources, with a reserve of 5,000 personnel (Dorman). 2.5 billion would be
spent on defense and security; a portion of the money going towards the production of a

dozen planes, that would be utilized to protect Scottish airspace (Dorman). Those not in
favor of independence feared that Scotlands separation from the United Kingdom would
produce game-changing tensions between the two groups, so Scotland would have to
promise greater commitments to assure a healthy relationship with their allies within
NATO and the European Union (Dorman). Many didnt see the point of Scottish
independence, in regards to how the Scottish would govern compared to the English
Parliament, because the Scottish government wished to keep some same principles in the
governing system. They also feared that possessing an armed force of 15,000 people
would be too high of a proportion of the overall population of Scotland. Furthermore, the
cost of the personnel would be a large proportion of the defense and security budget.
In the article "The Future Of United Kingdom Monetary Union And Scottish
Independence, Andrew Campbell discusses the different currency options that Scotland
would face if they did indeed choose independence. The question of whether or not
Scotland should be an independent country sheds light on many options in regards to the
currency that Scotland would use in their independence from the rest of the United
Kingdom. The Scottish government recommended that Scotland not continue to utilize
the English pound as a formal currency union with the rest of the UK (Campbell). In
response, Scotland has developed the following possible currency options: a sterling
currency union between Scotland and the UK, under a formal agreement with the British
government; continuing to utilize the pound, without the British governments consent;
the adoption of the use of the euro (if Scotland becomes a member of the European
Union); or the development of a new Scottish currency (Campbell). Continuing to use
pounds in Scotland would maintain steady trade across the Scottish/UK borders, assist in

easier transactions between British countries, and maintain an orderly nature among
business transactions between the two independent countries (Campbell). The British
government wishes for this union through currency to continue, but only as long as
Scotland is a part of the United Kingdom. The British government refuses to bank with
Scotland if they choose independence over union.
Severin Carrell discusses the losses that Scottish universities would face if they
chose independence over unity, in his article from The Guardian, Scottish universities
braced for brain drain if country votes for independence. University funding poses as a
major concern in deciding whether or not Scotland should be independent. Senior
executives believe that Scotlands prominent universities would lose billions of pounds in
funding, contracts, projects, and research supported by British councils if Scotland voted
to leave (Carrell). Scottish professors have given warnings to their universities,
threatening to leave if Scotland votes yes because budget cuts would hinder research and
university incomes in such a drastic way. Prominent universities in Scotland, including
Edinburgh University, cultivate 12% of the United Kingdoms 2 billion-per-year
research grants and funding for projects (Carrell). Therefore, at Edinburgh University,
30% of its exterior funding stems from United Kingdom sources (Carrell). Scottish and
English universities study and research so closely with one another; Professor David
Weller expressed that Theres just no way if Scotland was a separate country that kind of
arrangement could be sustained (Carrell). In contrast, the pro-independence group
Academics for Yes maintain that the total income from the United Kingdom to Scotland
has averaged to about 28 million more each year, than Scotlands tax contribution to the
UK (Carrell). England spent much more on capital projects in the rest of the United

Kingdom than they did in Scotland. The Scottish government wishes to establish a
common research area that parallels the current RCUK system, with the rest of the
United Kingdom (Carrell).
In response, I do not think that Scotland should be an independent country from
the United Kingdom. In response to Andrew Dormans article: with a yes vote,
Scotlands defense and security ties with the rest of the United Kingdom would be
broken, causing friction between the two groups. This would also cause tension between
the UK, Scotland, the European Union and NATO. Scotland would have to possess the
responsibility to construct and maintain their own armed forces, which would turn out to
be an expensive endeavor that would eat up a large proportion of their defense and
security budget. In agreement with Campbells argument on a currency system: if
Scotland were not able to use pounds for their currency, problems would arise when
dealing with business transactions with the rest of the United Kingdom. Complications
would occur if Scotland utilized a completely different monetary system, which would
hinder the trade between the United Kingdom and Scotland, which then directly affects
the status of the economy and well being of industries in both countries. These
complications can be avoided with the union of the UK and Scotland. I support Carrell in
his concern with the loss of funds towards Scottish Universities. Without British aid in
funding for Scottish universities, the levels of prestigious research, rooted in Scotland,
would decrease drastically. The loss of revenue, research, and employees, would degrade
the statuses of pre-distinguished universities. In conclusion, I do not think that Scotland
should vote for independence, because of the simple idea that Scotland would not be as
strong without the rest of the United Kingdom, and vice versa.

Word Count: 1,124

Works Cited
CAMPBELL, ANDREW. "The Future Of United Kingdom Monetary Union And Scottish
Independence." Law & Financial Markets Review 7.5 (2013): 239-249. Academic
Search Complete. Web. 15 Sept. 2014.

CARRELL, SEVERIN. Scottish universities braced for brain drain if country votes for
independence. The Guardian Sunday 31 August 2014.

DORMAN, ANDREW M. "More Than A Storm In A Teacup: The Defence And Security
Implications Of Scottish Independence." International Affairs 90.3 (2014): 679696. Academic Search Complete. Web. 15 Sept. 2014.