Over on Twitter, the Liberation Scotland Committee have responded to this post as follows:
“Please realise Eoghann that the term Non-Self-Governing Territory is the very definition of a colony in international law, and it is misleading to suggest otherwise. There is equally no point in talking about something you mysteriously call "pure self-determination" when the term has no meaning in international law. There exist internal and external self-determinations, and entitlement in law to the latter, i.e. to internationally-recognised statehood - restored statehood in Scotland's case - is entirely dependent on establishing dependency, or colonial status. You're not alone in not understanding this - neither the SNP nor Alba understands, or acknowledges it either. Perhaps you should engage with Liberation Scotland to help clear up some of these ideas.”
I have responded as follows:
Thank you for engaging with me; I am happy to do so, but suggest that had you read the articles referenced in my post, you would have found what I mean by, for example, “pure self-determination”. There’s no mystery. My detailed position is accessible here: https://macualraig.substack.com/p/routes-to-independence
My article contains nothing original; it was the culmination of research done over several years. My references extended from Lord President Cooper to Professor Marc Weller. Later it was a relief to find Professor Robert MacCorquodale broadly in agreement in his opinion commissioned by Alba.
My late friend Iain Lawson commented “Ewan wrote this in August 2021. In other words he saw well in advance where the failed debacle of the SCOTS GOVERNMENT application to the Supreme Court was going to end. He is not saying “told you so” but I am.”
I’d be interested to know if @LiberationScot have support from any legal academic for the position that the only route to Scottish statehood is via persuading the UN to add Scotland to the existing list of colonies and then decolonising us.
Forgot to add that I enjoy Ewan's writing, though not always agreeing entirely. This is from the time when the late and much missed Iain Lawson published Ewan's thoughts from time to time.
The fate of Scotland was sealed with two major events in my view. The fact of the matter is that the border between Scotland and England was always pretty loose and that was taken advantage of by the raiders from Scotland who went there rustling cattle. This caused a lot of annoyance and irritation. So right through the Middle Ages the English used to march up to Scotland every summer for a campaign to bop the Scots on the head - and quite reasonably in my opinion because the Scots were a pain in the arse
Now what happened next was of course much more serious politically which was the Jacobite rebellion which was a major threat to the British throne and the crown A threat not just political but also religious and I'm sure you understand the importance and significance of the freedom of Protestantism compared to the oppression of the Pope of Rome.
My view? Scotland's not a colony. Scotland decided very sensibly most recently in a referendum to stay as part of the United Kingdom and the reason is because frankly we'd rather have an enemy outside than an enemy within.
I don't think Scots could be described as a pain in the arse in the Midfle ages given the many by English troops into Scotland under various Kings, until the marriage ot Margaret Tudor to James IV, which brought peace for,a short while until James invaded Fnfland as,a result of an appeal from France, the result being the massive defeat at Flodden.
As to Scots voting NO in the 2014 referendum, research shows it was incomers, mostly English who voted that way and frustrated the wish of native Scots to be Independent. Also, of course there were the many lies promoted by the media and not corrected by Better Together, about loss of pensions, having a hard border between Scotland and England and, the infamous 'Vow' delivered illegalkycduring the purdah period.
Well I'm pretty well 50% English/ 50% North West European in origin, but I've actually spent more than half my life living in Scotland by choice and I actually voted for independence but I wasn't that bothered by the result. I don't think it was that important at that time and I think we can always reach an accommodation with our neighbours in the United Kingdom anyway.
Scotland was pretty lawless for much of the Middle Ages, and the fact of the matter is that Scotland produced a lot of raiders. This was very annoying if you were a farmer in the north of England, so I don't blame the English for getting cross with them. Anyway never mind we can disagree or agree about that. My wife by the way is is a hundred percent Scottish and I think she actually voted the other way I think she voted to to stay within the United Kingdom but there you go you know.
But there were certainly some interesting problems to do with the vote for independence at least a third of the people who voted independence also voted to leave the European Union, We've got issues like the currency that's unresolved we've got issues like the monarchy unresolved we've got issues like the British defence forces and NATO membership that's unresolved - they're just far too many unresolved issues really and I don't blame the sensible Scots for just saying the status quo is probably better than a completely unknown future as an independent country. But as I say things have moved on a bit since then anyway but as for the Vow? I think the Vow was just you know quite a reasonable sales pitch and we all saw it as that I don't know it actually influenced many many votes at all.
Over on Twitter, the Liberation Scotland Committee have responded to this post as follows:
“Please realise Eoghann that the term Non-Self-Governing Territory is the very definition of a colony in international law, and it is misleading to suggest otherwise. There is equally no point in talking about something you mysteriously call "pure self-determination" when the term has no meaning in international law. There exist internal and external self-determinations, and entitlement in law to the latter, i.e. to internationally-recognised statehood - restored statehood in Scotland's case - is entirely dependent on establishing dependency, or colonial status. You're not alone in not understanding this - neither the SNP nor Alba understands, or acknowledges it either. Perhaps you should engage with Liberation Scotland to help clear up some of these ideas.”
I have responded as follows:
Thank you for engaging with me; I am happy to do so, but suggest that had you read the articles referenced in my post, you would have found what I mean by, for example, “pure self-determination”. There’s no mystery. My detailed position is accessible here: https://macualraig.substack.com/p/routes-to-independence
My article contains nothing original; it was the culmination of research done over several years. My references extended from Lord President Cooper to Professor Marc Weller. Later it was a relief to find Professor Robert MacCorquodale broadly in agreement in his opinion commissioned by Alba.
My late friend Iain Lawson commented “Ewan wrote this in August 2021. In other words he saw well in advance where the failed debacle of the SCOTS GOVERNMENT application to the Supreme Court was going to end. He is not saying “told you so” but I am.”
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2023/06/29/routes-to-independence/
I’d be interested to know if @LiberationScot have support from any legal academic for the position that the only route to Scottish statehood is via persuading the UN to add Scotland to the existing list of colonies and then decolonising us.
Forgot to add that I enjoy Ewan's writing, though not always agreeing entirely. This is from the time when the late and much missed Iain Lawson published Ewan's thoughts from time to time.
The fate of Scotland was sealed with two major events in my view. The fact of the matter is that the border between Scotland and England was always pretty loose and that was taken advantage of by the raiders from Scotland who went there rustling cattle. This caused a lot of annoyance and irritation. So right through the Middle Ages the English used to march up to Scotland every summer for a campaign to bop the Scots on the head - and quite reasonably in my opinion because the Scots were a pain in the arse
Now what happened next was of course much more serious politically which was the Jacobite rebellion which was a major threat to the British throne and the crown A threat not just political but also religious and I'm sure you understand the importance and significance of the freedom of Protestantism compared to the oppression of the Pope of Rome.
My view? Scotland's not a colony. Scotland decided very sensibly most recently in a referendum to stay as part of the United Kingdom and the reason is because frankly we'd rather have an enemy outside than an enemy within.
I don't think Scots could be described as a pain in the arse in the Midfle ages given the many by English troops into Scotland under various Kings, until the marriage ot Margaret Tudor to James IV, which brought peace for,a short while until James invaded Fnfland as,a result of an appeal from France, the result being the massive defeat at Flodden.
As to Scots voting NO in the 2014 referendum, research shows it was incomers, mostly English who voted that way and frustrated the wish of native Scots to be Independent. Also, of course there were the many lies promoted by the media and not corrected by Better Together, about loss of pensions, having a hard border between Scotland and England and, the infamous 'Vow' delivered illegalkycduring the purdah period.
Well I'm pretty well 50% English/ 50% North West European in origin, but I've actually spent more than half my life living in Scotland by choice and I actually voted for independence but I wasn't that bothered by the result. I don't think it was that important at that time and I think we can always reach an accommodation with our neighbours in the United Kingdom anyway.
Scotland was pretty lawless for much of the Middle Ages, and the fact of the matter is that Scotland produced a lot of raiders. This was very annoying if you were a farmer in the north of England, so I don't blame the English for getting cross with them. Anyway never mind we can disagree or agree about that. My wife by the way is is a hundred percent Scottish and I think she actually voted the other way I think she voted to to stay within the United Kingdom but there you go you know.
But there were certainly some interesting problems to do with the vote for independence at least a third of the people who voted independence also voted to leave the European Union, We've got issues like the currency that's unresolved we've got issues like the monarchy unresolved we've got issues like the British defence forces and NATO membership that's unresolved - they're just far too many unresolved issues really and I don't blame the sensible Scots for just saying the status quo is probably better than a completely unknown future as an independent country. But as I say things have moved on a bit since then anyway but as for the Vow? I think the Vow was just you know quite a reasonable sales pitch and we all saw it as that I don't know it actually influenced many many votes at all.