Alex Salmond reveals vision for Scottish armed forces
Scottish plans to discard Trident has raised concerns in the US. Picture: Getty
ALEX Salmond has set out his vision for an independent Scottish defence force, saying it would consist of the same number of army, RAF and navy personnel as under plans being drawn up by UK ministers.
In the first detailed statement on the shape of the nation’s defences if Scots back independence, the First Minister said the coalition government’s defence review plan of one naval base, one air base and one mobile armed brigade was “exactly the configuration” required for Scotland.
Such a set-up would total about 15,400 troops, an armed force of an equivalent size to that of Kuwait.
The defence review set out by the coalition government last year proposed about 6,500 troops being stationed in Scotland, with a further 6,500 employed at the Trident submarine base in Faslane and 2,400 personnel at RAF Kinloss.
The three Scottish regiments – the Scots Guards, the Royal Regiment of Scotland, and the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards – would make up the core of any Scottish army, the SNP added.
But the proposals sparked a fresh political row last night, as Defence Secretary Philip Hammond described the plans to “break off a little bit” of the UK armed forces and hand it to Scotland as “laughable”.
And Mr Salmond – who campaigned against the closure of RAF bases proposed by the UK government – was accused of “complete hypocrisy” by Labour, which said he was “signing up to Tory cuts” on defence.
The SNP and UK governments also embarked on a fresh row over the future of Faslane’s Trident submarines and warheads, as Mr Hammond warned the SNP that Scotland could face a multi-billion-pound “reckoning” over their relocation if it insisted they be removed from Scottish waters.
Mr Salmond’s comments come after former defence secretary Liam Fox laid out a bitterly contested strategic defence review last year, in a bid to cut defence costs across the UK.
The First Minister said: “The configuration of the army in Scotland, the mobile brigade, which is the outcome of the defence review, looks exactly like the configuration you’d want for a Scottish defence force -– so that’s one naval base, one aircraft base and a mobile armed brigade.”
He added: “The great argument in favour of having a Scottish Defence Force is two-fold. One, you wouldn’t have to have the biggest concentration of nuclear weapons in western Europe situated in Scotland, which many people support the removal, and secondly of course, we’d have the right to decide whether or not to participate in international engagements.”
Last year, Mr Salmond insisted he was standing “shoulder-to-shoulder” with the RAF bases in Fife and Moray as they campaigned against the cutbacks. Those cuts will see both RAF Kinloss and RAF Leuchars being turned into bases for the army.
Dunfermline and West Fife Labour MP Thomas Docherty, a member of the defence select committee, said: “This is complete hypocrisy from the SNP. They are signed up to the closure of Leuchars and Lossiemouth despite campaigning against them.” He added: “After years of telling us Scotland has a defence under-spend they are signed up to the Tory cuts and keeping them in an independent Scotland.”
Mr Hammond argued that the SNP plans to adopt the UK forces based in Scotland was unfeasible. He said: “The UK armed forces are a highly integrated and very sophisticated fighting force. The idea that you can sort of break off a little bit, like a square on a chocolate bar and that would be the bit that went north of the Border, is frankly laughable.”
He also gave a stark warning about the SNP’s call to remove Trident from the Clyde after independence.
He said: “It would be an enormous exercise to rebuild the facilities that are at Faslane. It would cost billions of pounds and it would take many years. And, obviously, the cost of doing that would be a factor that had to be taken into account in any reckoning on Scottish independence, if that is the way it goes.”
Mr Salmond responded: “Only somebody with the arrogance of a Westminster politician would say to the Scottish people, apparently in all sobriety, that you’d place and station weapons of mass destruction in Scotland over a period of half a century, impose substantial clean-up costs and then try to send Scotland the bill. I don’t think that’s a feasible position.”
The SNP’s defence spokesman, Angus Robertson, said that an independent Scotland would not pay any relocation costs for Faslane. He declared: “Why should we? If London really cared so much about nuclear weapons systems perhaps they would have considered public opinion in Scotland decades ago. They didn’t and now they are asking themselves what are they going to do with it.”
However, Mr Robertson also acknowledged that the military opinions for relocating Trident were limited. “They might find it difficult to find locations in England, but perhaps they should have thought about that before foisting it on the people of Scotland years ago,” he said.
The spat highlights warnings voiced by military experts across the UK that a Scottish decision to remove Trident could trigger a bitter diplomatic spat as independence negotiations began.
William Walker, professor of international relations at St Andrews University, warned earlier this month it would be “implausible” to move the submarines anywhere else, ensuring that an eviction from Scotland would “amount to a promise to shut down the UK’s nuclear deterrent and enforce its disarmament”.
Such a demand would, therefore, “discourage London’s co-operation on issues that would be immediately vital to Scotland’s establishment as a viable state, including the national debt, pensions and North Sea oil, and support for Scotland’s membership of the United Nations, European Union and other international organisations” he added.
The UK government is committed to renewing Britain’s four Trident submarines, at a cost of upwards of £25 billion, arguing it needs to keep its nuclear presence on the world stage.
Former SNP leader Jim Sillars triggered fury within the Nationalist movement two years ago when he suggested the SNP should scrap its call for the deterrent to be removed in order to smooth negotiations between Scotland and the rest of the UK.
However, Mr Salmond said earlier this week that “an independent Scotland will not have nuclear weapons, and after we become independent Trident weapons of mass destruction will no longer be based in Scottish waters.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 10 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 829 comments to this article
Page 1 of 56
Simonsaid
Sunday, January 22, 2012 at 04:49 PM#828 - occupylink - The sooner Scotland is independent the better. Countries all over the world will be queueing up to welcome Scotland. Scotland has a special relationship with Canada, =================================================== Where did you hear that rubbish – My daughter has being waiting four years (aye 4 years) to get her Canadian residence permit and is still waiting. And, other countries have more important things to think about than being over the moon about Scotland’s independence. You obviously have succumbed to a severe bout of Salmonitis, which can only be cured by a quaff or two of realisation that whilst Salmond might think the world should be preoccupied with his stupid brave heart games, other countries couldn’t care less
occupylink
Sunday, January 22, 2012 at 04:24 PMThe sooner Scotland is independent the better. Countries all over the world will be queueing up to welcome Scotland. Scotland has a special relationship with Canada, France and New Zealand. England only has a special relationship to the United States, and that is becoming increasingly one sided. Occupy Edinburgh doesn't officially support Scottish Independence yet, but I for one will be pushing for that valued support.
Simonsaid
Sunday, January 22, 2012 at 12:57 PM#823 well informed - 819 Nigeria is classified as a mixed economy emerging market, and has already reached middle income status according to the Worldbank Now listen up disinformed capot d’Aglais – I have spent most of my working life in Nigeria and I can categorically inform you that whatever comic you have trawled to get your info it is rubbish. Corruption, and poverty are as rife now as it ever was. In fact in this ‘week’s press there are articles which state that Nigeria is facing multiple crises after the government's decision to scrap the oil subsidy has brought the country to the brink, leading to violent protests, curfews and strikes. And successive governments have failed to transform Nigeria's oil wealth into prosperity, with over half the country living in poverty. Meanwhile, an Islamist insurgency gathers pace in the north. Now I suggest you pick a subject you know something about numptie – if you can find one that is. NOW GO AWAY AND PLAY WITH YER TOYS AND GEE US PIECE
duelaynomore
Sunday, January 22, 2012 at 04:06 AMname a western country which has oil and is not wealthy? ....................................................................................................................Well how about the USA which is broke, and getting broker by the minute. The fact that wealth CAN be created by oil and natural resources. does not mean that the country will be sensible in its use of this wealth. By the way if it is going to become scotlands oil and gas, as the driver of this change, what will we do after we have exhausted that FINITE resource?..............................................quite frankly we need to be far more productive than we are if we want to go it alone. The alternative is that we screw it up, then get bailed out by a country that may have dissimilar views to ourselves, and have to do their bidding as they'd own us....................................................................................................................If we rush down this route with the Charlies that we currently have in command, we'll be third world country in a decade. Its like kids, they should only leave home when they can really stand on their own feet and be genuinely productive, not just because they have a loud voice or get pregnant, or some person gives them the vote at 16, but legislates them out of the pubs...........Is this a madhouse or what?
Scouse Dave
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 06:24 PMEvery day the degree of self importance of scots nats grows bigger. Totally deluded the lot of you. Who on earth is going to threaten an independent scotland? Why bother? To muscle in on your tartan goods industry? To cleave off a slice of your lucky heather production? Give us a break. Nobody is a threat because there will be nothing there. Trident will come down to Portsmouth leaving even more scots without jobs. Get a grip.........
Quiet John
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 04:34 PMThis whole conversation is a diversion from real issues. An independent Scotland will be so small as to be insignificant militarily, except as a base forces from more powerful nations. Scotland must leverage its location and alliances to manage its defense. The discussion about NATO, alliances, the EU and treaty's are important. Not whether you one base or two bases for 6,000 soldiers. Seriously, New York City has over 40,000 police. Militarily Scotland will be like the suburb of a major US city. And that is a good thing in so many ways. As for whether you will hurt your economy by closing a base, it would be cheaper to just hand out the money then to try to build a military for the sole purpose of propping up the economy.
well informed
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 04:15 PM819 Nigeria is classified as a mixed economy emerging market, and has already reached middle income status according to the Worldbank,[58] with its abundant supply of natural resources, well-developed financial, legal, communications, transport sectors and stock exchange (the Nigerian Stock Exchange), which is the second largest in Africa. Nigeria is ranked 37th in the world in terms of GDP (PPP) as of 2007. Nigeria is the United States' largest trading partner in sub-Saharan Africa and supplies a fifth of its oil (11% of oil imports). It has the seventh-largest trade surplus with the U.S. of any country worldwide. Nigeria is currently the 50th-largest export market for U.S. goods and the 14th-largest exporter of goods to the U.S. The United States is the country's largest foreign investor.[59] The International Monetary Fund (IMF) projected economic growth of 9% in 2008 and 8.3% in 2009.[60][61][62] The IMF further projects a 8% growth in the Nigerian economy in 2011.[63] February 2011: According to Citigroup, Nigeria will get the highest average GDP growth in the world between 2010–2050. Nigeria is one of two countries from Africa among 11 Global Growth Generators countries.[64] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You really do have a compulsive need to show the world how big a dick you can really be!
well informed
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 04:12 PM819 And just like Scotland the control of the oil and gas assets is not theirs! It is being taken by private corporations who after bribing the right officials have been milking the country dry for decades! Now imagine if they had a Govt who actually controlled the Oil and Gas and was able to run it as a national service industry?
well informed
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 04:09 PM807 Another reason to remain within the union then? Got anymore?
well informed
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 04:08 PM812 What terrorists? An Independent Scotland wont be at war with anybody! Did you notice how many IRA bombs went off in Scotland during the NI "troubles"?
Simonsaid
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 12:33 PM#818 - McDuff - To all you so called Scots i ask the question again , name me a country in the West that has oil and is NOT wealthy? Nigeria for one – Ask me another – afore you do I will let you into a secret – Nigeria has been producing oil since for 52 years or more and is Africa’s biggest oil producer but the country is skint. Wealth means nothing unless it is used for the benefit of the people and not just for the few who shall we say MANAGE IT.
McDuff
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 11:37 AMTo all you so called Scots i ask the question again , name me a country in the West that has oil and is NOT wealthy? The reason Westminster does not want Scotland to have independence is OIL and the promise of more to come from new exploration sites,that and they are terrified of the prospect of Trident moving to England. Complete separation from England will not happen overnight but the logistics will be sorted out as has happened in other countries. The pathetic roll-call of fat Scottish Lords in their lairs in London spouting Unionist propoganda will only add to SNP votes. And to those of you who are offensively labeling the SNP as Nazis`s yet are praising the merits of being part of a large aggressive UK war machine,would that view not be seen as Fascist?
Simonsaid
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 10:45 AM#816 – Wardog - Yes, with fifteen nuclear reactor targets in England, the future of her people looks bleak. ======================================================= Aw right smart ass a widnae be sae smug if a wis you – Aw the Iranians wid see is a wee island and their aim isnae very gid – Hope ye hiv a gid bunker tae shelter in
The Harder They Come
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 09:36 AM812. Yes, with fifteen nuclear reactor targets in England, the future of her people looks bleak.
The Harder They Come
Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 09:35 AM811. Do you get aroused when you see other men's missiles?
Page 1 of 56
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.