Duncan Hamilton: Scotland cannot embrace Europe without independence

AS THE immediate Eurozone crisis recedes, a new Europe emerges. For the UK, and for Scotland, that poses fundamental questions. The UK has a dysfunctional relationship with the rest of Europe.

It reeks of misplaced superiority. It proceeds on the basis that the EU is lucky to have us, that the UK is the cherry on the European cake and that British membership of the Eurozone is the holy grail of European integration. That tone has even maintained throughout the current Euro crisis. Yes, there is a realisation that if the Eurozone goes down, the UK goes with it. But equally, there is an unmistakable schadenfreude.

Yes, those who doubted the creation of a single currency in the absence of concurrent fiscal union and genuine economic convergence have much to crow about. Anyone arguing for Euro membership at the present time would be bundled into a van by the men in white coats.

But that’s to miss the point. The coming months and years are the turning point for Europe. Positive idealism and worthy declarations of “ever deeper union” have delivered too little; now it is the ferocity of the market which drives change. Money talks, and the markets have spoken.

The days of warm words and aspirational noises have gone. The changes which must, and will, now come if the euro is to survive will be of a different order of magnitude. This will be about forced sharing of sovereignty. It will be about ceding control of national fiscal decision-making. It will transform the relationship between the citizen and his or her nation state. It will drive a cohesive concept of being European – not on the previous grounds of that being politically desirable, but because it is what stands between economic survival and the most expensive financial divorce the world has ever seen. This is no longer about choice – it is about necessity.

That matters to us, even though we are outside the Eurozone. In fact, it matters precisely because we are outside the Eurozone. Europe will now divide into a core group of Eurozone nations – currently 17 strong – and a second group of those outside the currency. Those inside the core group will drive forward with radical institutional change and massive reform to the way they organise their economic affairs. The days when the UK could flirt with Europe are over. The train is leaving the station.

But what then? Our economic future tied to the EU and decisions will therefore continue to be made by others which impact on our prosperity. What we have gained not being in the euro, we may lose in the diminished influence of years to come. President Nicolas Sarkozy this week made plain his position, telling David Cameron: “We are sick of you criticising us and telling us what to do. You say you hate the euro and now you want to interfere in our meetings.” That eruption speaks to years of frustration. It should have alarm bells ringing for all of us, indicating an unmistakable hardening of mood against the UK.

Domestically, the Tory backbench rebellion last week in the House of Commons guarantees that Cameron has no room for manoeuvre. That any future treaty will have to be ratified in a UK referendum simply adds to the certainty that an uneasy stand-off may soon become open hostility.

And what of Scotland in all this? The Eurozone crisis may have been the rock in the water, but the ripples extend far and wide. A referendum on independence cannot ignore these changes in the form and substance of what it means to be a member of the EU. “Independence” itself is a constantly evolving concept in a world of shared sovereignty. What will it mean when the blueprint for the new Europe is unveiled in the years to come?

Two points are worth making. First, these are challenges which will be faced by Scots regardless of whether we remain part of the United Kingdom or not. The question is therefore whether we are better equipped to deal with the “new Europe” as an independent country or whether we are content to have Cameron speak for Scotland, driven as he must now surely be by the need to throw red meat to his backbenchers. For me, that’s an easy choice – the impending revolution within the EU makes an already strong case for independence even more urgent. These are precisely the moments when having a government focused solely and exclusively on the Scottish national interest matters more, not less. The Scottish view may well differ from the views of an increasingly eurosceptic English view – contrast, for example, the electoral success of UKIP up here and down there. For myself, I prefer the Scottish tradition of enlightened European engagement, and having a direct influence in shaping the future.

Secondly, it should inspire nationalists to be on the front foot over Europe. The charge that independence means isolation can be turned on its head, for it is the attitude of the UK government which may risk isolation, not an independent Scotland. This is the time to explain to Scottish voters why it is overwhelmingly better that Scotland be an independent member state in the EU. How many know that it means direct Scottish representation at the European Council, Scotland taking a rotation of holding the presidency of the Council of Ministers or a chance to get more MEPs from Scotland to fight our corner? There’s a great story to tell, and no better time to tell it.