US defence analyst asks questions of Scotland’s nuclear deterrant

Robert L Goldich served for more than 33 years as a defence analyst for the Congressional Research Service at the US Library of Congress.

Writing in US geopolitics magazine Foreign Policy, he said “some very important questions need to be asked about what the implications of Scottish independence would be for US national defence”.

He queried whether “a disintegrating United Kingdom” could be considered as reliable a partner as it has been for the last century.

He said: “What would it say to American policymakers if our closest ally, one with whom we have been linked in peace and war since we entered World War One in 1917, suddenly broke apart after over 300 years of political unity?

“What would it say about the internal cohesion of whatever rump UK remained after Scotland left?”

Mr Goldich highlighted the SNP’s aim to rid Scotland of nuclear weapons and said American policymakers may also raise questions about a “Scottish defence force”.

However, he suggested the defence force “might not work out too well” because many of the soldiers and “most of the officers” of Scottish regiments “aren’t Scottish”.

Mr Goldich raised questions over how much Scotland would co-operate with Nato; the armed forces, intelligence and anti-terrorism services of “a truncated United Kingdom”, as well as those in other western democracies including the United States.

He added: “Would it look more leniently on the presence of embassies and diplomatic representatives, and their activities, from anti-American and anti-western states such as North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela?”

As the SNP is “quite far to the left”, he said this “doesn’t augur well for a positive answer to any of these questions”.

He suggested Scotland might be “aggressively neutral” and avoid involvement in Euro-Atlantic collective security agreements.