Numbers Speak 2

The Internal Ratio

When events occur as they did in Westminster last week (I write on 27th February 2024) with a successful manipulation of the Parliamentary system or, at least, of precedent, then inevitably an eyebrow or two will be raised, specifically an independence, a Scottish independence eyebrow. Mine, as a long-time advocate certainly arched.

There seems to me to little doubt that much of the reaction, both mine and SNP, has been the result of frustration through lack of progress. itself through lack of impact both North of the Border and in the wider UK. And it has set me thinking mainly about how to proceed and about comparison. There have been three successful European independences since the end of the age of imperialism, i.e. in the last one hundred and twenty years or so. The most recent has been the separation on the last day of 1992 of what is now Slovakia from the Czechia Republic or Czechia. The one furthest away in time at least was one that is often forgotten, that in 1905 of Norway from Sweden. And the third, also in Scandinavia, was Finland from Russia in 1917 or 1919, depending on when it is recognised as a done-deal.

The first two are notable for one thing, their lack of violence, indeed the former, so soft was it, is called The Velvet Divorce. But apart from the lack of physical conflict I make one more observation about each and it is the equality, the numerical equality, the Speaking Numbers part of this piece, with which the parties entered and exited the process. In the case of the Norway-Sweden the former had at the time a population of 2.39 million against the latter's 5.22 million or a ratio of more or less 1:2. And in Central Europe ninety years later the equivalent figures were 5.45 and 10.51 million or again 1:2.  

Now any knowledge of Finland and Russia would immediately preclude any similar ratio. Today the the figures are 5.54 million for the former and 143.4 million for the later, or almost 25:1 and in 1920 it is estimated to be almost twice that. The Finns should not have stood a chance but prevail they did because of the special circumstances of the Russian Revolution and the loss of central control from St. Petersburg/Moscow until it was too late. Indeed, given the involvement of Russia there is perhaps a more contemporary comparison that can be invoked. The Ukraine, in what is a war to keep the independence gained at the time of another round of Russian, i.e. Soviet internal instability has a population of 43.79 million and Russia currently 143.4 million. That is roughly 1:3 and, whilst Kiev has done well in resisting Moscow's advances, it has done it not without loss of territory, with very considerable external support and still with ongoing noticeable fragility to the point that without that support failure is on the cards. Moreover, there is perhaps the suggestion that with an internal ratio of 1:2 independence is not quite a formality then negotiable and at more than that then not so.   

And there is perhaps some further evidence. The most recent attempt in Europe at gaining independence was Catalonia, population 7.57 million, and we all know how that ended,  With an example repressed with some violence, physical and legal, by a state, Spain, with its 47 million, or 1:6, backed up the European Union or an overwhelming 1:58. So where does that leave Scotland? With an examplar for one. That is the Ireland that was.          

In 1850 the island of Ireland was 6.55 million souls. England had 17.9 million or 1:3, that ratio once more. For Hibernia read Norway and Slovakia but with a twist. When the round of negotiation that would end in 1920 in the Free State and full independence in 1948 began the numbers added up but it soon would not. An Gorta Mor, the Great Famine, its deaths and the mass emigration saw to that. By 1900 the number of Irish had fallen to 4.4 million to England's 30.5 million, 1:7, and Scotland's 4.44 million, up from 2.89 million just fifty years earlier, to much the same. By 1920 the Ireland: England ratio had deteriorated further to almost 1:8 but in the meantime Ireland or at least Dublin's Ireland had risen up. There were decisions to be made, they were and contrary to precedent Britain decided that Spanish-style repression would not be the path. The short-term result was for both parties choices, for Britain decline and conflict in the part of the Emerald Isle retained, and for the rest, perhaps soon for all, prosperity. Eire currently has a Gross Domestic Product per head that is second or third of forth in World and more than twice that of the UK depending on source.

So where does this leave Scotland? Our current internal ratio is 1:10. In 1920 it was 1:8, in 1900 1:7, the average before that also. We are not Slovakia or Norway. We were Ireland but no longer. We are not even Catalonia. We are in trouble because our numerical leverage is decreasing. The Irish solution when faced with much the same was civil disorder to the point of bloody insurrection and disengagement. For us the former if taken to the the max would be problematic,, do we want our own Troubles, which leaves two possibilities, do nothing or the latter and it, I maintain is quite possible. We even have the example, that of Sinn Fein.

which does not attend Westminster on principle and because it would have little voice anyway but does use the Westminster institutions for the betterment of its constituents. Look on it as the political equivalent of gardening leave used to spend more time with and on the house and family of six with the result that the garden looks generally better, the red roses are pink just now, the painting gets done and not only the six are happier but show every sign of becoming twenty-six before too long. I know the SNP has even today said that "it will never leave the people of Scotland unrepresented at Westminster" but facts, as this last week has proved, are facts. It has already happened.     

Oh, and in case criticism comes in the form that all the above is too Euro-centric, ignoring the fact that that both Scots and English have been Europeans for just a little while, that wee while for the former about three thousand years, there is perhaps an accessible counter. In Africa in 2005 South Sudan finally successfully disengaged from Sudan itself. It was preceded by a 10-year war. South Sudan has a population of 10.75 million, Sudan of 45.66 million or 4:1, too much for velvet, too little for successful repression. I rest my case.