An independent Scotland would not inherit the UK’s existing international treaties but would inherit a share of the UK national debt, according to the Scottish Secretary.
Michael Moore has set out the UK Government’s understanding of new legal analysis on the implications of Scottish independence by two eminent international lawyers.
James Crawford, Whewell Professor of International Law at the University of Cambridge, and Alan Boyle, Professor of Public International Law at the University of Edinburgh, believe the most likely outcome of Scottish independence would be the continuation of the UK as the existing state under international law and the creation of a new state of Scotland.
However, they have not ruled out the creation of two completely new states or the resurrection of the Scottish state that existed prior to 1707, although both outcomes are deemed unlikely.
The Scottish Government’s claim that Scotland would remain a member of existing international organisations such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and, crucially, the European Union “can be dismissed as, at best, inconclusive”, according to the expert analysis.
It states: “Assuming that Scotland would be recognised as a new state, albeit a successor state to the UK, it is difficult to see how Scotland could evade the accession process for new states in the EU treaties.”
It adds: “Since the rUK (remainder of the UK) would be the same state as the UK, its EU membership would continue.”
While the experts’ paper does not directly address the division of assets and liabilities, a 62-page report by the UK Government accompanying the analysis states that the division of liabilities and assets would have to be negotiated.
It states: “There would be an expectation that an independent Scottish state would take on an equitable share of the UK’s national debt.
“How an ‘equitable share’ would be calculated is open to question and would have to be negotiated.”