WE have learned only belatedly that American and Russian nuclear submarines engaged in a game of tig around the Holy Loch. This raises the question: What other “near misses” have successive Westminster governments covered up? I suspect the answer is plenty. After all, they have yet to tell us the truth about Gordon of Khartoum!

If Putin is the power-grabbing gangster he is depicted as being, and Trump is the loose cannon the mainstream media would have us believe, surely it can be only a matter of time, before they start a game of nuclear ping pong, with Scotland in a position where it would not survive the first serve! The choice for the Scottish electorate is simple: 500 jobs or a nuclear fry-up.

Joseph G Miller Dunfermline The Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, holds the belief – still prevalent in London and the Home Counties – that Britain is capable of offending the leader of the free world, upon whom we rely to defend us when push comes to shove. He clearly doesn’t understand Britain’s true position in today’s world order, which is worrying.

Malcolm Parkin, Kinnesswood, Kinross

ONE of the most criticised of the EU’s policies has been the forlorn attempt to apply a common currency with a fixed exchange rate to very different economies across Europe. Most people, I think, now acknowledge that these tight central controls have prevented countries such as Greece from pursuing distinctive economic policies to encourage the growth they so desperately need.

Certainly this error has been regularly pointed out by those in Westminster who opposed British membership of the euro and the EU in general. It is odd, therefore, that these same people and their Scottish Unionist fellow travellers fail to recognise that Scotland suffers in the same way, trapped in a common currency, the pound sterling, with an inflexible exchange rate.

We need to create growth in our economy, and our own currency, with freedom to establish its own value in the global money market, should be an element in our future planning.

One parallel is Canada, which has no difficulty in maintaining a distinctive currency and a flexible exchange rate despite being closely intertwined economically with their larger neighbour. Incidentally, Canada also has a “frictionless” border with that neighbour, as Mrs May would put it. A good model perhaps for Scotland and England?

Peter Craigie, Edinburgh

A LONG-STANDING silence has surrounded the relentless progress of the infamous trade deal CETA, as it quietly creeps towards its implementation day on February 15. The reluctance of Scotland to face the problems raised by this unfair trade agreement has permitted Liam Fox to sneak this deal through with the minimum of scrutiny. (Fox under fire for ‘dodging scrutiny’ of Canada-EU trade agreement, The National, February 6).  Instead of the debate on the floor of Westminster which Liam Fox promised, a very low-key discussion took place in the back rooms of Parliament on Monday. Nevertheless, Barry Gardiner, the shadow secretary of state for international trade delivered a comprehensive speech on the dangers of CETA, but, worryingly, Peter Grant, the SNP MP for Glenrothes, was much more positive about this agreement.

With a little tweaking, he thought CETA could be advantageous to Scotland. It would be helpful if he would outline exactly how he would transform CETA so that it would not compromise the ability of an independent Scotland to govern in favour of its citizens as opposed to the demands of big business. 

Jean Kemp, Fife

THE point that some recent letter writers (including myself) have sought to make, is that far worse regimes than Donald Trump’s have not aroused the vitriolic frenzy that appears to have been excited against Trump.  I heard a discussion on Radio Scotland yesterday where the supposedly neutral interviewer constantly interrupted a guest who attempted to put Trump’s case into perspective... ie pointing out that he has not created any new Orders, he has only put into effect existing laws which have not been previously implemented. There have been attempts by a few people to protest against regimes such as that of Saudi Arabia with its regular beheadings as public entertainment and its placing of women under the total control of men to the extent of excluding them even from medical treatment without the permission of their male guardians. These regimes are not merely “unpleasant” as one of your correspondents put it. They are despicable.  I, for one, sought the support of all political parties in Scotland against the gender apartheid that exists in the Emirates but sadly, there was a deafening silence, both at Government level owing to commercial reasons and interestingly at a left-wing political level.

How much is the frenzy against Trump due to the fact that a white western man is the target? Is this – perish the thought – a form of inverted racism? 

Rosie Lucca, Dunfermline 

THE forecast by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that public services (including health and education) will be in for a prolonged squeeze shows that austerity has failed the general public (UK austerity ‘to stretch well into the 2020s, The National, February 8).

Austerity will now extend well into the next decade to achieve the previous target of a budget surplus. In addition there will need to be tax rises of some £34 billion.

The Tories’ White Paper on Brexit is not so much a plan as an empty wish list. Amid all the blather, the Government is basically saying the UK will leave the single market while seeking to maintain access to the single market.

As for the prospect of a “buccaneering Britain” rampaging merrily across the planet, Theresa May’s obsequious performance during her meeting with Donald Trump underscored the reality that the UK, in fact, overwhelmingly relies on securing increased US trade, along with Washington’s backing, so as to pressure the EU into making concessions.

In reality, there is no indication from Trump’s “America First” administration that the UK will get such a favourable deal, which can, in any event, only be negotiated and signed after leaving the EU.

Equally, there is no reason to believe that any European leader will be prepared to treat Britain leniently.

Alan Hinnrichs Dundee