I WRITE in support of proposal to wear a white rose on March 30 made by Ian Richmond of the Dumfries and Galloway Pensioners for independence (All Under One Banner to support White Rose Day, The National, March 9) but I look at his suggestion from a rather different and, if I may suggest, deeper perspective.
Scotland is unique as being the only country in the world that has nuclear weapons imposed on it against the will of its parliament and people by another government. This grotesque democratic deficit places a moral responsibility on us to take a leading role in the international campaign to rid the world of all nuclear weapons, as expressed by the decision of 122 states to support a treaty banning all such weapons taken last July at the UN.
READ MORE: All Under One Banner to support White Rose Day
The Doomsday Clock is closer to midnight now than it has ever been at any time in the past, including even the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis, which has been described as “the most dangerous moment in history”. If you’re not terrified, you’re not paying attention.
But back in Britland it’s business as usual. “Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition and Onwards Christian soldiers” and nothing to worry about. We preach multilateral disarmament, but ignore real international disarmament proposals. It was in recognition of this unacknowledged fear that impelled some Trident Ploughshares activists (the “Peaton Pirates”) to write to the Consuls of the nuclear-armed permanent members of the Security Council of the United Nations (the P5) in Edinburgh, asking them to please talk with us, and inviting them to a showing of the BBC production the War Game (which was banned for 20 years).
Viceroy Mundell (aka Scottish Office), the French, American, and the Chinese consuls did not reply. When we went to their embassies to talk with them anyway, it was to be confronted with a line of amiable but determined polis. It was “Nae Passaran”. This was on February 18. Meanwhile the Russian Consul had replied and kindly invited us to meet and talk with him, which is why Janet Fenton of ICAN, and I found ourselves sitting at a well-spread table talking with Andrei Anatolevich Pritsepev on February 21.
Our conversation was open, honest, and prolonged (more than an hour), although it was disconcerting to talk with a portrait of Vladimir Putin looming behind the Consul’s earnest and amiable face. Still, the fact that Donald Trump is an ignorant buffoon does not preclude dialogue with good Americans, so why should we treat honourable Russians any differently?
Anti-Russian attitudes have a long tradition in British politics, going back to a popular music hall song supporting the sending of a British fleet to fight Russia in 1878. The chorus ran: “We don’t want to fight, yet by Jingo! if we do, We’ve got the ships, we’ve got the men, and got the money too.” This is the origin of the word “jingoism”.
Scotland has a different relationship with Russia. From the Middle Ages to the twentieth century a multitude of Scots flocked to that immense country. One need only recall the names of Peter the Great’s principal advisor, General Patrick Gordon of Auchleucheries, or Samuel Greig of Inverkeithing, full admiral, reformer of Russia’s Baltic Fleet (father of the Modern Russian Navy, Prince Mikhail Barclay de Tolly, commander-in-chief in the Napoleonic wars, etc.
An independent Scotland can surely recreate something of this positive and fruitful relationship with Russia, a magnificent country which shares our common European home. So, I will wear my white rose with pride on March 30 – and redouble my efforts to build a nuclear free, independent Scotland.
Brian Quail
Glasgow
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel