Shortly after the issue was decided, British Prime Minister David Cameron told his countrymen in a televised address that the question of Scotland’s independence had been “settled for a generation”. There will be, he stressed, “no re-runs”. That may be somewhat premature, given the powerful emotions unleashed by the issue and the extraordinary debate over the question of nationalism and identity witnessed in the run-up to the referendum. However, the fact remains that Scottish voters have convincingly voted against independence from Britain. Given the immense voter turnout — nearly 85 per cent — the referendum was indicative of the closeness with which the ordinary people of Scotland identified with the issue. For a small country — an independent Scotland’s population would have been about the size of Singapore’s — 1.6 million votes for independence is substantial and indicative of the deep divide within Scottish society. The vote may have been won by the pro-unity faction, but it would be disingenuous to claim that this has settled the issue once and for all.

At a time when issues of national and ethnic identity, and the desire for self-determination have resulted in bloody conflict around the world, Scotland’s remarkably civilised debate, and the peaceful and democratic vote on such an emotive issue, hold many lessons for the rest of the world. For the people caught in the middle of the war in Ukraine or Syria and Iraq or South Sudan, Scotland has shown that there is another way to address the question. For democratic societies everywhere, the Scottish referendum also underscores the strength of the democratic process. The result shows that given adequate information, sufficient mobilisation and the freedom to exercise their choice without fear, people will end up making rational and pragmatic choices. The result will also be cheered by stock and currency markets, as well as UK industry, which had been fearful of a ‘Yes’ vote.

There is a larger lesson here for India as well. Why, after all, did independence become an issue after three centuries of union? More than the immediate pushes and pulls — of anger against being ruled by a government they largely didn’t vote for or a revolt against imposed austerity or a dismantling of their welfare state — the reason the independence issue caught the imagination of so many Scots is that it offered the possibility of an alternative future, one which they could have a bigger hand in determining. This is not so different from the reasons which have propelled the demand for independent statehood in Telangana or Gorkhaland. The very least Scotland’s vote should do is set us thinking about an alternative way to handle such issues.

comment COMMENT NOW