A voting with two definitive finales: it is either independence time for Scotts or a chance for the United Kingdom to ratify a 307-year-old union that British Prime Minister David Cameron knows has been put “at stake.” «There’s no going back from this. This is a once-and-for-all decision. If Scotland votes Yes, the UK will split, and we will go our separate ways forever.»
Well, across the pond but on Argentina’s shores, the word referendum could bring other once-and-for-all questions to the spotlight along with not that much of a yes-or-no dénouement. Could the Scotland referendum – even regardless of its outcome -, give a push to decolonization claims the UK faces around the globe? Could Scots voting neck-and-neck – even regardless of its final outcome – mean Great Britain’s international weakening and, in that, pave the way to Malvinas dialogue?
First to first: “Inappropriate parallelisms”
Guillermo Carmona receives the Buenosairesherald.com in his office in Congress. Head of the Lower House Foreign Affairs Committee, he is about to embark in a marathon session with ruling Victory Front MP’s seeking to secure the passing of some key bills including the reform of Argentina’s anti-hoarding legislation that has prompted fierce resistance from the opposition and private-sector business leaders over the past weeks.
Yet, the Mendoza-born lawmaker makes time to accept the challenge to analyze Scotland’s historic referendum and its international implications, as he describes himself having “great sympathies for the pro-independence stance of the Scottish people” which, he adds, follows “historic reasons.” “Scotland, it happened also with Ireland, have been subjugated by what was an imperialist power. In that context, I think the stance of the Scottish people that stand for Yes involves the vindication of their own history and aspiration of becoming an independent state.”
Having said that, Mr. Carmona finds it necessary to say something else: “It is important to highlight the pre-existence of the (Scottish) people and of a national entity to avoid inappropriate parallelisms with, for instance, the case of Malvinas where what we have is an implanted population, a population that has been part of the British colonialist strategy over a part of the Argentine territory.”
“If you have an implanted population, to acknowledge the right to self-determination is to collide with the right to territorial integrity. In that context, Argentina has a clear position in favour of decolonization and of the recognition of self-determination for the people that can be considered native and not for implanted populations like in the case of Malvinas.”
“An empire in decline”
For Mr. Carmona, an independent Scotland should not lead to an isolation scenario for the country despite the “threats” and “strong pressures” by the government of Britain to prevent a break-up of the United Kingdom.
“We have seen David Cameron as Primer Minister and Ed Miliband as main leader of the Labour Party friendly promoting the vote for No but at the same time a campaign of fear, of financial debacle that the exit of Scotland could mean,” the Argentine MP says also questioning recent comments by ex former US Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan for “spreading fear” – this week, Mr. Greenspan questioned Yes campaigners, warning «there is no conceivable way» Scotland could share the pound.
“There has been pressure by companies threatening with leaving Scotland, important companies threatening jobs in a non-conducive way considering Scotland would continue to be part of the European Union. There was even a threat that, in the case the YES triumphed, the UK would block Scotland’s permanence in the European Union.”
But such “extorting practices,” the Lower House Foreign Affairs Committee considers, have had a “counter-effect,” reaffirming instead a “nationalist spirit” in Scotland.
“What can be seen is an in-decline empire. What was being left of UK’s imperialist position is in a profound crisis, they can not even maintain the unity they built centuries ago,” Carmona states.
“I think that this, in our case, for Argentina, connects the situation of decline of the empire with the anachronism of the British colonial ambition in Malvinas, which should logically, at some time, take the UK to accept Argentina’s dialogue and negotiation stance in the sovereignty dispute.”
Scotland, Malvinas and a “proper scenario”
Guillermo Carmona will be joining President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner next week in New York where the head of state will be addressing the United Nations General Assembly, likely ratifying Argentina’s demands for negotiations with London over the Malvinas Islands sovereignty dispute.
The Buenosairesherald.com asks Mr. Carmona why he thinks the UK categorically denies dialogue with Argentina. Mr. Carmona has three aces up the sleeve.
“Malvinas implies keeping the strategic position of the UK and the NATO in an area of important projections for the world’s economy and trade, it has a projection on the Antarctica and has strategic natural resources, such as hydrocarbons and mining resources,” he explains and moves to introduce reason N° 2.
“In second place, I have the perception that the British government uses the situation in Malvinas as distraction for its own internal problems. We have seen how in the worst times of the British economy of the past decades, the UK intensified the tone of confrontation against Argentina, which shows re-editing what Margaret Thatcher had already done during the Malvinas War.”
“In third place,” he continues saying, “there is the lobby factor which is very important.” “Pressure not only of the Islands’ population but of the economic players of the Islands, specially the Falklands Islands Company, which has gained a pressure capacity over the British government, an increasing pressure capacity also over the British parliament.”
“In that context, I think a weakening of UK’s international position could probably lead to a proper scenario for the dialogue we are being categorically denied to,” the Victory Front lawmaker considers.
“I think the result of the Scottish referendum should be analyzed within that framework. To which point the UK ends up damaged in its ambition to maintain its imperialist sheens. And to which point could this, in the future, create a different scenario. All speculations, because that will depend on Scots’ will.”
Source: Buenos Aires Herald
Felipe 
Dana 
ALEJ