An independent Scotland could provide ample funding for national defence without cuts to other budgets, according to an academic and former Army commander.

Scotland would have a similar defence budget to Denmark, which "appears to provide effective national defence" and allows the state to participate in "a variety of international operations", a report by Scottish Global Forum said.

A Scottish military would be more efficient than current UK Armed Forces, according to the Defending An Independent Scotland report by Dundee University politics lecturer Dr John MacDonald and retired Scottish Transport Regiment commander Lt Col Andrew Parrott.

"Scotland is more than capable of sustaining an ample military budget at no detriment to its broader economic performance," the report states.

"We can acknowledge that the £2.5 billion annual defence expenditure proposed by the current Scottish Government would align an independent Scotland's defence spending with that of Denmark, a state whose military appears to provide effective national defence but which also manages to participate meaningfully in a variety of international operations.

"In reflecting upon the potential of an independent Scotland to defend itself effectively on the projected budget designated by the Scottish Government, we might reasonably assume that if Denmark can sustain an appropriate, modern and highly regarded military force on such a budget then an independent Scotland could as well.

"We know also that it would be possible for an independent Scotland to run its military far more efficiently than the UK currently does. If Scotland were to vote for its independence, Scottish taxpayers could not be asked to contribute towards the £100 billion that it might take to sustain the UK nuclear deterrent over the next few decades.

"On the balance of available evidence, there thus seems to be no question that an independent Scotland would be able to pay for and sustain a meaningful defence posture of the kind envisaged by the present Scottish Government."

SNP defence spokesman Angus Robertson said: "We are a maritime nation without maritime patrol aircraft and not a single major conventional naval vessel based in Scotland. Our coastal defences are shamefully inadequate and, as the report says, the key priority is to 'defend the perimeter' which is not even on Westminster's agenda.

"Taxpayers in Scotland contribute billions of pounds to the MoD, which is not spent here, while at the same time we have suffered disproportionate job cuts. And of course, we have to endure the obscenity of weapons of mass destruction based just half an hour from our biggest centre of population, which cost an absolute fortune, whose role is to destroy cities in a Soviet Union which doesn't even exist any more and whose renewal is opposed by the trades unions, the churches, Scottish civic society and the majority of all Scotland's elected representatives; all ignored by Westminster.

"Service personnel numbers are at a record low and we have just endured a series of broken Whitehall promises on troops returning from Germany."

Blair Jenkins, chief executive of pro-independence campaign Yes Scotland, said: "Westminster isn't working for Scotland's defences. The politicians who tell us we aren't capable of running our own defence forces have wasted billions on botched procurement, closed major bases and cut many thousands of jobs.

"Scotland's taxpayers contribute £3.3 billion to pay for defence in the UK but the MoD spends only £2 billion in Scotland, meaning we have fewer defence-related jobs and we see less benefit for our economy.

"The current Scottish Government proposes a post-independence defence budget of £2.5 billion, a saving of £800 million that could be used to improve other public services and create new economic opportunities. The scrapping of Trident would save (Scotland) £250 million a year.

"One of the big gains of independence is that we would be less likely to send our young men and women into battle. There would be no repeat of the Iraq war - the majority of Scottish MPs voted against participation in that conflict."

Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said: "This report is hugely embarrassing for the SNP even though they have welcomed it.

"The report recommends scrapping any idea about building type-26 frigates on the Clyde for Scottish use, just four days after Nicola Sturgeon said that would be her plan.

"Last week the mantra was 'buy British'. All the way through this report it recommends 'buy anything but British'.

"Crucially, it says it will take a dangerous decade for the defence force to get up to strength and recommends using the staffing shortfall to pay for the set-up costs. Putting our security at risk for 10 years is a gamble in a dangerous world.

"The plan will make us dependent on the goodwill of other countries. That is a risk.

"The report also contradicts the SNP with calls for a military with 5,000 more reserve personnel than proposed by the SNP. It says the SNP plan for a single navy base has 'too high an element of risk'."

Conservative leader Ruth Davidson said: "I find it surprising the SNP would welcome a report showing that an independent Scotland's army would be about three-quarters of the size of Ireland's.

"Currently, Scottish soldiers are part of the most professional fighting force in the world and UK troops take part in missions across the globe under the banner of Nato and the UN.

"We are stronger at home and contribute more abroad from being part of the UK and there is nothing in this report which suggests Scotland's defence would be anything other than weakened if Britain was broken up."