SCOTLAND would find it politically impossible to keep Trident on the Clyde for much more than a decade after independence, a defence expert said yesterday.
Even the threat of exclusion from Nato would be unlikely to force the SNP to embrace Trident if it wins a Yes vote next year, argued John MacDonald.
The academic, who is director of a new foreign policy think tank the Scottish Global Forum, warned against a growing assumption in UK defence circles that Scotland would trade away or weaken its anti-nuclear stance in return for concessions in post-referendum talks.
But, like most experts, he believes SNP negotiators would be flexible on their pledge to ensure the removal of Trident as soon as it is safe to do so.
MacDonald said: "My sense is that the Scottish Government will agree to a Trident drawdown period - perhaps 10 to 12 years - when warheads can stay at Coulport and give the UK Government a sensible amount of time to make provision to build another replacement. Responsible politics has to prevail."
MacDonald was speaking at a conference at Glasgow University on the defence and security implications of Scottish independence.
MacDonald believes that Nato's commitment to democracy - and its membership by a number of non-nuclear states - would make it hard for the alliance to play hardball.
He said: "Will Nato actually say 'No' to Scotland if it holds firm on its Trident eviction aspiration? If Nato were indeed to hold firm and say No to Scotland which demanded to evict the UK deterrent, would the Scottish Government be that bothered? I am not convinced it would be."
The SNP, he said, had "synonimised a Yes vote and getting rid of nuclear weapons".
Going back on such a promise would be very politically risky - not least, MacDonald stressed, if the SNP get their way and enshrine a ban on nuclear weapons in the constitution of a new Scottish state.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article