MSPs have clashed over how an independent Scotland could become an independent European Union (EU) state.
The fresh division came during a debate on the findings of a Holyrood committee which looked into the potential route to membership after a Yes vote in September.
The SNP maintains that Scotland can make the transition in the 18 months between the vote and formal separation from the UK.
But opposition parties say negotiations may take far longer and possibly lead to Scotland being outside the EU.
There is no precedent for part of an EU country becoming a member in its own right and no country has been forced out.
But Labour and Conservative members drew attention to claims that Scotland would have to follow a long route like any new applicant.
Labour MSP Alex Rowley said the evidence showed that nothing was certain.
"The timescale for those negotiations as set out by the Scottish Government remains highly optimistic at best," he said.
"It is also clear there would need to be amendments to all relevant treaties of the European Union, that these would need to be agreed unanimously by all 28 members states."
Conservative MSP Jamie McGrigor said: "It is clear there is no automatic right that an independent Scotland would be admitted to the EU."
External Affairs Secretary Fiona Hyslop said: "Independence will give Scotland a seat and a voice at the top table in Europe for the first time ever, giving us a direct say in protecting vital national interests like fishing and farming.
"Without a direct voice in these areas, we are forced to accept whatever deal is negotiated for us by the UK.
"Only independence will safeguard Scotland's place in the European Union, given the very real threat of UK withdrawal via the Prime Minister's proposed in-out referendum."
The debate was held days after the publication of a report on the EU by Holyrood's European and External Affairs Committee.
It sparked concerns that the SNP had "doctored" the final draft to reflect more pro-independence views.
The claim followed separate complaints from opposition members that the party of government is abusing its majority to stifle criticism.
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