On November 20, Ethiopia’s Sidama people realised a dream decades old. Queuing from dawn until dusk to cast their ballots, more than two million voted in a watershed referendum on secession. Almost all backed a bid to break away. In a new, semi-autonomous state, the Sidama people will shape their own future unfettered by far-flung lawmakers – but some worry it could be the start of a frenzied unravelling of Ethiopia’s fragile federal system.

Ethiopians agitating to exercise their rights were once locked up or shot, such was their nation’s repressive set-up. But things have changed. Elected last year, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has worked tirelessly to kick-start a democratic revolution. His government has released thousands of political prisoners, repatriated exiled opponents, and made a point of approving the Sidama’s referendum request.

Their right to a vote on self-determination is enshrined in the country’s constitution. Any of Ethiopia’s over 80 ethnic groups can seek autonomy, according to the text – but fearing wider fragmentation, past rulers have been quick to quash independence impulses.          

Small wonder the shot at secession wasn’t to be passed up by the Sidama, Ethiopia’s fifth-biggest ethnic community. An astounding 99.8% of the electorate turned out, with all bar 1.5% backing a break-away. Their new state will be carved from the Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ Region (SNNPR), and will command its own tax regime, education system, and security force.       

Reaching this point has not been easy – even with Abiy in office. For months his government dithered on the question of a referendum, postponing a vote scheduled for July. The consequences were catastrophic. Enraged at what they saw as a federal snub, the public rose in revolt. As civil unrest spread across the SNNPR, government troops clashed with protesters, and fifty lives were lost.  

The bloodshed’s shadow hung over the referendum campaign. Public rallies were banned and soldiers prowled the streets; but by-and-large, the vote was a peaceful affair. It was an expression of the nation’s “democratisation path,” the prime minister said afterwards, one that bodes well for his planned general election next year. 

Abiy hopes that vote will galvanise a sense of national unity, as he strives to steer the country away from its ‘ethno-federal’ roots. He plans to replace Ethiopia’s long-running party of government, the EPRDF, with the Prosperity Party, a new national coalition. This group will engender a different type of politics, he hopes – one that focuses more on policy than ethnicity. 

But Abiy’s dreams of reform are likely hindered by the Sidama vote. Following their neighbour’s lead, at least ten other groups in Ethiopia’s south are now demanding a ballot, experts believe. “[The] key question now is how Wolayta, Hadiya, Gurage, Keffa and other zones seeking statehood referendums will react,” said William Davison of the International Crisis Group, a think-tank.               

Their cause is being championed by former-exile Jawar Mohammed, an influential activist and vocal critic of the prime minister. In a post to his 1.75m Facebook followers, Jawar – who intends to stand in the forthcoming election – described the Sidama result as “one in the bag for federalists”, urging like-minded groups to “stand for self-determination”.

It is a message that resonates with many. But a speedy disintegration of the SNNPR would be dangerous, especially at a time of heightened ethnic unrest. Intercommunal conflict forced more than two million Ethiopians from their homes last year, according to the United Nations – and in recent weeks, there has been a marked upsurge in violence. 

On October 23, supporters of Jarwar took to the streets, blocking roads and burning copies of Abiy’s new book on the merits of national unity. Events then took a bloody turn, as the protesters – mostly young men of Oromo heritage – clashed with groups of Amhara, Ethiopia’s second-largest ethnicity.  

Skirmishes have continued sporadically ever since, claiming as many as 80 lives. Many of the victims were stoned to death. Others were killed in attacks on mosques and churches, hinting at a worrying religious development. 

This violence must be stamped out, but doing so won’t be easy. Abiy has wedded himself to a democratic path, but in doing so he risks inciting long-repressed ethnic tensions. Emancipated communities will coexist more peacefully, he hopes, but the opposite could also be true: emboldened racial groups at loggerheads over their new-found sovereignty. Either way, the road to further referendums now lies open. For better or worse, their results will reshape Ethiopia.

L'articolo Ethopia’s Sidama People Vote For Independence – Could More Regions Follow? proviene da InsideOver.

Catalan president, Quim Torra, has insisted on a new independence vote for Catalonia, after he called for an end to the violent protests, which brought Barcelona to its knees over the past few days.

Quim Torra calls new vote

“This has to stop right now,” Torra said in a televised address on Wednesday. “There is no reason or justification for burning cars, nor any other vandalism. Protest should be peaceful.

“We cannot allow such groups who infiltrate and provoke to harm the image of a movement which counts millions of Catalans.”

Torra told the regional parliament on Thursday that he wanted an official referendum for a “Catalan republic” by next year. If it is approved, it means that Catalonia could be independent from Spain by the end of 2021.

He said that there was a “false narrative” about the Catalan separatist movement being violent. He added with defiance, “If we have been sentenced to 100 years in prison for putting out the ballot boxes, the response is clear: we’ll have to put them out again for self-determination.”

Why did the riots begin?

The riots were sparked in Barcelona on Monday after the Spanish Supreme Court sentenced nine independence movement leaders to prison for up to 13 years. They were imprisoned for their parts in the failed independence bid that took place in 2017. The leaders first held an illegal referendum then proclaimed a declaration of independence, causing Madrid to suspend Catalonia’s autonomy and sack its government.

Soon after the verdict was revealed, around 10,000 protesters flocked Barcelona’s El Prat airport, disrupting transportation services and causing the cancellation for over 100 flights. The protests also quickly spread to other regions of Catalonia like Tarragona and Lleida.

“As far as what the Supreme Court has done with the sentencing, 9 to 13 years is way too much. But at the same time, they did something illegal so they should be charged. But I don’t think it is fair to get such a long sentence,” Julio Garcia, a Catalan local told InsideOver.

As the violence escalated, cars were set on fire, and police officers were attacked with stones, acid, fireworks, and other objects. Hundreds gathered in the mobs, with one group of masked protesters screaming in front of a burning barricade, “This isn’t violence, it’s self-defence!”

Jose Ramon Garcia, an elderly local who had gone out for a quiet drink and found himself engulfed in the mobs told AFP, “I’m just a bag of nerves.”

“I was just sitting calmly in the bar and suddenly they appeared from all directions,” he said. “And these are ‘peaceful’ demonstrators?”

An 18-year-old student, Bernat Busquet, draped in an independence flag explained that many had simply lost the will to protest peacefully.

“It’s a reaction to what the police did on October 1 to shut down the referendum and against what the justice system did on Monday in condemning the separatist [leaders],” he told AFP.

According to the authorities, eighty people – including 46 police officers – have been injured overnight and 33 people arrested.

Fourth general election

Spain is set to have its fourth general election on November 10 in just four years because Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has been unable to maintain a stable government. At a Spanish delegation this week, many Catalans from various backgrounds described Sánchez’s government as “fascist” and “a dictatorship”. Sanchez has remained steadfast, stating that the Spanish government would not bulk under the pressure of the ensuing protests.

Jane Muir, a British ex-pat who has lived in Barcelona for twenty years told InsideOver, “I respect the desire of the Catalan people to seek independence to reclaim their culture after so many years of being oppressed by dictatorship. However, the ways in which I have experienced and witnessed the drive to push for independence is neither effective nor right. Protesting and rioting does nothing but cripple the city and creates tension and fear. I think there could be a right way to earn independence but until that way is found, all that will come from a new vote is more chaos and political backlash.”

L'articolo Will Catalonia Finally Gain Its Independence By 2021? proviene da InsideOver.

Two years ago this week, Catalonia witnessed its greatest political turmoil since the death of Franco. An illegal referendum, organized by pro-independence politicians, resulted in a spate of clashes between voters and the Spanish Civil Guard, whose bloody baton charges went viral around the world. Within weeks, regional leader Carles Puigdemont had fled into exile, his declaration of independence in tatters. Twelve other separatists were in jail and the Catalan Parliament had been suspended.

It would be wrong to say this week’s anniversary opened fresh wounds. In truth, they never really healed. The two sides continue to bicker ceaselessly, and last week’s discovery of an alleged terror cell, run by hardline separatists, has poured further fuel on the fire.

As Spain’s Supreme Court prepares to sentence the jailed independence figures, fears of fresh violence are growing. While Catalan politicians call on their supporters to channel the spirit of the 2017 referendum and create a “democratic explosion,” the Spanish government is threatening to invoke article 155 again. And millions of ordinary people risk being caught in the middle.

Changing narrative

It’s easy to forget that, until recently, the separatist movement enjoyed only modest support. In the mid-2000s only 15% of Catalans identified as independentistas, and the region’s primary grievance was financial rather than political. Ordinary Catalans complained that they were being exploited by Madrid, forced to prop up Spain’s poorer regions and fund ludicrous projects such as the ‘ghost airports’ which have sprung up around the country. They rallied against the fact that the Basque Country had its fiscal privileges and the wealthiest of all Spain’s autonomous regions did not.

But the needle shifted dramatically around the turn of the decade, driven by the global economic crisis and the failure of Mariano Rajoy’s hapless government to arrest it. Instead of trying to console its Mediterranean bread-winner, the Spanish establishment went on the offensive. In 2010, an infamous Supreme Court verdict struck down several clauses in Catalonia’s regional statute, including the “preferential” treatment of the Catalan language in regional administrations and communications networks.

Over the next seven years the independence movement became a self-propelled missile, fuelled by its own failures. The Spanish government’s refusal to countenance any sort of climbdown causes a mutation of the narrative; instead of muttering about exploitation, ordinary people now talked of subjugation, and reasoned that they had no choice but to break away. Separatist leaders seized on the sentiment to hold illegal referendums in 2009 and 2014.

Finally came that third vote in 2017, the one that finally pushed the Spanish government too far. By imposing Article 155 and jailing the leaders of the ‘Process’, the Madrileño ministers might have thought they had stemmed the separatist tide. But, if you talk to ordinary Catalans, it’s clear the differences are as entrenched as ever.

Independence supporters still bristle at the brutality meted out to those who voted on October 1, and the fact that their figureheads have spent more than two years in jail without sentencing — while the police officers who launched that all-too-literal crackdown have never been sanctioned. They claim they have a right to decide their own future and insist that the Spanish government is repressing their language and culture.

The unionists say that this repression is a myth, pointing out that Catalan is the compulsory first language of schools and local government (despite that inflammatory ruling in 2010). According to them, it’s the separatists who have used aggression and intimidation on several occasions, most recently towards a female journalist during pro-independence demonstrations this week. And they point to recent polling figures which show that well under half the Catalan population supports independence (the referendum of 2017 may have returned a 90% majority in favour of independence, but this only equated to around 40% of the total voter base).

Tipping point

Matters came to a head last week last Monday (September 23) with the discovery of an alleged terrorist plot fomented by members of the ‘Republican Defense Committees’ (CDR), a hardline separatist group which has staged direct action in the past. Members of Spain’s Civil Guard reported the discovery of explosive materials as well as plans for a ‘D-Day’, which would have supposedly coincided with the sentencing of the jailed separatist leaders this month, and witnessed assaults on the regional parliament and other key targets. Nine people were arrested, although they insist they were simply creating fireworks for a local festival.

According to some reports, the plot goes right to the top of the Catalan political establishment. Spain’s EFE news agency claims that one of those arrested had met regional President Quim Torra before the police raid, and various outlets suggest Torra knew about the plans. Whatever the truth of these allegations, Torra and other secessionist politicians have fuelled the speculation by refusing to condemn the CDR. Instead, they have accused the police of mounting a “stitch-up” designed to “criminalize a peaceful movement”, and voted to expel the Civil Guard from Catalonia.

This stance is stoically supported by Omnium, the pro-Catalan cultural association whose president Jordi Cuixart was among those arrested in October 2017. Speaking to InsideOver, an Omnium spokesman said that the Spanish government has been condemned for the use of torture by the European Court of Human Rights on various occasions (the condemnations primarily relate to the treatment of terror suspects) and said that politicians in Madrid are simply trying to thwart democracy in Catalonia.

“It would be irresponsible [for the separatist politicians] to publicly condemn people for violence which hasn’t occurred or for events that haven’t been proved,” the spokesperson said. “The whole world knows that ours is a peaceful movement. Our pathway has always been one of non-violent action. 

“We’ve been organizing demonstrations of more than a million people for 10 years and there’ve never been altercations. The only violence we’ve seen up until now, the only one the world has seen, is the violence committed by the national police forces to obstruct the referendum of October 1 2017.

“It’s clear that the presumption of innocence is essential under the rule of law, especially where judicial investigations are secret. This is something that hasn’t happened. Quite the opposite, in fact: we’ve seen how the Spanish press published parts of the investigation and how information was filtered out to criminalize the independence movement.”

“Don’t play with fire”

Unionists disagree, however. In the Catalan Parliament, the centre-right Citizens Party has accused the separatists of supporting terrorism, comments which resulted in the expulsion of the group’s leader. Undeterred, Citizens has since tabled a motion of no-confidence against Torra and accused him of collaborating with the CDR. Meanwhile, national Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has warned secessionist politicians not to “play with fire” and warned that he is prepared to suspend the Parliament again.

One of the loudest loyalist voices is provided by the Catalan Civil Society, which purports to build bridges between Madrid and Barcelona. Its spokesman told InsideOver: “We see it as irresponsible that a person in charge of the Parliament says this when he has previously encouraged the CDR to push forward. 

“Torra has said before that, in his circle, there are a lot of ‘CDRs’. The guy is trapped between emotional impulses and the reasoned approach that he’s obliged to apply as president of all Catalans, not just one part. It’s a great responsibility.

“Anything can happen when a governor, instead of calming down a situation and appealing for people to come together, appeals to and feeds these groups. Maybe it’s for political support, maybe for financial support — because this has happened in Catalonia for years — but this guy is feeding the spiral. I don’t want to contribute to [the m unrest] but he’s contributing to a spiral that won’t end well.”

Increasing fears

The fallout continues. Spanish newspapers continue to release details of the ongoing investigation, including allegations that the CDR cell planned to blow up motorway bridges and collapse power lines. The reports are only fuelling fears of fresh violence when the 12 jailed separatists learn their fate, sometime in the middle of this month.

For the separatists, these are political prisoners who were jailed for expressing their democratic right and should never have served a single day. For the loyalists, they’re a dirty dozen, who mounted a coup d’etat and should be punished accordingly. Whatever verdict the judges in Madrid pass down, one side is going to be outraged.

Catalonia’s police forces declined to comment when asked by Il Giornale about their preparations for sentencing day. But Spain’s interior ministry has already ordered around 500 officers to be sent to Catalonia, and the number could rise to 2,000. The Mossos d’Esquadra police force has released a statement saying it is prepared to dispatch “the maximum number of resources” to deal with any disturbance. Undeterred, the CDR has promised a string of fresh actions to sow “chaos” across the region.

Will things turn violent? Perhaps unsurprisingly, the two sides view the prospect of violence very differently.

Omnium tells us “there will be no violent uprising. We will never justify violence, we come from a pacifist tradition. We think that non-violent civil disobedience is the way forward and we’re certain of the passivity of the Catalan people, as they have demonstrated over many years.

“Not even when innocent and unarmed people were being beaten at the voting centres during the referendum did the society behave violently.”

However the Catalan Civil Society suggests “there’s worry. There will be an escalation of tension, because there are people who think this [radical] stuff. People who have been deceived by propaganda. If they deceive you and you get frustrated, the outrage, a hyper-exaggerated reaction, will occur.

“We might see some last, desperate attempt… someone might do what we’ve seen with these guys who were preparing explosives and wanted to take down power and telephone lines to generate chaos. They can’t go forward any other way and some desperate people who’ll try anything.”

The society says that, if things do get out of hand, the Spanish government should “rise to the challenge and do what’s necessary,” even taking control of the Catalan Parliament again if necessary. In reality, however, Sánchez and his government are facing a horrible dilemma. Like those Supreme Court judges, they know that they will stoke the fire with whatever decision they make — and that this issue isn’t going away.

Meanwhile, the people of Catalonia wait. Most of them probably thought that October 1, 2017, represented a never-again moment, a cue for dialogue to finally take over. But few would now bet against one of the world’s sunniest regions plunging into darkness again.

L'articolo Catalonia At Crisis Point: Region Poised For Violence As Key Trial Looms proviene da InsideOver.

Last August marked 20 years since the momentous referendum vote which resulted in East Timor’s independence from Indonesia. But how did we get here, two decades later?

To begin with,  Portugal used to trade with Timor hundreds of years ago and during the middle of the 16th century, they colonised the nation. The Fretilin (Revolutionary Front for Independent East Timor) – a major left-wing party in East Timor –  soon gained territory of the nation during a brief civil war and in 1975 declared East Timor Independent.

Only nine days later, an aggressive Indonesia invaded the colony, leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives as a result of the direct conflict.  The Fretilin Party fought with great resistance against the Indonesians as many opposed the takeover of control. East Timor suffered 24 years of disease, famine and terrible conflict at the hands of the Indonesian military and colonial rule.  The East Timorese were against Indonesian rule as Portugal’s colonial impact meant that most of the population were Catholics who spoke Tetun – their own language – and were therefore culturally dissimilar to the rest of Indonesia. A quarter of a million lives were lost as civilians fought Indonesia’s occupation and annexation.

After mass bloodshed, there was mounting pressure from international countries for the violence to end. At the beginning of the resistance, many took a blind eye to appease Indonesia and did not interfere. However, The Economist Reports that declassified documents from America reveal Australia and America’s western governments were, in fact, aware of Indonesia’s cruel aims and failed to act until the matters worsened.

Soon, a referendum was authorised. The UN-backed referendum saw the Southeast Asian nation granted independence but at a bloody cost. On the 30th August 1999, a whopping 78.5% of people voted in favour of independence from Indonesia. East Timor came back to its pre-annexation status of autonomy, but became a territory under UN supervision with no government.

However, following the referendum result, there was great bloodshed for three weeks. Anti Independence Timorese militia who were supported by the Indonesian military began to attack. The country’s infrastructure was destroyed and hundreds and thousands of civilians were forced out of their homes, whilst some fled to escape and became refugees. the fight for independence was a resilient one fought by the natives of East Timor. Following this horrendous timeline of events, the nation became devasted and exhausted at heart.

An Australian-led UN peacekeeping force was deployed to stop the violence, and in August 2001 East Timor held its first democratic elections to establish an autonomous government.

A year later in 2002, full sovereignty was established and, the former opposition leader of CNRT was elected President at the time. The country then unveiled a new national flag, with the yellow symbolising the people’s fight for independence, the red expressing the people’s suffering which was endured for such a long time, the black signifying colonial repression of the country whilst the star symbolised hope for the future. This flag gave the people something to believe in and allowed them to become part of a strong community who fought for their country.

Last month on the 30th, people came together in the country’s capital Dilli to celebrate the landmark ruling that led to the independence of East Timor. Celebrations are expected to last until the end of September for the people who paid a big price for freedom.

L'articolo A History of East Timor’s Independence, 20 Years On proviene da InsideOver.

West Papua is still recovering from the last wave of violence that hit the region between August and early September, leaving several dead, buildings burned, dozens of activists arrested and again showing the discontent of the local population with the Indonesian central government.

The largely Melanesian Christian population of West Papua (comprising the Indonesian administrative divisions of Papua and West Papua) differs greatly from the Muslim-majority Indonesians, yet they have been under the control of Indonesia since the 1960’s when, in 1962, the country signed a deal with The Netherlands – the New York Agreement – placing then West New Guinea, a Dutch colony, under UN Temporary Executive Authority until a referendum calling for West Papuans to vote for their independence (or to join Indonesia) could be organised.

The Act of Free Choice stated that all adult West Papuans had the right to vote and decide the destiny of their country, yet in 1967 Indonesia and the US signed a deal giving gold and copper mining company Freeport-McMoran a 30-year lease in the region. That deal sealed the fate of West Papuans who had been suffering from human rights violations since at least 1963, when it was annexed by Indonesia. Not that things could have been different, the New York Agreement was part of a US plan to steer Indonesia from the Soviet area of influence, so in a sense, the result was expected, even planned.

Australia, who had backed the West Papuan bid for independence soon changed its mind inside the Cold War logic of an external enemy to be defeated.

Two years later, in 1969, instead of all West Papuans, whose population at the time was estimated in around 800,000 people, a small number of men, just over a thousand tribal leaders, were handpicked to vote by the Indonesian military – voting unanimously in favour of a union with Indonesia.

The Act of No Choice, as it became known, is still contested by separatist leaders in the now Indonesian territory – even though the UN General Assembly through resolution 2504 (XXIV) recognised the result of the fraudulent referendum.

The recent wave of protests is yet another attempt from West Papuans to show their dissatisfaction with their situation. As well as the result of decades of human rights abuses that range from illegal arrests, extrajudicial killings and even lack of basic health care for children punctuated by internet blackouts and crackdown on freedom of speech.

West Papuan activists even consider the Indonesian repression of the region as genocide.

Protests for independence are commonplace in the region, yet this last wave of protests was different from previous ones as it drew the largest crowds ever seen to the streets, with public buildings being torched by angry protestors and, even more unusual, it also found support among Indonesians.

Not to mention that unlike previous protests often called by the many separatist groups in exile (that have also exerted control over local guerrilla groups), this particular wave seems to have erupted from within local West Papua civil society.

Journalist and activist Juke Carolina Rumuat explained at Global Voices Online that “[o]n 16 August 2019, around 15 soldiers reportedly barged into a student dormitory in Surabaya and accused Papuan students of disrespecting the Indonesian flag. The soldiers’ actions were reportedly triggered by a photo shared on WhatsApp by a youth civil organisation, of an Indonesian flag lying in a gutter ahead of the country’s independence celebrations on August 17. The soldiers allegedly hurled racist comments at the students, calling them ‘monkeys’. Around 42 students were taken to police headquarters the following day for questioning, but were released later in the afternoon.”

Papuans are frequently the targets of racism in Indonesia and the case has sparked outrage all over Indonesia, leading to a riot in Manokwari, the capital of West Papua province, spreading fast throughout the region – reaching even Indonesia’s capital, Jakarta, and other cities outside West Papua.

Along with racism, the action of Indonesian Islamist and nationalist groups against West Papuans with threats and intimidation has intensified, particularly following the unification of several separatist groups under one umbrella, the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP),  in 2014 – that has recently urged the United Nations to act and prevent a greater bloodshed. Leaders of several Pacific Islands also urged the UN to step in.

Also, the number of settlers in the region grew exponentially since the 1969 referendum, with local Melanesians making up roughly half of the region’s population, increasing tensions.

At the beginning of September, with the sending of thousands of police and military officers to the region who, among other measures, opened fire on demonstrators killing between 6 and 8 people, the situation began to calm down – or at least the dissenting voices began to be hunted down and silenced with also the help of an internet blackout.

The tense peace achieved by force in West Papua will hardly last long in a region already accustomed to suffering human rights abuses and who remain firm in its goal for independence.

L'articolo War and No Peace for West Papua Hit By Violent Protests proviene da InsideOver.

Although Labour and the Scottish National Party (SNP) are both interested in destroying the current Tory government and preventing a no-deal Brexit, it seems that Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell is not willing to do that at the expense of forming a ‘progressive alliance’ with Nicola Sturgeon. The Daily Express reports on Rebecca Long-Bailey’s recent Sky News interview that revealed her party believes a regime consisting of anti-no deal MPs would give the Prime Minister a ‘get out of jail free card.’ Instead, Labour is calling for a general election to ensure they win a majority.

This represents a substantial defeat for Scotland’s First Minister. The Scotsman states that Sturgeon believes Labour is a ‘stumbling block’ to forming a ‘progressive alliance’ to defeat the Conservatives. McDonnell dashed her hopes by describing the SNP as ‘Tories’, claiming that her party is not socialist enough for them to form an alliance with. Nonetheless, he now supports a second Scottish referendum. The First Minister has welcomed the Shadow Chancellor’s call to allow the Scottish Parliament, not Westminster, to decide whether to hold a second vote. But the nationalists’ interpretation of ‘freedom’ is inconsistent with the SNP’s founding vision of true Scottish independence.

Instead of campaigning to ensure Scotland becomes a sovereign nation, the SNP want to reduce this proud country to a satellite EU state. Rather than allow Westminster to directly rule them, they want to transfer that responsibility to Brussels. There is no guarantee an independent Scotland would be allowed to join the EU either. Spain oppose the SNP’s bid for EU membership because if they voted for it, it would send a message to Catalonia that they can liberate themselves from Madrid and rejoin the EU as a sovereign state.

In the 1970s, being an SNP member meant you believed in total independence. During the 1975 referendum on the UK’s Common Market membership, the nationalists campaigned against this country’s EEC status because they believed this body was eroding Britain’s sovereignty. When Sturgeon joined this party in the 1980s, opposition to EEC membership remained the SNP’s official policy on this matter. But now they have reversed their position.This is why Alex Neil deserves respect as one of the few nationalist MSPs who remained true to the principles espoused by his party since the 1975 referendum. He is right to highlight that leaving the UK to join the EU will not result in proper sovereignty.

The European Journal of Political Economy found that the driving force behind Vote Leave’s 2016 victory was that 90 per cent of over-65s voted in the referendum, and many of them remember life before Britain joined the EEC and felt like the EU was different to the Common Market they opted for during the 1975 vote. It has become apparent since then that even before the EU’s existence, membership of its precursor body, the EEC, was always going to result in an eradication of national sovereignty.

In the case of Costa v ENEL, which involved an Italian citizen challenging his government’s decision to nationalise an electricity company, the European Court of Justice confirmed that European law had supremacy over national law at all times. Therefore, the SNP are not interested in true Scottish independence if they are willing to join an organisation that would erode their country’s newfound freedom from day one.

The Conservative Government has made it clear a second independence vote won’t happen. As long as there is little prospect of a Corbyn-led administration, the SNP Leader won’t see her wishes comes true, especially if the Tories win a majority once this country has left the EU. Sturgeon is becoming increasingly desperate to achieve Scottish independence at any cost. This is why she has betrayed her beliefs by expressing her desire to establish an alliance with a unionist party like Labour to bring down a Tory government and meddle in British affairs, even though her party was founded to take Scotland out of Westminster’s politics altogether.

The First Minister has contradicted her party’s founding principles by transforming the SNP into a Europhile party, using Brexit as an opportunity to form a ‘progressive alliance’ with a party that fundamentally opposes what the nationalists stands for. It’s not Scottish freedom this woman is interested in; just power at any cost.

L'articolo Sturgeon Isn’t Interested in Scottish Independence, Just Power proviene da InsideOver.

On a sunny afternoon in the seaside town of Ayr, 37 miles from Glasgow, Scotland, an estimated 13,000 marched to demand independence from the United Kingdom.

The march was the fourth in a series of eight organised by Scottish pro-independence movement All Under One Banner. The last in the sequence will take place in Edinburgh, the Scottish capital, on Saturday, October 5th. All Under One Banner (AUOB) were formed by Neil McKay on October 12, 2014, following the referendum of September 18, 2014 when Scotland voted by 55.3 per cent to 44.7 per cent to stay in the United Kingdom.

McKay wanted to harness the energy of the ‘Yes’ campaign and to have a movement: ‘staging public processions for independence at regular intervals until Scotland is ‘free’.’ The mission of AUOB then is to host marches and rallies for Scottish independence, marching All Under One Banner; open to everyone who desires an independent Scotland.

The chief organiser of AUOB is Manny Singh, a man who describes himself as ‘King of the North’ on his Facebook page. At a march in Glasgow on May 4, the council authorities asked Singh and AUOB to alter their route. It was a last minute request which was ignored by the movement who marched as planned. Subsequently, Singh was reported to the police and procurator fiscal.

But AUOB are not the only group pushing for Scottish independence. “We differ from All Under One Banner,” Scott McMurray a spokesperson for Saltires For Independence told me “We are a small group whose aim is to showcase the photographs, videos and messages from the participants of any independence event. All Under One Banner are organisers of events and marches across Scotland. However, we aim to ensure that those who cannot attend these events still have a means to express their interest in independence by flying their Saltires and posting their photographs to the page.”

There is an odd feeling of near euphoria as people file past. The atmosphere is good natured and reminds one of a football cup final with all the colours and excitement of opposing fans supporting their respective teams. But here there is only one ‘team’, only one goal that unites the marchers: Scottish independence.

A sea of blue is curiously interspersed with the red and yellow stripes of Catalonia. The marchers for Scottish independence obviously feel some affinity for their separatist brotherhood. The next AUOB march will take place in Campelltown on July 27, and there is a growing feeling among the crowd that a second independence referendum will definitely take place.

“In terms of IndyRef2,” Scott McMurray of Saltires For Independence added, “we are now more confident than ever that a second independence referendum would see a majority vote in favour of a split with the UK.” McMurray was also aware that the UK government in Westminster would have to agree to such an action. “This will mean,” he started up again, “that the Scottish electorate need to continue to be proactively voting for pro-independence parties at Westminster and Scottish Parliament levels. The pressure will then be on the politicians to accept the will of the Scottish people.”

There does seem to be a resurgence of an independent sentiment in Scotland, spurred on by Brexit and the possibility of Boris Johnson as Prime Minister. “Indy ref 2 will happen,” Mike Blackshaw of Edinburgh Yes Hub said with a degree of certainty. He had travelled from the capital, 80 miles away, by bus, though there were many more from further afield. InsideOver spoke to a man from Carmarthenshire, Wales, and someone told us of people who had travelled from Austria. There was – strangely – the Saltire flown behind a motorcycle with a Swiss number plate and the driver dressed as a Highlander.

It would be easy to get carried away with the near carnival atmosphere of the afternoon. Lest we forget, it should be mentioned there are counter arguments to independence. Some suggest, for instance, that the economy could be a major stumbling block to Scottish self-determination. A new currency in an independent Scotland would have to compete against stronger currencies, including Sterling. Scottish bonds, an unknown quantity in an independent era will be high risk, initially at least, and the cost of borrowing high. How much would a welfare state cost? An army? A civil service? And who would pay for it all? But, for now, looking around, it would be difficult to be the one to say that to them. Not today anyway.

L'articolo Scots March for Independence and Another Chance of a Referendum proviene da InsideOver.

L'articolo Scots march for Independence proviene da InsideOver.