Punching above our weight

What, as Wings asked this morning, do Better Together actually have left?:

"No currency union: gone.
Your pensions at risk: gone.
High cost of borrowing: gone."

Well, to be fair, a couple of things. Primarily, it seems, maudlin, sentimental (though increasingly belligerent) paeans to an imagined but never-actually-existed-and-certainly-won't-now Britain about which increasingly desperate, far-fetched and outlandish claims are made. (Did we really give the world "Christian civilisation"? When?).

But anyway, there's another trope they bang on about: international influence. "We punch above our weight". Now, there's not enough room on the internet to do justice to all the fascinating psychological implications of equating "influence" with looking for big people to hit to demonstrate to everyone that you're not small at all oh no there that showed them do you want some too do you do you? And there are most certainly limits to what comprises permissible, or sensible, punching. But in any event, is it punching that gives you influence in today's world? How do small countries who don't punch people get on? Countries who don't threaten to punch people, don't want to punch people? Can they have no ambition to play any part, in concert with others, in creating a better, more stable world? Does realpolitik condemn a nation of, say, five and a half million people to choose either to opt out of world affairs altogether, to be buffeted around by the disturbances created by others, or hook itself up with a belligerent partner and go on a spree punching? Well let's see. Let's pick on someone smaller than us.



Lithuania has a population of around three and a bit million: a little over half the size of Scotland. On 17 October 2013, Lithuania was elected as one of the ten non-permanent members of the UN Security Council, for a period of two years. (Luxembourg, with a population of around 500,000, has been one since October 2012). Lithuania returns 12 Members to the European Parliament; Scotland, six. Lithuania provided the President of the Council of the European Union from July to December 2013. During that period, in the words of the EU, "the work of driving the EU agenda" lay with Lithuania. The UK last provided the President (one Tony Blair) for the six months from July to December 2005. It is not due to do so again until July to December 2017. Professor Michael Keatinge, speaking recently on the BBC's Sunday Politics programme, explained very lucidly just precisely how countries our size exercise influence within the EU by identifying mutual interests and aims and forming alliances depending on the subject matter. Croatia has a population of four million or so. What does it think about its role in the EU?

"Mato Skrabalo, the Croatian Ambassador to the EU, said that smaller nations play a significant role in the European Union and their place is important.

'There have been some occasions, right after a membership in which our seven votes were crucial, so they count," Mr Skrabalo said.  "Even when they are not tipping the balance.  However there are some decisions that are made unanimously, and there Croatia has a right to veto any decision and in these areas of the work of the union.  So I would say that our role, even though we are a small country is quite significant.'"

Scotland is not a small country. It is a medium-sized country. Blessed with enormous natural resources, an advanced, wealthy and diverse economy, and a healthy and functioning social and political democracy. The idea that punching above or below your weight is the key to international influence must be one of the most out-dated, out-of-touch notions around. People really don't like to be threatened with a punch, let alone actually punched. Soft, not hard, power is what gives influence. If you want the most eloquent exposition of how a country like ours can play its part in the world, then watch or read this:

"Now, there is a new world developing in Europe. It is a world where people want to be independent and interdependent: to address global and social challenges; to build a fairer and more prosperous society; to assess people and nations by their contribution - the positive difference they make - rather than by their status or their power.

But unfortunately, too much of the debate on this new Europe at Westminster is being distorted by the dreams of an old empire. Those dreams have little allure now for Scotland. Europe enriches our culture, our economy and our society. We cherish the freedom it gives us to share, to travel and to exchange.

But we also seek the freedom to contribute. To contribute our voice as an equal partner on the world stage. To contribute to the future success of the European project from which we gain so much. To contribute our talents and innovation to the challenges that Europe, and the world, face in the future.

So when our small nation asks for the freedom to contribute, we will meet a welcome from around Europe. And we will gladly make those contributions – and more - when an independent Scotland, takes its full place in the European family of nations."

We don't need to hit anyone.