US Consul on Scottish Independence A week ago the Sunday Herald (US consul questions wisdom of Scottish independence) reported:

THE US government has made a dramatic intervention into Scottish politics after a senior diplomat said the Bush administration would “probably” prefer independence not to happen. Lisa Vickers, the new US consul in Scotland, questioned the effect of separation on American energy firms.

I know that most people tend to think about themselves first, but for a diplomat to come out with such a statement is hardly likely to help her engage with the locals.

Now, as I've said before, I'm all for free speech, so the US Consul is entitled to say what she likes. However, it does seem to me to be a most politically naïve statement to make. Anyway, who am I to complain - It must be obvious by now that I'm all for Scottish Independence and anything the US can to to help, however unintentional, must be welcomed.

It can be seen from the letters page this week what people think of her comments.

Mary McCabe from Glasgow wrote:

It is disappointing to see the new consul, right at the start, falling into the stereotype of the American bully, blundering into other countries’ affairs and telling them, from a position of apparent ignorance, what to do, expecting deference as a matter of right and assuming that other countries will prioritise America’s (erroneously perceived!) self-interest over their own.

Dr Alasdair Allan from the Isle of Lewis wrote:

Her claim that Bush isn’t too keen on Scottish independence is unlikely to win many Scottish hearts and minds. In fact, it is likely to prove, on the basis of Bush’s previous record in the areas of foreign policy thinking (and thinking in general), that Scottish independence is a sensible option.

  ¶ 11:24