Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

And, no it’s not because both of their flags are blue and white!

Here we will leave aside the fact that the UK will probably never allow Scotland to peacefully leave the union, and that Canada and the US will probably never let Quebec leave. Sadly Ireland had to fight a war against the UK, followed by an internal Civil War in order to free itself from the UK and the UK’s militaristic, imperialistic project. And, in fact, this is what has allowed Ireland to opt out of wars and to be nuclear free. Not all attempts at secession have been so successful, however.

Are Scotland and Quebec large enough to be countries?
Scotland, the Republic of Ireland, Norway and Denmark are all about 5 million people. Quebec, Switzerland and Austria are around 8 million people. Canada is about 35 million, the UK 63 million, and Germany 80 million. Monaco and Lichtenstein are countries with populations of 36,000 and 35,000, respectively.

Ireland is nuclear free; Scotland wants to be nuclear free; Austria is nuclear free; Denmark has been nuclear free. Switzerland and Germany are opting out of nuclear post-Fukushima. The UK is pushing new nuclear.

Quebec is closing down its one reactor and being sued by Strateco Resources because Quebec doesn’t want its waterways poisoned by a uranium mine at its hydrogeological center. Pro-nuclear, pro-uranium, pro-mining Canada had approved it, and so Strateco is suing Quebec. Strateco should be suing Canada instead. There are, of course, linguistic reasons for Quebec and even Scotland to secede but the big life and death reason is nuclear (including uranium mining).

It seems that being a smaller country allows citizen voices to be more easily heard. It used to be that a large country would make it more difficult to buy politicians. However, in larger countries, Federal politicians seem to not only sell out their people, but to sell them out for cheap. It is obvious that the smaller the country the better voice its people have in both their own government and on the international stage. Apart from maintaining a large military, it is clear that smallness has advantages. These advantages are for democratic process. Some countries are smaller than large cities, towns, counties or states in other countries. There is something strikingly unfair about that.

If a small country has the same voice as a large one in the UN, then its people also get a larger voice. If there are more small anti-nuclear countries, such as Quebec and Scotland would be, it can only help the overall anti-nuclear drive internationally. There would be more countries opposing the nuclear industry. Although Germany is large and is opting out of nuclear, it has an extremely long tradition of environmentalism. There may also be particularities, which make it more responsive to its people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germany There is no longer time to fight against nuclear within larger countries, and especially in those countries such as the US, UK, France, and Canada, where National governments have proven themselves uncaring of and even insulated from their populations. The UK government’s unwillingness to respect Cumbria County’s refusal to accept a nuclear repository being a case in point. Cumbria County has about the same population as Luxembourg and 2 1/2 times the land area of Luxembourg, and yet the people’s voice has been ignored by the UK government in London. Cumbria became part of England upon English (Norman) invasion in 1092. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxembourg Ireland was invaded by England less than 100 years later, in 1171. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_invasion_of_Ireland Quebec was invaded and conquered by the UK from 1758 to 1760. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_1760 Scotland was invaded by England in 1296, fought a long, hard war for Scottish Independence, only to be absorbed into Great Britain in 1707. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_War_of_Scottish_Independence If Scotland votes for Independence on the 18 September 2014, it will become free again and free at last, on the 24 of March 2016. It will be a nuclear free Scotland.

FREEDOM!
VIVE LE QUEBEC LIBRE!

Related Information:
Quebec to shut down its only nuclear reactor
CBC News Posted: Sep 11, 2012 10:52 PM ET Last Updated: Sep 12, 2012 12:41 AM ET http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-to-shut-down-its-only-nuclear-reactor-1.1177555

https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2013/08/04/the-still-unanswered-question-just-whats-so-important-about-the-strateco-resources-case/

Excerpt from “Scotland’s Future” (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2013/11/9348)
Environment: Why we need a new approach
Scotland has a spectacular natural environment and rich biodiversity. The Scottish Government recognises that our natural assets underpin our economy and the health and wellbeing of our citizens and visitors.

Using independence to build a clean, green and nuclear-free nation, Scotland can be a beacon of environmentalism and sustainability.

The world-leading climate change legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament in 2009[323] demonstrates Scotland’s progressive approach to the protection of the environment, and makes Scotland a respected and valued player on the international stage. Indeed, Scotland has had the biggest cumulative fall in greenhouse gas emissions since 1990 (29.6 per cent) of the EU-15; higher than the average emissions reduction for the EU-27 (17.1 per cent), and the highest of the nations in the UK[324].

In addition, our ground-breaking work championing Climate Justice, including setting up the world’s first Climate Justice Fund, has received international praise including from highly respected figures such as Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former UN High Commissioner Mary Robinson.”

“However, Scotland is held back from championing action on climate change internationally as we have no direct voice in either the UN or the EU. Our unique position – as a developed nation with the highest ambition in this area – is thus missing from the international forums debating this crucial global issue.

Scotland’s target of a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions of at least 42 per cent by 2020 compares to the UK’s 34 per cent target, is more than double the EU’s 20 per cent target, and, distinctively, also includes our share of international aviation and shipping emissions. We are committed to a minimum of 80 per cent emissions reduction by 2050 and our recent, second Report on Proposals and Policies[325] sets out a strategy for Scotland to deliver a 57.8 per cent reduction in emissions by 2027.

The Scotland we can create
With independence, Scotland can play a crucial role in the international debate on climate change. With an independent seat in the EU, adding our voice to those of other nations with high ambitions on climate change, we can present evidence of effective action within Scotland and argue directly for our European neighbours and other developed[…]”

“targets to 2030. This Government supports a legally-binding EU greenhouse gas emissions reduction target for 2030 and reform of the EU Emissions Trading System to deliver greater pre-2020 ambition to cut emissions.

With independence, Scotland will be able to negotiate fairer EU funding allocations for rural development, with some of these funds targeted for environmental protection and accelerated delivery of our commitments on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Our priorities for action

If we form the government of an independent Scotland we will:

seek to enshrine environmental protection in the constitution. With independence we will have the opportunity to enshrine protection of our environment in the proposed written constitution for Scotland”

“show international leadership in tackling climate change. An independent Scotland will champion tackling climate change in international forums including the UN and the EU – encouraging and supporting others to share Scotland’s ambition negotiate increased European funding for environmental protection. This Government will seek a better deal on Pillar 2 of the Common Agricultural Policy in the next CAP negotiations, allowing increased funding for environmental protection and emissions reduction measures

Excerpted from: The Scottish Government, “Scotland’s Future.” Available here: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2013/11/9348