We face a huge and irreversible decision in Scotland this September: whether or not to stay in the UK. The prospect of such seismic constitutional change creates many uncertainties, not least on Scotland's place in Europe. Democracy will decide the outcome here at home; the reality of European politics will determine the terms of a separate Scotland's relationship with Europe.
Scotland gets a good deal from Europe by being part of the UK with our strong negotiating voice. We benefit from the rebate worth £3bn (€3.65bn); we benefit from the opt-out of the euro and Schengen; our farmers and fishermen do well, including higher fish quotas and protection for Scottish salmon. As a separate state, we stand to lose hard-won advantages. For example, estimates show an independent Scotland would contribute nearly €3bn more to the EU budget over 2014-20 - an additional direct cost of €1100 to each Scottish household.
The UK has the equal highest number of votes in the council at 29 and the third largest European parliament delegation with 73 MEPs. Changes to voting weights in 2014 will reduce the current over-weighting for smaller member states, diminishing our voice further. The UK government's independent legal advice clarified that if Scotland votes to become independent, the rest of the UK would be the continuing state and would continue membership of international institutions like the EU.
"The crux of the Scottish government's problem is its simplistic, almost naive, stance on European negotiation"
A separate Scotland would have to apply to join the EU. This is a view backed up by senior EU leaders, commission president José Manuel Barroso, council president Herman Van Rompuy and Mariano Rajoy, the prime minister of Spain. The EU is a treaty-based organisation with explicit procedures for entry of new member states. The overwhelming weight of legal opinion concludes this would be the method for Scottish entry, negotiating from scratch as a new state.
Instead of accepting these realities, the Scottish government assert it would have a seamless transition via an article 48 route - never used for accession - and claim Scotland would retain the rebate and opt-outs secured by the UK. They claim this deal would be negotiated with 28 EU member states in a record-breaking 18 months. The crux of the Scottish government's problem is its simplistic, almost naive, stance on European negotiation. Consider its approach to the EU treaties.
All new member states are obliged to make the political and legal commitment to join the single currency and to join the Schengen travel area. Only the UK and Denmark have permanent opt-outs from the euro and the UK and Ireland have opt-outs from Schengen. The Scottish government has declared that it does not accept this, for example, citing Sweden which is outside the eurozone. They ignore the fact that Sweden has made the political and legal commitment to join the euro - is Scotland prepared to make that same commitment in good faith? All 28 other member states must determine a newly separate Scotland's membership application. It is questionable how a bad faith approach to negotiations would go down with them, the majority of whom have had to sign up to these principles.
We must be honest about the challenges which flow from a decision to leave the UK. The European question is one of many issues to be addressed, and the Scottish government must take a more serious view if it wishes to salvage any credibility.