DID ENGLAND SLEEP - THE SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM IN A NEGOTIATION CONTEXT

In  this September '14 edition of  NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES  we analyze the Scottish independence referendum of today and extract negotiation lessons to be learned. 

For your reading convenience, we also distill this into a brief lessons learned at the end of the column.

Please feel free to forward this column or to share it via facebook, linkedin or twitter by clicking on the appropriate icons at the top. If you know anyone who would like to subscribe, they can subscribe by replying to this email or via our website at www.conflict-management.net

Learn more About Lapin Negotiation Strategies  and ways in which we can make a high impact and a demonstrable and substantive difference to your organization.

With Best Wishes 

Sincerely,

Raphael Lapin

Today, the Scottish people go to the polls to vote a "YES or "NO" on the

secession of Scotland from the United Kingdom. Either outcome is wrought with serious problems. If the vote is "NO", a large portion of the Scottish population will feel resentful knowing that this might be the last opportunity for generations, and demonstrations and riots are not out of the question. If the answer is "YES", there will be resentment on the part of England. This will be very serious for Scotland too, as there will still be many complex issues to negotiate with a resentful Westminster  as a partner. 

These issues will include; currency union; banking and financial services;  Scotland's responsibility to the UK's national debt; National Health; European Union membership (currently Scotland is a member only by England's shirttails); borders and immigration; monarchy; and defense (involving amongst other things, the UK Trident nuclear deterrent currently based in Scotland). 

These negotiations are likely to take a minimum of two years and will be acrimonious and messy. Did England sleep instead of preempting and possibly averting the current crisis?

Rumblings of Scotland's desire for independence have been going on for years if not generations. England never appeared to  take this really seriously which in turn, made Edinburgh feel even more resentful towards London's domination. This eventually led Scotland to  opt for a unilateral decision-making process of a national referendum rather than a collaborative one of negotiation with England.

The first step that England could have taken, after recognizing that a failure to negotiate might result in the sort of crisis the United Kingdom finds itself facing today, is to sit down with the Scottish leaders to learn more about why they desire independence and what benefits they hope to achieve. 

They may have learned that Scotland wants  her own national identity and pride as opposed to being a serf to the British fiefdom, a symbolic independence and sovereignty of sorts. They perhaps would want a more socialistic  Scotland, and freedom to determine and shape their own economic growth, destiny and future.

England might have shared her concerns about the strength and status of a United Kingdom and  for a precedent being set for Wales and parts of Northern Ireland. The complexities of an England/Scotland disentanglement and the impact it might have socially, economically and on national morale might be a further concern.

While acknowledging the different interests of the parties, they may then have worked to identify those interests that are vitally important and common to both. "Let both sides explore what problems unite us, instead of belaboring those problems which divide us" said Kennedy in his inaugural address. 

For example both wish to maintain economic, diplomatic and defense stability in the region. Both would want continued collaboration on trade, commerce and industry and both would find strength in a mutual allegiance currently facilitated by a common union.

This sort of exchange might have been the first step towards a d�tente that may have led to an agreement and averted a national referendum and the ensuing crisis.

When faced with a potential conflict, evaluate the potential outcomes of negotiation verses no negotiation and if no negotiation could potentially result in a more adverse situation, do not fear to negotiate  (but do NOT negotiate out of fear) or at the least, engage the other party in a conversation  to understand what their concerns and needs are and to open up dialogue. 

When you have explored differing and common interests and the other party is assured that you have a cogent understanding of their issues, concerns, needs and fears, it is helpful to persuade them of how unwise a unilateral action or decision might be as opposed to a negotiated agreement.

Britain might have persuaded Scotland how a secession would cause a breach in domestic and international confidence  due to the many uncertainties associated with independence, and how that might trigger an economic catastrophe. This might in turn, drive England to reject the idea of a currency union which would only add to economic concerns in Scotland.

By effectively persuading the other side of how unwise or costly a unilateral action might be, they will be more receptive to ideas that potentially might be better for both.

Britain perhaps then could have  engaged Scotland in searching for creative ideas that could potentially meet everyone's needs without something as dramatic and dangerous as secession.

They may have come up with an entirely new model for a union, perhaps a tight and successful version of the European Union, only between two countries, where essential sovereignty and self rule govern, while at the same time having close collaboration and association in specific areas such as currency, defense and border access. Each would be an equal in the union as opposed to one dominating the other. Or perhaps some other creative option that could meet all parties' needs.

A key to negotiation is to collaboratively look for creative solutions that each side can find satisfying to the greatest extent possible.

I do not know what the outcome of the referendum today will be and the race is too close to call. What I do know is that if the vote is ""YES", this will only be the beginning of a very tough and rough road ahead for Scotland, and new realities for the United Kingdom which, had England not slept, might have had a very different outcome.