How exactly can Barack Obama possess such concentrated arrogance that he thinks he is helping anything by lecturing the Scots on what they should believe about their national interest and their own national sovereignty?
According to AntiWar.com:
Speaking at a press conference at the end of the G7 summit, President Obama has urged Scottish voters to reject independence, saying that it is not in America’s interestto see Scotland independent from Britain.
The comments are unusually direct, as most nations have tried to avoid direct involvement in the Scottish independence movement, and Obama’s opposition is unlikely to change much, except giving it more publicity.
Such meddling appears to be common for Obama, and in the same conference he warned Britain against leaving the European Union, insisting the US wants Britain to remain in the EU to “ensure prosperity.”
The chances of the UK “ensuring prosperity” in the European Union are absolutely zero. The collapse is a matter of “when,” not “if.” The UK’s prosperity (such as it is) is what will take a beating if they remain in the EU.
Obama is basically putting many secession movements on notice that the U.S. Federal Government believes bigger is better. The more people tied up (!) under one massive government bureaucracy, and the more of those bureaucracies that are submitted to a supra-national bureaucracy, the more “robust” and “prosperous” those people will be.
As the Telegraph reports,
The President said it is in the US interest that Britain remains “robust and united”.
Speaking at a joint press conference with David Cameron at the G7 summit in Brussels, he said: “With respect to the future of the United Kingdom, obviously ultimately this is up to the people of Great Britain.
“In the case of Scotland, there is a referendum process in place and it’s up to the people of Scotland.
“But I would to say the United Kingdom has been an extraordinary partner to us. From the outside at least, it looks like things have worked pretty well.”
“We obviously have a deep interest in making sure one of the closest allies we will ever remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner,” he said.
But why can’t smaller nations be “robust” and “united”?
Just thinking about the logic of it, it seems obvious that it is highly possible that those who gain from a union are not the same people who want to break free of that union. So the demand to remain “strong, robust, united” could easily be interpreted as a demand for those being dominated to lend their strength and energy to those who benefit from the domination.
No matter what you think of secession, you will notice that, according to the Telegraph, the leaders of other nations have known better than to tell the Scots what to do.
Mr. Obama’s comments were the most forthright yet by any world leader and represented a major boost to the campaign to save the UK. It also undermined the Nationalists’ claim a separate Scotland would be warmly welcomed on the world stage.
That second sentence lets us know that there is an implicit threat in Obama’s words. He is essentially telling Scotland that they need to worry about how the U.S. will treat them if they demand their independence.