Shipbucket

THE REPUBLIC OF SCOTS (SCOTLAND – RoS)

Area: 78,772 km2 (10,3253km2 including Ulster)
GDP (in US$, yr 2010): 600 billion
GDP per head (US$): 41,000
Population (2010): 14.5 million
Capital: Perth
Government: Parliamentary Democracy
Languages: English, Lallans, Doric, Scots and Irish Gaelic
Religion: Secular society, no State religion
Adult literacy: 99.5%
Life Expectancy: 79m, 81f
Currency: Euro
Member of -
EU, NATO, OECD, G20, CaleCom (other members are Hong Kong, Jamaica, Malawi, New Zealand, Nova Scotia)
Dependent Territories -
Scottish Indian Ocean Territory (Cocos and Christmas Islands)
National Motto -
Nemo me impune lacessit (Alt Tr: Wha dare meddle wi me? No one can harm me with impunity; Cha togar m' fhearg gun dìoladh)

History
Although a European nation state dating from the medieval period, modern Scotland originated in the 1690s. During this period money which had been collected to invest in a proposed colony at Darien in Panama was diverted to investment in home based trade and industry. The prosperity which resulted placed the country on a firm economic footing and put an end to any discussions of political union with England (Lower Britain). In the 18th Century, the scientific and cultural Enlightenment was to find an industrial counterpart in the revolution in production methods, which began about 1760.
Scotland stayed neutral during Lower Britain’s wars with France but the Jacobite rebellion of 1745 left Scotland split into highland and lowland enclaves for the next 45 years. The republican revolutions in France and America also took hold in Scotland with both the Stewart dynasty and the Hanoverian viceroys swept away in a bloodless coup in 1790. Unfortunately, this led to friction with Lower Britain and the War of 1812-15 was not resolved until the defeat of Wellesley’s forces at the Battle of La Belle Alliance by a Franco-Scottish army.
During the 19th Century while Scottish industry continued to grow, explorers, traders and other adventurers founded a small but prosperous Empire. Friendly relationships developed with both Lower Britain and Europe. Like Holland, Denmark and Norway, Scotland wisely remained neutral in 1914 but by 1917 shipping losses caused by unrestricted U-boat warfare resulted in a declaration of war on Germany. She was able to play a major part in the naval campaign which protected trade and in the string of victories on the Western Front against Germany in 1918 which brought the war to an end.
In 1922, after the partition of Ireland, the League of Nations granted Scotland the mandate for governance of Ulster, an agreement which was later ratified by the UN. In 1975, following a plebiscite, Ulster seceded to the Republic of Scots and became an integral part of the country.
Careful management of the economy together with a refusal to follow Lower Britain’s error of returning to the gold standard meant that Scotland weathered the inter-war years with her economy in better shape than many other countries. Considerable investment in new industries allowed the nation to take advantage of the technological advances made after World War One.
Although Scotland had once again avowed neutrality, re-armament started in 1935 and by the time Norway and Denmark fell in early 1940 Scotland found herself in the front line and in close alliance with Lower Britain. Once again, Scotland’s contribution to World War 2 was telling with respect to the country’s size particularly at sea where the strength of her shipbuilding industry and merchant marine was an important weapon for the Allies.

Economy
After the Second World War, Scotland was one of the first to sign up for the Common Mercat, as the EU was then known. Scotland gradually dissolved its overseas empire and the newly independent countries formed the International Caledonian Community (aka “the Calecom”). The nation continued to develop its traditional industries including ship and aircraft manufacture, but during the ‘70s and ‘80s, industries like oil and electronics began to replace staples such as coal and textiles. Diversification, with no reliance on any single sector has always been a main plank of the country’s economic policy. Today, while knowledge-based industries grow rapidly Scotland remains famous for its ships, railway locomotives, aircraft, computers and energy products such as oil well equipment and wind turbines. Most experts still consider Scottish machinery to be amongst the best in the world; the SMW for instance, is the favourite car of many of the rich and famous internationally.

Politics
The constitutional framework of the RoS is a modernised version of the one, which came into effect in the late 18th Century. There is an Estates General of 300 seats and a Senate of 100, each chamber having fixed five-year terms which overlap so that there are never two elections in the same year. Election is by proportional representation using the additional member system. A joint mandate of both chambers, appoints the President, normally a senior Senator, who is Head of Government as well as Head of State. The President must retain the representatives’ confidence to remain in office. Scotland also returns 18 members to the European Parliament.
In the period since 1945, no single party has managed to achieve an overall majority in either house so coalition government is the norm. The ruling faction is prone to splits and a censure motion in the Senate can bring down the government or President.

(Extract from the Concise Encyclopaedia Caledonia, 199th Edition, Edinburgh, 2010)

Defence

Budget: €11 billion
President of Scots: The Honourable Duncan King, CE MA BSc (titular Commander-in-Chief)
Minister of Defence: Dr Kenneth J Finlay, CE MA PhD
National Defence Consultant: Quentin Banks BA LLB FNIDS
Chief of the Defence Staff: General Eleanor Bains-McKenzie, MS BSc (Eng) (de facto Commander-in-Chief)
Commander-in-Chief (Maritime): Admiral John H Allen, VM MA FNIDS
CE = Conscript Elder (ie Member of the Senate)
FNIDS = Fellow of the National Institute of Defence Studies
MS = Military Star
VM = Victory Medal (highest medal for gallantry, approximately equivalent to the Victoria Cross in Lower Britain)

The Minister of Defence sits in the Senate and is a senior member of the Cabinet, fourth in order of precedence after the Chancellor (Prime Minister), the Foreign Affairs Minister and the Finance Minister. The Defence Minister is assisted by three under-Ministers responsible for procurement, personnel and strategy. Two of these under-Ministers normally sit in the Estates General. The National Defence Consultant is a non-elected adviser to the President, Chancellor and Minister of Defence and in addition sits on the Defence, Foreign Affairs and Security committees of the Cabinet.
Since 1950, the Army, Navy and Air Force have been combined into a single command, The Scottish Defence Force (SDF). The effect of this is most seen at the highest level, with a unified Staff and High Command, as well as procurement and research and development functions. At the lowest level, all recruits (volunteer only) undergo a common 3 months basic training as an Infantry Fighter Grade 1, after that they specialise in which ever branch they prefer but transfer to another branch is always possible, eg a Missile Defence Operator in the Land Forces can opt to transfer to a similar position in Maritime or Air Forces. Recruits selected for officer training enter the Officer Training Unit after completing the basic training. Refresher basic training is compulsory at three year intervals for all ranks.
Service is normally for five to seven years depending on speciality. However at the end of the allotted period, they may opt for further service if they so wish followed by three or more years in the Reserve. After completion of basic training all Defence Force personnel including the Chief of Defence Staff, are issued with a personal weapon, usually a rifle, and in a national emergency are expected to serve with that weapon, if called upon. The Reserve also includes a Volunteer Reserve of “weekend soldiers” who may be called to any appropriate Branch in the event of an emergency.
As Scotland has no land border with any potentially hostile power, most defence spending has gone into naval forces due to the need to protect trade and the former colonies which make up the Calecom. The army is relatively small, although well mechanised and trained for marine intervention (there is no Marine Corps as such, every soldier is a potential marine).

Navy

Role
The main mission of the Republic of Scots Navy (RoSN) is to protect Scottish interests at home and abroad. It executes the foreign and defence policies of the Scottish Government through the exercise of military effort, diplomatic and other activities. The RoSN is also a key element of the RoS contribution to NATO, with a variety of assets allocated to NATO tasks at any one time. The mission is delivered via a number of core capabilities:
• Provision of a medium scale maritime task groups with organic air assets
• Delivery of the RoS amphibious force
• Provision of forces in support of Caledonian Community members in the event of threats against them (Calecom Pact)
• Contribution of assets to SDF Air Strike Command
• Contribution of assets to the SDF Helicopter Command
• Maintenance of standing patrol commitments including Long Range Maritime Patrol
• Search and Rescue (SAR) and pollution response in support of the Coastguard and Emergency Services
• Provision of emergency humanitarian relief following natural disasters in any littoral region
• Provision of Mine Counter Measures capability to RoS and allied commitments.
• Provision of hydrographic and meteorological services deployable worldwide.
• Protection of the RoS and EU's Exclusive Economic Zone.

Organisation

The CinC (N) has four direct reports, The CinC (Ops), who is also 2i/c, The Chief of Naval Staff, the CinC (Recruitment and personnel) and the Chief Engineer. Combat assets are assigned to Squadrons under the CinC (Ops) and include the Atlantic Squadron, the Patrol Squadron, the Amphibious Squadron and Naval Air Command. The Training Squadron is assigned to the CinC (Recruitment and Personnel).

Active units include 1 CVA, 2 x CH, 3 x LPD, 16 DDG and FFG, 6 AOR plus various MCM, FAC, support, logistic and other vessels. More details on these to follow.

Nice to see another AU almost straight after mine!!!

Just wondering what is CH Helicopter Cruiser?)?? Also what sort of tech does you military have?

Nick

_________________
Nick

@ashwellkennedy

CH is Helicopter Cruiser as you say, and in this case through-deckers, although the class they replaced had the hanger and heli-deck on the stern similar to the converted Tigers.

I was intrigued to see your posting just as I was preparing mine, certainly similar thoughts although mine was originally triggered years ago a the time of devolution from reading an article by a Scottish historian suggesting this particular alternative history.

As I’ve been concentrating on the Navy I haven’t given too much consideration yet to the Army but I had thought something along these lines –

Armoured Regiments x 2
Armoured Artillery Regiment x 1
Armoured Recon Regiment x 1
Armoured Infantry Battalions x 2
Motorised Infantry Battalions x 6
Motorised Recon Battalion x 1
Towed Artillery Regiments x 2 (includes AAA and SAM batteries)
Mountain Infantry Battalions x 4
Special Forces Battalion x 1
Engineer Regiment x 1
Presidential Guard and Ceremonial Battalion x 1

On the equipment front I think the tank may be the Vickers MBT, probably an up-armoured version of the Khalid with a 120mm rifled cannon but that is by no means certain yet – I may even buy the Le Clerc. Other armoured vehicles would be of the types typically used by the smaller European powers, a mix of indigenous and imported types, probably with a fair amount of US equipment eg M113 or derivatives would be the basis of many of the armoured infantry vehicles.

And then of course there’s the air force to put together as well.

Can you please explain further the Jacobite Rebellion of 1745? I'm asking because you do state that no Union with England took place. Also, if Republican Scotland defeated 'Lower Britain' aka England in Alliance with Republican France, it must follow that France would acheive its aim of hegemony in Europe, and by extension in its empire, replacing Gt Britain as the greatest World Empire. So once we begin unravelling world history, you cannot have WWI and WWII. I would expect that a triumphant France across the world would ensure no subsequent unification of the German States; then England or Lower Britain, never having acheived its own predominance, would itself become a vassal of France. I'm going to the trouble of pointing all this out because, while the idea of an independent Scotland was indeed possible; it (fortunately) never came about in the 18th century; the reason being that the Jacobite rebellion was the last obstacle encouraged by France, to prevent Gt Britain becoming its main rival for world empire. Once the rebellion was put down Gt Britain was free to turn its energies against France; and thus began that early 'world war'. And my ancestors, some of who fought on both sides at Culloden (and I'm talking about the Scots here) soon became the essential component in the army of Gt Britain, that allowed the subsequent victories.

Delighted to provide clarity – I have thought about the details.

When Wesley’s army was defeated at the Battle of La Belle Alliance there were still Austrian, German Federation and Russian armies in the field in considerable strength. However after 20 years of war throughout mainland Europe there was no stomach for continued conflict. The sides went back to the negotiating table. France was allowed to return to its pre-revolutionary boundaries, Napoleon I was permitted to remain as its head of state and the strength of the French army was strictly limited by treaty. Napoleon continued as French leader until his death in 1821. France then restored the Bourbon monarchy and the European history time line more or less returns to the one that we know.

We always take some liberties with history for these what-ifs, but in some respects it’s less far fetched than the liberties taken with geography; huge islands all over the Atlantic and Pacific?

one comment: I suggest removing napoleon. there will never be an peacefull france with napoleon. better make him killed in battle or something...... but well, you can take large liberties on AU's in history (only look at my AU, winged heroes )

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Amen to that; and I'm sort of giving you the compliment of taking this one seriously. By that, you're going to have to take a robust critique, but I reckon you're up for that. The spur for me is that this very close to my heart: i.e. its 'family'; so.........

The actual 'world war' between France and Gt Britain commenced during the 18th century, and both sides used any means to get an advantage; hence France's interest in supporting the Jacobites (and you haven't answered on that yet). And then we have India, North America, and the bitter struggle for maritime dominance, all pre the French Revolution. And I'm with Ace on Napoleon; what we overlook is that he was the first true modern dictator, who was driven by a passion to dominate the world, and in that sense France served his purpose (reminds me of the Austrian corporal, both outsiders, both drive by a monomania - world dominance). So if we get Scotland to a position where its linked up with Napoleon to defeat England, then with all due respect we just can't get that. I mean, if a mutually billigerent England/Scotland are glowering at each other across the boarder then there just isn't the leeway for 'England' to be successful against Bourbon France; so she looses out in the wider world, and Bourbon France triumphs, so no French Revolution, and no Napoleon.

But if we get to Republican French/Scottish defeat of England on British soil then Naploeon cannot be stopped. We must remember that Gt Britain was basically bribing a lot of Europe to keep fighting Napoleon; and so without a British involvement that would cease and no Peninsular campaign. And o.k. we can allow Prussia, but alone Prussia could not defeat Napoleon, so no revenge Franco/Prussian war, and no German ferderation; and by extension we still cannot get us to the Kaiser and German Imperialism; because, no Queen Victoria marrying off her childeren into Europes royal families, because by then 'England' would be a very minor player, and besides, in your scenario a republic.

I think the problem here is to disentangle Scotland and England at some point in time, and yet somehow allow much of modern history. But it is just too difficult, because for good or ill, the modern world emerged out of Gt Britains supremecy; and that includes the USA being able to supplant Gt Britain; and the Pax Brittanica ending when Imperial Gremany challenged that and the resulting WWI which semi bankrupted Gt Britain and created the Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany; then WWII, which really bankrupted GB, then the Yankees bought the deeds to the farm

Aint history fun?

It's stuff like this that makes the "Huge Islands all over the Atlantic and Pacific" (Well Indian in my case) more attractive, giving more free reign to creativity without worrying about every POD required to bring about the nation's existance causing major damage to the OTL. Your above point illustrates this exactly.

_________________
We can't stop here--this is Bat country!

If it's close enough to cast a shadow, I think the flying house wins initiative.

Bronies are like the Forsworn. Everyone agrees that they are a problem but nobody wants to expend the energy rooting them out.

"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way."

While it is convenient from our viewpoint to look on the wars between Britain and France from the late 17thC to1815 as a “second Hundred Years War” I don’t think anyone looked on it as that at the time. Each war was fought for different reason for instance the Seven Years War started in mainland Europe as a carry over from the War of the Austrian Succession, whereas Britain got involved in the French Revolutionary War to prevent Antwerp falling into hostile hands and because the Hanoverians were worried that the contagion of republicanism might spread to British shores. As for a global struggle for supremacy, the British Empire seems to come about more by accident than design, driven by trade and adventurers with military and political intervention coming later.

Incidentally Napoleon never invaded Britain. La Belle Alliance is the name of an inn 2 or 3 miles south of Waterloo. It was suggested by Blucher as a suitable name for the battle but this was vetoed by Wellington in favour of Waterloo. A La Belle Alliance Station in London – now that’s an AU!

As for the Jacobite Rebellion, maybe it never happened. What would be the point in invading what was in effect a neutral country which would almost certainly turn against the invaders? BPC at best rallied only about 40% of the Highland Clans and only a handful of Lowlanders and English Jacobites joined him. Maybe he landed on the coast of Cumberland instead and the local magistrate had him arrested.

Although we know history largely through “significant” events like battles, assassinations and so on, my view is the greatest effect of an event is felt immediately after it. Through time that effect decays. Say the American Rebellion in 1776 had been put down, Britain would still have had to hold onto America through the 19th C which would have been no easy task. Dominion status would certainly have come in the 20th C along with intervention in both World Wars. What would be different? Would the US be a world power today? Would it be rich, with extensive armed forces and an economy that dominates the world? Would it use that power to intervene when it thought its interests threatened? Of course it would.

Anyway, rather then debate the niceties of what-if history I would far rather have your opinions on my proposed fleet. In retrospect since posting I think it may be on the large size for the budget with a CVA almost certainly a hull too far. The Netherlands and Denmark are my analogues. Either that or I may have to annexe more territory, after all the Romans recognised the border as the Tyne-Solway isthmus.

I'll concede the field graciously, and my interest was more in the historical background - something we'll all have to allow for when it is one that is bending real history.

Good luck