
JOHN MACLEOD: For all the President's kindness, is Swinney now a friend or just some sort of pet?
Fortunately for the First Minister, when he finally met the leader of the free world at an Aberdeenshire banquet on Monday – langoustines, prime beef, a trio of desserts featuring Scottish fruits – he was not merely avalanched with charm but bidden to sit beside him.
Either Dòmhnall Iain, as we darkly refer to him in his ancestral Lewis, is a singularly thick-skinned chap of vast magnanimity – or, until he had been briefed earlier that day, had never in all his puff heard of John Swinney.
They discussed golf. And, more seriously, oil and gas taxation, exported salmon, and especially whisky.
Incredibly, Scotch whisky revenues account for a quarter of all British food and drink exports – and, months back, Trump slapped a 10% tariff on every bottle sold in these great United States.
It's costing the industry about £4 million a week and the consequences are already painful: earlier this summer, the Isle of Harris distillery laid off workers.
But that was Monday night: on Tuesday, in rather more formal conclave, Swinney was granted fifteen minutes alone with the President. And, from his perfervid soundbites on the evening news, almost all Scotland's First Minister had banged on about was Gaza.
''I implored President Trump to use his immense influence on the Israeli government to end the unbearable, unjust, and inhumane situation unfolding in Gaza,' strutted John Swinney, 'and to bring an end to the humanitarian crisis we are witnessing.'
Later, on social media, 'I set out the urgent need for a ceasefire in Gaza and for humanitarian aid to flow, as well as the need to support Ukraine.
'Scotland's voice was heard loud and clear.'
Now international affairs are no part of the First Minister's remit. He helms a devolved, domestic administration with but domestic responsibilities, many of which, of late, have been managed very badly.
And the persistent yip of this SNP administration that it speaks, and as one, for the people of Scotland is one of its most irritating features.
In any event, Scotland boasts no diplomats on Middle Eastern soil, Swinney receives no detailed daily briefings of the type laid before, for instance, the King and the Prime Minister.
In truth he is driven less by informed reflection than panicked flight before the social-media hysterics of his own activists.
Why do hardcore SNP supporters so detest what is the only democracy in the Middle East? The only state with full-blown women's rights and, indeed, gay rights
Fortunately for the First Minister, Donald Trump alighted at Prestwick Airport the other day determined to be all love and cuddles.
'It's great to be in Scotland,' he declared. 'I like your prime minister. He's slightly more liberal than I am - as you probably heard - but he's a good man. He got a trade deal done.'
As for John Swinney, he – too – was a 'good man.' And, as he arrived at his Turnberry retreat – no doubt all ankle-deep carpets and gilded vulgarity – the President, unperturbed by a handful of protesters, even toasted OO7's aid in securing these golfing enterprises.
'Sean Connery helped get me the permits - if it weren't for Sean Connery we wouldn't have those great courses.'
Yet Trump railed against wind-turbines, damned mass-migration as a 'horrible invasion' that was 'killing Europe,' and could not resist a swipe at his ailing predecessor.
His administration, declared the President, had taken out 'a lot of bad people that got there with (former US president Joe) Biden. 'Biden was a total stiff, and what he allowed to happen.... but you're allowing it to happen to your countries…'
Visits to Scotland by a serving US President are rare. Dwight Eisenhower enjoyed a Balmoral stay in 1957, subsequently sought the Queen's recipe for drop-scones and was granted (for life, by a grateful nation) an apartment in Culzean Castle.
George W Bush dropped by in 2005 for the Gleneagles G8 summit and Trump himself made a flying visit in 2018. Reagan and Clinton only came here in retirement.
But Trump stands out for his extraordinarily unfiltered personality. Time in close proximity to The Donald would daunt the stoutest spirit and there was more than a hint of relief in John Swinney's remarks afterwards.
The President had been 'pleasant company,' the First Minister assured reporters. They had enjoyed 'perfectly valuable and courteous conversations.'
What Swinney could not bring himself to do – oh, dear, those cyberNats again at the back of his mind – was say, or at least pretend, that he him.
'I appreciated the time and opportunity to engage with [Trump] as I would with any world leader that came to Scotland,' insisted the SNP leader. Pushed firmly on the point, 'my personal feelings about people are irrelevant.'
Given, too, Trump's love of building, infrastructure and bright ideas, Swinney shrewdly presented him with a proposal to provide Edinburgh Airport with US Customs pre-clearance facilities.
This, carolled the First Minister, would help to 'demonstrate the strength of America's enduring relationship with its friend and partner, Scotland.'
There has been an unfortunate tendency among recent SNP leaders to overestimate Scotland's international standing or overlook some unfortunate nuancing.
The Tartan Day thing in the States – strongest in the old Confederacy, which had enjoyed heavy Scottish and indeed Highland settlement in the 1700s - had unhappy whiffs of the old segregationist Right.
And when Nicola Sturgeon was politely feted in Dublin in November 1916 – not that Taoiseach Enda Kenny risked being photographed with her – members of the Irish Senate could barely hide their boredom as she formally addressed them.
The real takeaway from President Trump's recent Scottish jolly is, perhaps, his unexpected kindness.
He was not obliged to seat John Swinney on equal terms with Sir Keir Starmer, grant him a private audience the following day or give his appearance of hanging on his every word as they stuck into rare beef.
All Swinney had to do in return was feign some sort of enthusiasm about golf. As if his cup did not already overflow, Starmer had to leave this love-in early and, unexpectedly, Swinney was invited the following morning to join the Trumps for breakfast.
He was even emboldened to show the President a snap of young Matthew Swinney playing golf on Tiree. He had a 'beautiful swing,' enthused The Donald.
There followed that private meeting. But did Swinney part from his new acquaintance as President Trump's friend? Or, really, just as a sort of pet?
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Times
11 minutes ago
- Times
Eugene Shvidler case highlights threat to fundamental liberties
E ugene Shvidler left the Soviet Union in 1989 and obtained refugee status in the US before being granted a UK visa under the highly skilled migrant programme. A British citizen since 2010, Shvidler and his family chose to build their lives in England. He has not set foot in Russia since 2007, holds no ties to its regime, and has never been a citizen of the Russian Federation. Indeed, in 2022, he publicly condemned the 'senseless violence' in Ukraine. Nevertheless, that year the British government took the draconian step of freezing Shvidler's assets on the basis that he was 'associated with' Roman Abramovich, the former owner of Chelsea FC; and that he was a non-executive director of Evraz, a mining company carrying on business in a sector of strategic significance to Russia. Critically, because Shvidler is a British citizen, the asset-freeze makes it a criminal offence for him to deal with his assets anywhere in the world — subject to certain limited exceptions. Roman Abramovich, left, with Eugene Shvidler, centre ALAMY Ironically, had Shvidler not become a British citizen, the asset-freeze would be limited to his assets in the UK — he would have been better off. Instead, he cannot even buy food without obtaining a licence to do so. This is in circumstances where he has done nothing unlawful. It is unquestionable that the asset-freeze interferes with Shvidler's ability to have peaceful enjoyment of his possessions, a right guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights. The question is whether such interference is justified in the public interest. Having failed to persuade the government and the lower courts that the answer to that question was a resounding 'no', Shvidler appealed to the Supreme Court to uphold his rights. Sadly, they did not do so — the majority decision of four to one deferred to the government on the basis that the executive branch has a 'wide margin of appreciation' when imposing sanctions for the pursuit of foreign policy objectives. Lord Leggatt did not defer. In a dissenting judgment that will roar through the ages, he championed the constitutional role that our courts should play in keeping checks and balances on the executive powers exercised by the government. Without that separation of powers, our fundamental liberties are under threat. Citing Magna Carta and Orwell, Lord Leggatt stood up for those liberties and declared unlawful the asset-freeze 'without any geographical or temporal limit' which has deprived Shvidler of the basic freedom to use his possessions as he wishes, a freedom to which he should be entitled as a citizen of this country. In 1989, Shvidler left a country in which — in his words — 'individuals could be stripped of their rights with little or no protections'. He has since left the UK for the same reason. James Clark is a partner at the firm Quillon Law; Jordan Hill, an associate at the firm, also contributed to this article
.jpg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C0%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)

The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Why Trump is threatening to double India's tariffs
Donald Trump signed an executive order imposing a 50% tariff on Indian imports, citing India 's purchase of Russian oil This action has been criticised by India's opposition and public as 'bullying', with analysts warning it could undo two decades of diplomatic progress between the two nations. India has accused the US of double standards regarding Russian imports and vowed to protect its national interests, despite concerns that further escalation could harm it beyond trade. Analysts suggest the relationship is at its worst point since 1998, with India facing pressure to reduce Russian oil purchases without appearing to surrender to Trump's demands. Indian government sources indicate a need to gradually repair ties with the US while increasing engagement with the BRICS bloc and other nations affected by Trump's tariffs and aid cuts.


Reuters
13 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump says he could impose more tariffs on China, similar to India duties, over Russian oil
WASHINGTON, Aug 6 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday said he could announce further tariffs on China similar to the 25% duties announced earlier on India over its purchases of Russian oil, depending on what happens. "Could happen," Trump told reporters, after saying he expected to announce more secondary sanctions aimed at pressuring Russia to end its war in Ukraine. He gave no further details. "It may happen ... I can't tell you yet," Trump said. "We did it with India. We're doing it probably with a couple of others. One of them could be China." Trump on Wednesday imposed an additional 25% tariff on Indian goods, on top of a 25% tariff announced previously, citing its continued purchases of Russian oil. The White House order did not mention China, which is another big purchaser of Russian oil. Last week, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned China that it could also face new tariffs if it continued buying Russian oil.