Why Scotland joining Efta or EEA is infinitely preferable to the EU

The National

a day ago

Since then, there has been an understandable desire expressed by many to rejoin the EU after independence, though how that is delivered remains to be seen.
However, the debate thus far has not fully addressed other options: notably membership of Efta/the EEA, at least in the medium term.
Efta is the European Free Trade Association. It was formed in 1960 as kind of an economic waiting room prior to EU accession. The UK was a member of Efta before 1973 when it passed legislation to become a member of the EU. Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, and Lichtenstein never left the waiting room, and currently comprise Efta.
READ MORE: These key economic truths show how independent Scotland and Wales can succeed
The EEA is the European Economic Area. This was a treaty signed in 1992 which enabled all the EU states and the Efta members (excluding Switzerland) to be part of the single market. This requires all members of the EEA to respect the four freedoms of movement – workers, goods, services, and capital.
Switzerland has a series of bilateral treaties with the EU under which it must abide by these four freedoms, but it is much more complicated than EEA membership.
I have attended two biennial seminars of the Efta/EEA council in Brussels, and was struck by the positive engagement between all EEA members, Efta and the EU.
There is this slogan against Efta membership that Scotland would be 'rule takers, not rule makers'. This ignores the fact that within the EEA treaty, all EEA states must be closely consulted on any change in EU law pertaining to the EEA agreement.
On many occasions, Efta/EEA members engaged in the process early and had a positive formative influence on the law.
READ MORE: Assa Samake-Roman: What if we are wrong about reasons for rise in far-right support?
While Efta/EEA members do not have a vote on laws, I asked Efta members if they had ever had EU laws forced on them against their will. They couldn't think of any such occasions. Many smaller EU states feel they have no influence at all.
Upon a 'democratic event' affirming majority support for independence, Scotland could apply to join Efta.
While I cannot speak on their behalf, I can safely say there is great support among Efta officials for Scottish membership.
The three Efta/EEA members would then lobby to get an independent Scotland into the EEA. Again, I cannot speak on their behalf, but when I last spoke with Efta officials they saw no impediment to Scotland joining Efta and the EEA within a few short months. Compare this to the EU accession process.
This could easily take 10 years. EU law (the acquis) comprises 35 chapters, all of which would need to be reflected in Scots law, and Scotland would have to demonstrate that it has the institutions in place to apply EU law. It doesn't, because the 'Scottish' civil service is merely an appendage of the UK state.
File photo of a Yes for EU rally at the Scottish parliamentAll 27 EU member states have veto power at any stage in the process. Think Spain and Catalonia. At the recent SSRG conference in Dunfermline, we held a panel on Efta/EEA membership. I was in touch with @YesforEU, and asked if any known prominent advocate for Scotland in the EU would be willing to speak. We got zero responses.
There seems to be a contrived prevailing assumption that, because Scots voted to remain in the EU in 2016, rejoining the EU after independence would be easy and preferable to Efta membership.
I was in touch with a well-known purportedly pro-indy corporate lobbyist, who after changing his mind, assured me that the EU membership 'polled' better than Efta/EEA, therefore independence should be automatically linked with EU membership.
However, that assumes Scots are well-informed about the pros and cons of membership of both, and can make an informed decision. This debate has yet to be held.
This ignores the many independence supporters who, despite the Scottish vote to remain in 2016, take a dim view of EU membership.
As an American with UK citizenship through my Scottish father, I have been able to carve out a career as a university teacher in France. When I came to France in 1995, I felt a genuine optimism towards the economic objectives of the EU, and have benefited from it.
My view of the EU has changed drastically since then. The musician Frank Zappa famously remarked that '[US] Politics is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex'. Regrettably, the same can increasingly be said of the EU and Nato, which are becoming indistinguishable.
At the same time, the EU is increasingly authoritarian. Whether you agree with them or not, look at how Viktor Orban in Hungary and Robert Fico in Slovakia have been threatened because of their opposition to the EU approach to Russia and Ukraine.
It also managed to get Calin Georgescu eliminated in Romania as a presidential candidate because he dissented from Ursula Von der Leyen's orthodoxy.
Kaja Kallas is the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security PolicyAnd don't get me going on the incompetence and stupidity of Kaja Kallas, the EU foreign minister. She is openly Russophobic, speaks about defeating and carving up Russia, and laments that if the EU cannot defeat Russia, how can it defeat China?
Does Scotland want to join THAT EU? What happens when that bile is directed at Scotland if it dissents from EU-manufactured consent?
Maybe, over time, the EU leadership will regain some sanity, get back to its original economic purpose and stop violating its members' sovereignty and cultures.
Until then, Scotland should join Efta/the EEA, recoup and exercise its popular sovereignty, and let the EU sort itself out. Whether it does or not, Scotland will be much better off as an Efta/EEA member, and will be warmly welcomed. Later, there is no obstacle to joining the EU, if that is what Scots democratically decide.
Dr Mark McNaught is the founder of the Scottish Sovereignty Research Group and Maître de Conférences at the University of Rennes 2, France