By Martin Armstrong
Something very strange is happening around the United Kingdom, and the political establishment would be foolish to dismiss it. President Donald Trump has now openly endorsed the reunification of Ireland, describing it as one of the “naturals” of all time and saying he would “love” to see it happen. Then he was asked about Scottish independence and suddenly became much more careful, replying, “That one I won’t talk about yet.” Yet? That is an interesting word because Trump did not reject the possibility. He simply declined to discuss it NOW, precisely as separatist pressure is again rising across the United Kingdom.
Separatist movements in Australia have been pushing the secession button for years in particular Western Australia which has considerable public support for a divorce from socialist Australia. A North Queensland state also has substantial support from voters who say they have had enough of being dictated to by Brisbane, 1000 klms to the south.
The timing for UK could hardly be more remarkable. Within days of Trump’s comments, the nationalist leaders of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland came together in Cardiff and declared that “Westminster’s time is coming to an end.” Scotland’s SNP, Wales’ Plaid Cymru, and Sinn Féin in Northern Ireland are now coordinating around the principle that their nations should determine their own constitutional futures. For the first time in the era of devolution, all three governments outside England are led by parties committed either to independence or Irish reunification. These events should not be viewed separately because they are manifestations of the same declining confidence in centralized political authority.
Northern Ireland is especially significant because unlike Scotland or Wales, there is already a legal mechanism for leaving the United Kingdom. The 1998 Good Friday Agreement provides for the possibility of a border poll if it appears likely that a majority would favor a united Ireland. That means Irish reunification is not some theoretical constitutional fantasy. There is an internationally recognized political path through which Northern Ireland could eventually leave Britain and join the Republic of Ireland.
Brexit itself was driven partly by precisely that desire to reclaim political sovereignty. Britain told Brussels that decisions affecting British citizens should be made in Britain. Fine. Scotland can now turn around and make precisely the same argument toward Westminster. Northern Ireland can make it toward London. Wales can eventually make it as well. Once you establish the principle that political sovereignty belongs closer to the people, you cannot simply declare that principle legitimate when Britain uses it against Brussels but illegitimate when Scotland uses it against Britain.
Trump appears to recognize that the political map is not carved in stone. He has long approached geopolitics much more transactionally than the traditional diplomatic establishment. Borders, alliances, trade relationships, and political structures are not sacred merely because politicians have become accustomed to them. His willingness to discuss Irish reunification so casually therefore reflects something much larger than Ireland itself. The assumption that the United Kingdom will remain permanently united is no longer universally taken for granted.
His refusal to discuss Scotland is perhaps even more revealing. Trump owns property in Scotland and has extensive personal and business connections there, so there are obvious reasons for him to tread carefully. But saying “That one I won’t talk about yet” is not the same as saying Scottish independence is impossible.
The SNP, Plaid Cymru, and Sinn Féin broadly envision their futures inside the European Union. They want independence from Westminster while simultaneously embracing political integration with Brussels. I have never understood how surrendering sovereignty to one capital after escaping another constitutes independence. Scotland should have the right to govern Scotland, but genuine independence means sovereignty, not simply exchanging London bureaucrats for European bureaucrats.
Nevertheless, their contradiction does not make the separatist trend disappear. The political pressure itself is real, and it extends far beyond Britain. Catalonia challenged Madrid. Nationalist movements remain active in Flanders, Corsica, and elsewhere. Giorgia Meloni is calling for a confederal Europe that restores greater authority to sovereign nations. Nationalist and anti-establishment parties are gaining ground because centralized political structures are increasingly colliding with local interests.
This is precisely what the Cycle of War and civil unrest models were warning about when I discussed Scotland years before the 2014 referendum shocked Westminster. Economic decline does not merely change stock markets and currencies. It changes POLITICAL STRUCTURES. When government can no longer deliver prosperity, populations begin questioning why the government itself should continue to exist in its present form.
Trump’s comments therefore should not be dismissed as another offhand remark. The President of the United States has publicly said he would “love” to see Ireland reunified while deliberately leaving Scotland unanswered. Within days, the nationalist leaders governing Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland were sitting together declaring that Westminster’s era is coming to an end. None of this means the United Kingdom disappears tomorrow, but anyone looking at the direction of the political cycle should recognize what is taking place.
