Every now and then, the official designation, United Kingdom, can seem particularly inapposite. The relationship between its component parts – England (population 56.5 million), Scotland (5.5 million), Wales (3.1 million), and Northern Ireland (1.9 million) – is rarely as harmonious as that name suggests. So it was this week when the first ministers of the last three met to sign an agreement which committed each nation to determine its own future “in its own way and in its own time.”

Scotland’s John Swinney even went so far as to deliberately and provocatively describe the UK’s new head of government, Andy Burnham, as the “last prime minister of the UK.” Meanwhile, Northern Ireland’s Michelle O’Neill claimed it had the right to a referendum on unification with the Republic of Ireland (population 5.4 million), arguing: “We will not accept or tolerate any prime minister telling us that right is off the table.”

Weak support for Welsh independence

Wales’s Rhun ap Iorwerth, however, was noticeably less forthright, insisting only that “Wales should have the power, the resources, the fair treatment we need as a nation to build the future our people deserve.” Dodging questions about independence, ap Iorwerth merely reminded the assembled audience that there are “flexibilities that Scotland already has right now (that) as a minimum (should) be handed to Wales.”

His hesitation is a tacit acknowledgement there is relatively scant support for independence in Wales. Indeed, the latest poll, conducted this August, suggested that (after “don’t knows” were removed) only a third of Welsh voters would currently vote to leave the UK.

True, public opinion in Scotland is markedly different. But even there the latest poll, conducted this spring, suggested that those who want to leave the UK are outnumbered by those who want to remain by a margin of 56% to 44% – mirroring almost exactly the result of the independence referendum held back in 2014. The Scottish National Party that First Minister Swinney leads might be pushing for another vote but, whatever its representatives say in public, they cannot be confident in private that they would win it. Indeed, the serious hit to GDP suffered by the UK as a result of its decision to leave the EU would probably lend even more weight to their opponents’ argument that secession would be an economic disaster.

In any case, Swinney knows – not least because it was confirmed by a decision of the UK’s Supreme Court in 2022 – that, legally and constitutionally, the only legislature that can grant Scotland a referendum is not the Scottish but the UK’s 650-seat Parliament down in London – an institution in which, incidentally, some 57 Scottish MPs sit.

Sectarian divides in Northern Ireland

The situation in Northern Ireland is different again. The 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement that helped end decades of violent conflict there does make provision for a border poll to be held should it look “likely” that there is majority support for Irish unification on both sides of the border. At the moment it does not.

True, there is little doubt that such a majority could be found in the Republic of Ireland – at least in theory (it is noticeable, for instance, that the Irish Taoiseach – prime minister – Micheal Martin, didn’t respond to President Donald Trump’s apparent support for a united Ireland by demanding a vote anytime soon). But the latest poll found that, in contrast to the two-thirds of voters in the republic who support unification, only just over a third of those in the North feel the same way – a proportion which, if anything, has declined rather than grown over the last 10 years and one which continues to reflect deep sectarian differences between the mainly Roman Catholic “nationalist” population and the mainly Protestant “unionist” population which remains wedded to its assertively British identity.

In any case, the decision to hold an Irish border poll lies legally not with the first minister of Northern Ireland but with the UK government’s secretary of state for Northern Ireland. And even if that were not the case (which it is), despite the hierarchy implied by their official positions, Northern Ireland’s first minister has no more authority than the deputy first minister, who, as a unionist, is determined that it should remain part of the UK.

Ultimately, by meeting this week and signing an agreement, the first ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland had two main aims: 1) to reassure their supporters that they remain committed to the cause of independence and 2) to put pressure on a new British prime minister. The first aim may have been realized. But the second is highly unlikely to have had much effect: as a Number Ten Downing Street spokesman told journalists in the wake of their intervention, “The UK government is focused on addressing the issues that matter most to families … rather than engaging in constitutional debates or further referendums.”

In short, misnomer or not, the United Kingdom is going to be around for a few years yet.

Originally published at https://www.aa.com.tr/en/opinion/a-fractured-union-scotland-wales-and-northern-ireland-first-ministers-meeting/4060293