SCOTLAND's former counter-terrorism tsar has attacked what he has called "scurrilous scaremongering" about the efficiency of intelligence services in a post-independence Scotland by pro-union campaigners.
Allan Burnett insisted security services could be "readily created" and traditional alliances easily maintained if Scots vote Yes next year.
His remarks come as figures close to the UK security establishment warn that SNP strategists have "naïvely" underestimated how much time and money it will take to create a secret police service.
Burnett was the old Strathclyde Police's head of intelligence and Scotland's counter-terrorism co-ordinator before retiring in 2010 with the rank of assistant chief constable, and endorsing the SNP.
He believes Scottish policing – with the biggest Special Branch outside London and substantial existing capacity to deal with terrorists and organised crime – already has the basis of a strong MI5-style domestic security service.
He has accused UK authorities of refusing to discuss post-independence intelligence sharing in order "to cut off debate" on the issue.
Burnett said: "Their studied intention is to fill the discussion gap they have created with scurrilous scaremongering. 'The Americans won't share intelligence with you', 'you're leaving yourselves open to terrorist attack.' The truth is that an independent Scotland would face less of a threat, intelligence institutions will be readily created, and allies will remain allies."
Burnett's views on a domestic security service chime with those of Peter Jackson, an international expert in the creation of modern intelligence services.
Writing in today's Sunday Herald, right, Canadian-born Jackson, professor of security at Glasgow University, said Special Branch would form a "suitable nucleus" of any Scottish MI5. And he said Scotland, like Canada and Nordic states, would probably forego an MI6-style overseas spy network, instead relying on pooled intelligence or diplomatic open sources.
Jackson agrees with Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, who has argued that espionage services in the rest of the UK would have an interest in sharing intelligence with Scotland.
Burnett said: "The rumour that allies will shun us comes from the same box of tricks as the European Union exclusion nonsense.
"We occupy a strategically vital position in the North Atlantic. Our friends, including those south of the Border, will want us as allies as much as we want them."
But Labour peer Meta Ramsay disagrees. The former senior MI6 officer believes English, American and other overseas services would take some time to trust their new Scottish partners.
She said: "Do not assume that everybody – even nice Nordic and other countries, and even the ones near to you – will just give you all their stuff because you're Scotland and they quite like you."
Agencies don't share intelligence with those they like, she stressed, they share with those they trust and only when it is in their own interests to do so.
Ramsay – a Glasgow University-trained Russian expert – describes SNP rhetoric on intelligence as "extremely naïve".
She said: "They are talking about a world about which they obviously do not know - it is not going to be as simple as they think."
Ramsay said there are countries which get by with only a domestic security service, such as Finland and Sweden, where she served during the Cold War.
But she also disagrees on how easy it would be to create a Nordic-style domestic security service.
She said: "There seems to be an assumption, which I think is wrong, that Special Branch can be transformed by waving a magic wand into a security service. In my opinion the two things are not the same."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article