ROBBIE Dinwoodie wrote: ''The new Swinney leadership is resoundingly pro-European and opens up a debate about an accommodation on Nato membership, possibly on an associate or non-nuclear basis'' (March 1). For many of us in the SNP there are no grounds for accommodation with an organisation that continues to espouse nuclear weapons and in particular a first-strike option. To suggest that a country can be a ''non-nuclear member'' of an organisation based on nuclear deterrence is hypocritical and morally indefensible.
There is certainly nothing ''pro-European'' in being a Nato member. There is on the other hand a perfectly good case to be made for joining our non-aligned Nordic neighbours such as Finland and Sweden in working within the framework of the European Union's Common Foreign and Security Policy to further European security and contribute to global conflict prevention through
a mix of enlightened development
co-operation and participation in
UN-mandated operations. A more balanced geopolitical system depends on the EU and its member states being able to act increasingly as a counterweight to a polarised American view of how to ensure global security and development.
For a party that campaigned tirelessly for the removal of nuclear weapons from Scotland to sign up to the ultimate nuclear club will be a betrayal of ideals. A change in SNP policy on Nato will only weaken the case for the removal of the UK's ''nuclear deterrent'' from Scottish territory. I believe a majority of party members understand that a principled stand against nuclear weapons and nuclear power cannot be squared with Nato membership. The SNP has nothing to gain electorally from being accommodating on Nato and much to lose in terms of the principles on which the party has been built.
Alasdair Reid,
convener, Brussels Branch, SNP,
Rue de la Malaise 17,
B-1340 Ottignies, Belgium.
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