AFTER more than 300 years of a political and economic union entered between England and Scotland on January 6 1707, this week’s referendum on Scottish independence may bring to an end this union; and at a cost.
By the time this article goes to print, we may have a new independent Scotland if the ‘Yes’ campaign prevails.
But the chances are that the ‘No’ campaign, which is now dominated by a campaign of instilling fear and financial penalties, will more likely prevail.
Of late we have seen a plethora of British politicians, business people and celebrities such as David Beckham, being roped in to dissuade Scottish people from voting for independence.
The ‘No’ campaign, which is dominated by Westminster politicians, is reminding the Scottish voters of the financial consequences that will come with an independent Scotland.
Among other penalties is that the Scots will have to leave the Sterling pound and either join the Euro (they will need to join the European Union first) or come up with their own currency during the 18 months transition period.
Major Banks such as the Lloyds TSB and the Royal Bank of Scotland said they would move their headquarters to England in the event of a ‘Yes’ vote prevailing.
Major companies and shops such as ASDA, NEXT, B&Q, have also threatened to revise their businesses in Scotland with the possibility of relocating to the South if Scottish people vote ‘Yes’ for independence.
With all these threats who would vote for independence?
The faint-hearted certainly wouldn’t.
There is a striking parallel between Scotland and Zimbabwe; that for those who cherish independence this is the ultimate price to pay!
Zimbabwe, like what is likely to befall Scotland if the ‘Yes’ vote prevails, has been a subject of financial penalties and economic sabotage since 2000 and sadly though, many people are failing to see the continuation of the economic sabotage well after the July 31 2013 elections.
I spoke to a few colleagues who had visited Zimbabwe recently during the August summer holidays and they talked about how businesses are closing and people removing their money from Zimbabwean banks and taking it elsewhere. This is not new.
It happened just before 2008.
A few of the people I spoke to say they would not return to Zimbabwe to live; not now or the immediate future.
Maybe when they are in their late 60s, they say.
But my colleagues are not pausing to think why there is an economic downturn and companies offloading their capital to overseas banks.
After Zimbabwe embarked on a struggle for economic independence (2000-2008), there was an international campaign to penalise Zimbabwe and Zimbabweans for taking such an unprecedented move.
Addressing the House of Commons in 2008, the then Tory leader, David Cameron (and now the British PM), said about British companies and politicians doing business with Zimbabwe: “Businesses and individuals that have dealings in Zimbabwe must examine their responsibilities and make sure they do not make investments that prop up the regime.”
Tesco, a UK retail giant that was spending about £1 million on imports of vegetables from Zimbabwe, was not spared from this criticism and eventually conceded to international pressure in 2008.
The giant shop issued a statement stating that: “We cannot ignore the escalating political crisis in Zimbabwe, and the growing consensus in the international community – including from UK politicians on all sides – that further action must be taken to maximise the pressure for change.” (BBC News, June 30 2008).
Tesco had initially resisted the international pressure to stop trading with Zimbabwe arguing that the money they spent in Zimbabwe helped millions of poor people.
Other British companies that were criticised for continuing to operate in Zimbabwe included Anglo American, BP, Barclays, BAT, Rio Tinto, Shell and WPP.
However, some of these companies remained in Zimbabwe because they foresaw that the Chinese would fill in the gap once they withdrew.
Other international companies that were intimidated into withdrawing business ventures with Zimbabwe include the German company, Giesecke & Devrient, which printed bank note paper for the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ).
In July 2008, the company announced that it would no longer supply banknotes to the RBZ.
Will the Scottish ‘Yes’ Vote prevail?
It depends on the willpower of the Scottish people, and their understanding of independence.
Independence is not for the fainthearted, neither is it for those who think with their ‘stomachs’.
It is for those that are prepared to lose everything, including their lives.
In the 1970s many young men and women in Zimbabwe left schools, colleges, universities, their jobs as well as the comfort of their parents’ homes, to join the liberation war.
Many young men and women lost their lives for our freedom.
There are many people that left their businesses to join the war.
Furthermore, during the war when some families were driven into protected villages (Keeps) and faced the wrath for providing food and intelligence to the guerrillas, some fainthearted families left the rural areas to become squatters in areas like Chirambahuyo in the then Salisbury, now Harare.
In 1972 when the gallant sons and daughters were leaving the country to join the liberation war, the fainthearted like Morgan Tsvangirai sought sanctuary in industries and mines such as the Elastics and Tapes textile factory (Mutare) and later at the Bindura Nickel Mine in Mashonaland Central where they traded their independence with low paying jobs.
Likewise, during the land redistribution revolution (dubbed war of economic independence) the fainthearted like myself left their white collar jobs in the civil service (Zimbabwe) and traded their economic independence with labouring jobs in farms, factories and care homes in Botswana, South Africa and the UK.
Revolutions are not for the weak.
Indeed independence comes at a price and financial penalties are some of the prices to pay.