THE first part of this series on Independence explored the question of Bermudian sovereignty from an international, historical and economic perspective.

There are other questions that demand our attention today that weren't on the table in 1968, some of them were not even on the table in 1995 when Sir John Swan's Government held a referendum on Independence:

1. How does the concept of Independence impact on the fact that all Bermudians are now full British citizens, and many of us have British passports?

2. What does Independence mean in a world of globalisation? Can a micro-state in an increasingly integrated world ever be truly "independent"?

3. What about the judiciary?

4. Prosperity, the British connection and relations with America, how does that work?

5. What happens when Bermuda's interests and Britain's conflict?

1) How does the concept of Independence impact on the fact that all Bermudians are now full British citizens and many of us have British passports?

IN the past year or so Bermudians have been granted true full British citizenship (including the right of abode) and therefore access to the whole of the European Union. Like it or not, and some don't like it at all, we Bermudians are British.

That means that we all are technically "Europeans", irrespective of our cultural, ethnic or racial attributes. With this backdrop, what would Independence mean to Bermudians going forward? Would we continue to be "Europeans"?

It appears likely that Independence would end the access of Bermudians to live and work in the UK and Europe. Perhaps those who already have taken British passports will be able to retain that right but it is unlikely that the next generation of Bermudians would be entitled to it. In any case, what's the point of Independence if all of us remain British citizens?

It appears that Independence would force us to choose between being solely Bermudians or Bermudian/British/EU citizens. Before these latest changes there was an issue between so-called "Status Bermudians" and "Born Bermudians".

The issue was that status Bermudians always had a default citizenship, usually British, to fall back on if things didn't work out in Bermuda, but born Bermudians (read, black Bermudians) didn't have this fall-back option. This issue was raised to question the ultimate commitment of status Bermudians to Bermuda. Now that all Bermudians are full British citizens this issue is dead.

Bermudians' access to the entire European Union in terms of job opportunities is huge, particularly for young people. Bermuda can be quite restricting for young people and the kind of breadth of exposure and potential for career opportunity is inestimable and is not something one would want to put at risk.

For Baby Boomers like myself, or older folk, living or working in Europe is not that important, we've already made our choices, but for younger and future generations it is a very important issue. This could prove a big obstacle for the pro-Independence argument.

Bermudians' favourite pastime, bar none, is travel. We have got to be one of the most travelled people on earth. Today travel has become a hassle in so many ways, sometimes including having a Bermuda passport. A British passport makes travelling much less of a hassle. There's nothing we can do about the other hassles.

2) What does Independence mean in a world of globalisation?

THIS question probes the very core of the concept of sovereignty, and its meaning in today's world. In this world of the Internet and globalisation, geography is often meaningless. Is any country truly independent? Even the world's only superpower is not independent. On the political front the US has found, to its chagrin, that world opinion really does matter.

That, despite its arsenal of nuclear weapons, it cannot just do what it likes to whom it likes with impunity. World opinion does matter because it is only with the approval, or at the very least, acquiescence, of other countries that one country's actions and policies can be viewed as legitimate.

Despite being by far the world's largest economic entity, the US cannot conduct economic policy independent of the rest of the world. The US trade deficit is financed by selling US treasury bonds to foreign countries.

If these countries disapprove of US economic policy they will sell these bonds and drive down the value of the dollar and drive up US interest rates. Nations of the world are interdependent. If the mighty USA cannot be Independent in today's world, who can be? Can little Bermuda?

Let's look at the European Union. The countries in the European Union have given up their complete Independence to form the EU. Member states of the EU have given up important parts of their sovereignty for various pan European goals. A country's currency is an important element of nationhood, but most EU countries have given it up in favour of the euro. More importantly, they have given up control of monetary policy to the European Central Bank and fiscal policy, a unique power of government, is overseen and controlled by formulas emanating from the Maastricht Treaty.

Moreover, myriad regulations governing movement of people and commerce across borders is formulated and administered in Brussels by a faceless army of bureaucrats who are not elected and their accountability is at best nebulous, at worst non-existent. The ultimate proof that EU member countries have given up parts of their sovereignty is the existence of a European Parliament and a European Court. Even Britain has given up some of her sovereign rights. She is the maverick of the EU group, because she has kept her own currency, fiscal and monetary policy-making apparatus. In the macrocosm there is sovereignty, the microcosmic equivalent is citizenship. If this is true then EU citizens who have subordinated their national citizenship in favour of being a citizen of Europe collectively subordinate their country's sovereignty to Europe.

Therefore, moving from the microcosm to the macrocosm, it logically follows that as Bermudians are indeed British, then Bermuda must be Britain, or at least an integral part thereof, like a town in Surrey would be. This might be similar to the French Caribbean islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe being departments of France, not French colonies. Thus our parliament would be a sort of "city council", our Premier the equivalent of Mayor, etc.

There are, however, some major anomalies with this small-town paradigm: whilst we are part of Britain we pay no British taxes, neither do we receive any kind of financial assistance from the UK. Britain does not build or maintain our roads, or provide us with transportation to the rest of Britain (like a motorway system would), or educate our children or provide our electricity. Even on the defence front/security, where Britain has clear responsibilities, we have to pay Britain for the use of her forces. Doesn't this make them like mercenaries in this context? Most significantly, we Bermudians cannot vote for our representative in the mother of parliaments. I guess there being no taxation, there is no representation.

Bermuda is in a constitutional halfway house (some would say no man's land): on the one hand integrated into the bosom of British citizenry, yet on the other hand, by virtue of our geography, culturally and economically distinct from the mother country. And we have no UK franchise. Our current status redefines what it is to be a "colony". There's never before been a colony like today's Bermuda. These conflicts are additional reasons why independence is such a difficult and divisive subject for Bermudians.

Why would countries voluntarily cede important parts of their hard-won sovereignty? What is this unseen tie that binds? The answer is trade, commerce and the financing thereof. So like it or not, and in many cases national leaders don't like it, nations are dependent on each other because of trade.

If Britain, like the US, cannot be independent in this modern world, how can little Bermuda? The EU recognises the true fact that in today's world no country is independent. The EU is an attempt to advantageously govern and manage, if not totally control, the interdependency of a group of nations in this modern age.

Britain, a country that has spilled millions of its citizens' blood to retain its sovereignty, has given up a part of this sovereignty, to be a member of the EU. Wouldn't Independence for Bermuda, at this point in history, be going counter to the world trend?

3) What about the judiciary?

THE recent flap about the Chief Justice (CJ) highlights that the UK has the right to appoint the CJ over and above any opinion of the local government. Is this a serious issue? Yes, it is, but is this an issue critical enough to proceed to Independence over?

Certainly as a micro-state we would like to think that we should be able to choose the CJ for ourselves. How much power does this UK appointed individual have? It certainly is an important and powerful position. He/she not only is the head judge on island but would be critical in the appointment of other officers of the court beneath him/her. As a body these judges interpret the law and administer justice. And as a country of laws, and not men, the judiciary occupies an essential place in the construct that makes a civilised democratic country.

On the other hand, the laws that judges interpret are "Made in Bermuda," and if the legislature does not like the way judges interpret them, local legislators can amend the laws to clarify what the elected body intended should happen in particular circumstances.

Moreover, local decisions can be overturned by appeal to the travelling Court of Appeal or ultimately to the Privy Council in London. There are many Independent Caribbean countries that still, despite their Independence, retain the right of appeal to the Privy Council.

The politicisation of the CJ's position which took place in the recent controversy also highlighted one of the problems with small-island judiciaries. In this case the politicisation might not have been about only righting an injustice but also to advance the Government's pro-Independence case. So while the imposition of an outside CJ was not a popular move it doesn't appear to be sufficiently critical, in the total scheme of things, to reasonably spark Bermuda to "Sue for Independence" (all other things being equal).

4) Prosperity, the British Connection and Relations with America, how does that work?

BERMUDA is a wealthy island. Is the root cause of our prosperity due to our British status? If that were true other British colonies or even ex-colonies should be equally prosperous.

So clearly it is not that simple. Is our prosperity based on our proximity to the USA?

If so, many of the Caribbean basin islands should be much more prosperous than we are because they are closer to the States than Bermuda. So that's not it either.

When one searches for the root causes for Bermuda's economic success one can easily come up with many valid reasons. But there is an overarching relationship between our success over the course of our history and our geographic location. It's not that we're that close to America, it's the parts of America we're uniquely close to: New York, Washington, Boston, Philadelphia.

These are cities where most of America's heavy hitters, political and financial, live. Bermuda has had a unique and close relationship with its large powerful neighbour since the gunpowder cavern plot. After the War of 1812, America and Britain have become close allies and that has been important to Bermuda's fortunes, during peacetime and war. So the British-Bermuda-America connection has had a positive impact on our economic development. It's had an impact in respect of providing America with an unusual level of comfort with Bermuda, in terms of placing strategic assets in Bermuda (the bases), doing business and having fun (tourism). How would Independence impact this comfort level ?

The importance of this comfort with Bermuda cannot be overemphasised. For instance, of all the countries in the world the US has pre-customs clearance in only two countries: Canada and Bermuda. There is no pre-customs clearance with the UK, its closest ally, or the Bahamas or the Cayman Islands. Another example is the tax treaty between the US and Bermuda. For the US Government to use up its resources, to take the time and trouble to negotiate a treaty with a country that is smaller than a small town in the Mid West is incredible. But such is the "special relationship" between the United States and Bermuda.

While the fact that we are closely connected to their closest ally is part of it, clearly the conduct of the Bermudian people and its successive Governments have also had a great deal to do with it. Bermuda has usually conducted its own affairs in a manner that the US could be confident about, co-operating on many things over the years.

So Bermudians have greatly enhanced that positive background that the close relationship between the US and the UK laid down and made it into a "special relationship".

Despite foreign relations being within the purview of the UK Government, Bermuda has had a long string of "Ambassadors" to the US. Every Premier of Bermuda (and some Ministers too) has conducted talks with US officials on matters of mutual interest. In addition, we have had the benefit of ambassadors like Hubert Smith and the Talbot Brothers and others who have made no small contribution to the special relationship between the leviathan and the minnow.

Independence would impair this relationship only if we as a people and our Government acted stupidly. American business takes comfort in our British legal institutions. That could remain in an Independent Bermuda, as Premier Scott has recently asserted.

But we must act like we understand that our relationship with America is in our own hands, whether we are Independent or remain in our current status. Utterances of Government ministers in recent years have left one wondering if there is a clear understanding as to the importance of this special relationship and that it must be preserved and nurtured.

As a micro-state Bermuda is not interdependent it is DEPENDENT. Our current status can be clearly stated as follows: Bermuda is legally dependent to some extent on Britain and in virtually all other aspects DEPENDENT on America.

If we remove the legal relationship with the UK we will still be dependent on America, probably even more so. Any elected Bermuda Government that does not fully recognise these realities and fully incorporate them into its strategies and policies does not deserve to be there. Therefore, any discussion on Independence needs to have as one of its core elements the issue of what our relationship with America will be. Our economic success going forward will depend on how that relationship will be managed and/or nurtured.

It's always better to be lucky than smart. I maintain that Bermuda has historically been very, very lucky. Our geographic location (luck) and British heritage (also luck) have been keys. Stupidity, however, can undo good luck.

5)What happens when Bermuda's interests and Britain's conflict?

THERE have been times, thankfully very seldom, where Britain has imposed her will on Bermuda by threatening to use and order-in-council (their ultimate weapon).

Back in 1997, in matters relating to the promulgation of the Proceeds of Crime Act, Bermuda was, understandably very reluctant to include "Fiscal Offences," otherwise called tax evasion, as one of the crimes covered by the Proceeds of Crime Act.

But enormous pressure was applied on Bermuda by the UK and a subtle but clear threat was communicated that if we didn't include fiscal offences the ultimate weapon could be used to force us to do so.

Was this a reason for Bermuda to "Sue for Independence?" To my knowledge, which is limited in this regard, this was the closest the Bermuda/UK relationship came to a legitimate impasse whereby the UK was pressuring Bermuda to take an action that was in its interest that clearly was not in Bermuda's.

In the event, Bermuda's economic interests were not significantly harmed, but this is the kind of issue if unresolved could rightly lead Bermuda to change its relationship with the UK. In such a circumstance Bermuda would have to weigh the costs and benefits. If the costs, both economic and social, of acquiescing to the UK's objectives outweigh the benefits of the status quo then that would be a valid reason to "Sue for Independence."

Such a situation would have to be a very real and critical one (a clear and present danger). The issues would have to be fully explained to the Bermudian people. A public debate would be necessary. Only with the people's specific approval could action be taken to "Sue for independence". We have no such situation today.

In Part Three we will try to put these ideas together and come to some conclusions.