[billyruffian]

I don't believe anything without evidence. It seems like a reasonable piece of tidying up that settles the legal juristiction of vessels in those waters but I look forward to seeing the evidence that it was a spiteful landgrab (watergrab?) so I can adjust my beliefs.

On balance, the maritime border appears to me to have been restruck to be fair.

[ggm]

Here's a BBC piece from 2013: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20042...

Here's a 2001 legal review from glasgow Caledonia university which obviously favours Scottish interests: https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/12/1/77/359040?login=t...

Here's closing remarks from the SNP on a parliamentary debate, that shows the predominant driving factor was fisheries, and (if you read the rest of the debate) suggests a lot of confusion about what was being discussed and why): https://www.theyworkforyou.com/sp/?id=2000-04-26.9.0#g58.1

Here's two extremely partisan takes by a pro Indy scot who claims to have previously negotiated sea boundary changes. What's interesting is the "northward drift" : https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/01/scotlands-st...

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/01/scotlandengl...

[billyruffian]

Thank you for taking the time to do that and I know we are drifting massively off-topic. The blogs posts fail the PROMPT test for me but the Zahraa, 2001 paper is much more interesting and makes a decent case that this isn't a settled issue and it probably should be sooner rather than later.