Nicola Sturgeon ran out of road. It is as simple as that. Scotland’s first minister, a supreme communicator with a strong claim to being the most effective political leader in Britain, concluded the only way was down. The bigger and more important point is that her departure signifies an independence movement that also cannot see the next step forward.
Even before one gets to her recent mistakes, it had become clear that Sturgeon was out of ideas on how to advance the cause in the face of intransigence from Westminster. This, far more than her miscalculations on her gender recognition reform bill, is the key point. When Scottish Nationalists looked for a plan on how to force a fresh referendum, they realised she had no answers.
There is no reason to doubt her sincerity when she said that “in my head and in my heart I know that time is now”. But another way of putting this is that she has recognised that she is facing ever tougher battles and no longer has the fight left to overcome them.
Sturgeon was good enough to know she was making mistakes she might not have made a few years ago. The temptation will be to view the row over the GRR bill, which made it significantly easier for people to change their official gender, as the catalyst. But it was more symptom than cause. Behind the empathetic manner, Sturgeon was a ruthless leader who crushed internal opposition. Such people cannot be seen to have lost their touch. This was perhaps the first time Sturgeon found herself badly out of step with her country, to the extent that when Westminster vetoed the measure, a majority of Scots sided with it.
Nicola Sturgeon: Independence is Scotland’s only route to rejoining EU
Nicola Sturgeon: ‘Brexit makes a united Ireland more likely’
Alex Salmond obituary: Commanding figure who came close to breaking up the United Kingdom
‘We need to inject some passion’: Young Scottish independence activists think the movement has lost verve
There were other problems, which the independence cause was used to obscure. Her SNP government has faced deepening criticism over its record on education, the NHS and drug deaths. There were also attacks over a loan made to the party by her husband, the SNP’s chief executive.
But above all this was the independence issue. Only Westminster can grant another referendum and it has refused to do so, arguing that only nine years have passed since the last and rejecting the argument that Brexit had created a material change of circumstances. Sturgeon, wisely unwilling to support an illegal poll, was unable to force the issue, even when a majority of seats at the Scottish elections were won by parties supporting independence.
Subsequent wheezes failed to launch. A legal challenge on the right to hold a vote was defeated without the expected uproar. Her last plan, to declare the next Westminster elections a de facto referendum, was deeply flawed and opposed even within the SNP. Nor was she able to broaden nationalism’s appeal beyond her core support.
Even Brexit was a double-edged blade, reigniting separatism but raising new questions around the practicalities. In the latest effort to stave off critics, Sturgeon had called a conference next month on tactics. But the event looked likely to turn into an attack on her leadership and a showcase for more radical and implausible action.
Focus now turns to the succession. Some will want a more confrontational leader, though that could backfire. And there are toxic divisions to manage.
There is no certain replacement, though many are talking up Kate Forbes, the young finance minister. A deeply religious figure known to be unhappy with the gender bill, she had the good fortune to be on maternity leave during the vote.
But the next leader will need to look like they have a credible plan to restore momentum to the independence push. And we know this is not easy — if it was, Sturgeon would have done it.
The party with the most to gain now is Labour. Its Scottish leader, Anas Sarwar, is already targeting 12-15 gains in the Westminster elections — a significant advance. And the prospect of a Labour government in London will boost its vote in Scotland. This revival is still the unionists’ best hope of stemming the separatist tide.
Independence remains the defining issue in Scottish politics and is likely to stay so regardless of who picks up the SNP baton. Separatist sentiment is not fading and support is higher among younger voters. The SNPs challenge is to construct a campaign to raise support to levels which cannot be ignored. Another referendum, though it may take a decade, is still a likely eventuality. But leaders matter and stalemate favours the unionists, as does a Labour resurgence.
Unionists may celebrate the end of a formidable foe, but a situation in which about half of Scots want independence yet democracy denies them a vehicle to secure it cannot be sustained indefinitely. They too need to drive up support for their cause.
As for Sturgeon herself, within minutes of the news, pundits were noting that she had not secured independence and trotting out the cliché that all political careers end in failure. This is an inadequate conclusion. She rebuilt the separatist campaign after the 2014 defeat and created an image of a modern, confident, liberal Scotland capable of standing on its own. That she did not get all the way there does not mean she did not advance the journey.
Hers are big shoes to fill and history may yet show that her tenure was the high water mark of separatism. This is a good day for unionists. Nonetheless, those who want to preserve the UK would be foolish to rest easy and assume the fight is now won just because a talented general has left the field.
Robert Shrimsley is a Financial Times columnist
This article first appeared in the Financial Times