The National:

BORIS Johnson is staking his claim to be the most successful recruiting officer Scottish independence campaigners have ever known.

Whenever the Prime Minister opens his mouth to speak about our country, he hammers another nail in the Union’s coffin.

But the Tory leader is just representative of English politician’s delusion about Scotland – just look at Keir Starmer.

It is refreshing, then, to see someone at Westminster who really understands what’s going on up here.

Financial Times associate editor Philip Stephens has shown just that in a searing critique of Johnson.

It was even shared by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

READ MORE: Boris Johnson furious at Scotland because it's 'too left-wing'

He points out that the Internal Market Bill, which will trample over devolution and break international law, is pushing the UK to breaking point. “By asserting unassailable English supremacy, the prime minister is inviting Scotland to leave the union,” he writes.

He condemns the PM’s “ignorant” assertion earlier this year that there is “no such thing” as a Scotland/England Border – a line parroted by Scottish Tories. “Scotland did not give up its border or its nationhood — nor its distinct legal and educational systems” in the 1707 Act of Union, Stephens notes.

He continues: “The union was about collaboration abroad. Scotland secured access to the emerging British empire, and England to talented entrepreneurs, engineers and administrators. With empire long gone, Brexit has put an end to any notion of a joint enterprise beyond British shores. Instead, Scotland is presented with a choice: if it sticks with England, it cuts itself off from Europe. The referendum vote to leave the EU was bad enough. The threat to defy international law on the way to a no-deal Brexit risks leaving Scotland isolated on the edge of its own continent.”

READ MORE: Daily Mail's Scottish and English front pages prove the Union is ridiculous

The UK Government’s “shambolic bluster” during the pandemic is contrasted with the Scottish Government’s “cautious, open” approach. Tory ministers are also criticised for planning a power grab as part of the internal market legislation.

“There is no reason why the other nations of the union should be barred a say in negotiating trade deals and the setting of standards,” Stephens writes, “or that UK-wide norms must exclude a measure of national discretion. But no, English MPs at Westminster will decide what Scotland eats.”

On independence, the FT editor says Johnson has backed himself into a corner. Either he will try to block independence, even if the SNP win a majority at next year’s election, or will bombard Scottish voters with claims about Holyrood’s fiscal reliance on Westminster.

“Both approaches serve the nationalists,” Stephens asserts. “The first by legitimising the SNP charge that England is locking Scotland into a state of vassalage; the second by displaying a condescending contempt calculated to energise nationalists. Of course, independence would bring severe economic challenges. But if there was a lesson from the Brexit vote in 2016 it was that identity trumps economics.”

He concludes: “Break-up may not be preordained, but none looks so determined as Mr Johnson to force Scotland’s hand.”

Bring it on.