In last weekend's Scotland on Sunday Duncan Hamilton claimed a successful eurozone entails "proud nations accepting a European uniformity rather than responding to the instinctive desire to protect and promote their national interest".
Which would seem to militate against greater Scottish autonomy in the context of retaining sterling.
By the same token, if an 'independent' Scotland joined the eurozone, she would presumably have to accept "European uniformity" rather than "protect and promote" the "national interest".
It's also curious how Mr Hamilton does not differentiate in terms of size regarding "the very countries which need to change the most" also being "those least likely to be allowed to do so by voters". However, as regards Ireland and Iceland, he says the "advantages of small, nimble, responsive nations in a crisis is striking."
Of course, the fact that he also manages to make a virtue of the contrasting responses of both Ireland and Iceland to their debt problems - "over-achieving" in its deficit reduction and default respectively - perhaps suggests a degree of rhetorical contrivance.
Indeed, given the need for decisive action and the external influences involved, perhaps Mr Hamiltion is making a virtue of necessity when he talks of the "small, nimble and responsive nations in a crisis".
And perhaps he should have cited the lumbering behemoth that is the UK with regard to decisive action taken to avert a possible sovereign debt crisis, but on the other hand I suspect Mr Hamilton wasn't particularly impressed by that either.
(This was initially drafted as a letter to the newspaper, but for various reasons was never sent. But this explains the less long-winded than usual nature of the post!)