In times like these, political journalists like me tend to reach for the collected works of WB Yeats. “All changed, changed utterly,” he wrote after Ireland’s Easter rebellion, and those words could not be more appropriate as a description of Scottish politics in the wake of yesterday’s Brexit vote. The Yeats poem captured a decisive moment that altered everything in its wake; for Scotland that moment was the 2014 independence referendum.

Nicola Sturgeon: second Scottish independence poll highly likely Read more

I say “Scottish politics”, for any vestige of “British politics” is now pushing up the proverbial daisies. The 2010 general election (in which Labour’s vote actually increased north of the border) sustained it for a while, but in every election since it has suffered death by a thousand cuts. In electoral and constitutional terms (if not broader social attitudes), Scotland and England are now poles apart.

It’s funny how quickly things change. A few weeks ago, in the wake of elections to the Scottish parliament, the prospect of a second independence referendum appeared to have receded, not least because the Scottish government found itself deprived of an overall majority. Senior Nationalists even briefed newspapers to that effect. But fast forward six weeks and this morning the first minister described another referendum as “highly likely”.

Nicola Sturgeon quoted from the SNP’s Holyrood manifesto. “We believe that the Scottish parliament should have the right to hold another referendum,” read the pertinent paragraph, “if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will.”

And as the first minister said at her Bute House press conference, the result of Thursday’s referendum clearly constituted a “significant and material change” in the circumstances in which Scotland voted against independence less than two years ago. But at the same time, and as the wording of the manifesto implied, the most important consideration is how Scottish public opinion responds to that material change.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest ‘Alex Salmond and his allies want a second referendum quickly.’ Photograph: Tracey Paddison/Rex/Shutterstock

Sensibly, Sturgeon made it clear she didn’t take this (an increase in support for independence) for granted, while if you listened carefully to her generally pitch-perfect statement there were lots of caveats and therefore wriggle room: her job, she said, was to “act responsibly”, it wouldn’t “be right to rush to judgment” and, of course, it would be for the Scottish parliament to decide. The meta-narrative was gutsy stuff, but cautiously so.

And the most common word used to describe the first minister is exactly that, “cautious”, indeed even some of her admirers consider her overly so. Nevertheless, it’s now clear that the “option” of a second independence referendum is, as she put it, on the table and the necessary legislation will be prepared, ready to go “if and when parliament decides” to proceed.

In other words, she’s waiting to see how things pan out. Support for independence may well increase as the reality of Brexit sinks in, on the other hand it might not: speculative polling prior to the EU referendum suggested this scenario would add only a point or two to the potential yes tally. That, however, was hypothetical – the situation Scotland now finds itself in is far from that.

There are other considerations, managing unrealistic expectations in some sections of the SNP among them. Broadly speaking there are two camps, an “impatient” wing headed up by the former first minister Alex Salmond, who was on manoeuvres in TV studios last night saying his successor would now “implement” the manifesto pledge, with the implication that a second referendum would follow sooner rather than later.

Salmond and his allies want a second referendum quickly, while others – the “cautious” wing – want to get it right. This includes Sturgeon, who made it clear this morning that, on the contrary, it might occur later rather than sooner. This is not, it’s worth remembering, a situation she wanted; indeed, her frenetic activity over the past week or so, virtually pleading with SNP voters to back remain, told its own story.

Timing will be critical. It will be more than two years before the UK formally withdraws from the EU, and the first minister – who looks set to be part of the negotiation process – will need to get a clearer idea of how flexible Brussels might be: would it be willing to make special arrangements for Northern Ireland (which, after all, borders another member state) and Scotland? German reunification was also uncharted territory, but the EU found a way to accommodate it.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest ‘There are arguably only two currency options if Scotland left the UK and joined the EU, a new Scottish currency or the euro.’ Photograph: Jim Dyson/Getty Images

But again, this looks easier than it actually is, for all the difficult issues that surfaced during the last independence referendum remain unresolved and, in certain cases, have become even more intractable. Last night Salmond referred to a “range” of available currency options but there are arguably only two, a new Scottish currency or the euro, both of which were deemed politically unsellable last time round.

And what about other membership terms? Brussels has never liked the UK’s rebate and it seems unlikely an independent Scotland would be allowed to keep a share of it. And what of the border between England and Scotland? The common travel area (which includes the UK, Ireland and the three crown dependencies) now looks unsustainable. And let’s not forget the oil price – the Scottish economy is not in a good place. As Sturgeon herself concedes, the issues she and her government face are “complex”.

Despite it all, Sturgeon might find Brussels more willing to engage with the idea of Scottish independence than it was a few years ago, when it firmly rebutted the SNP’s notion of negotiating continuing membership from “within” both the UK and EU. The European commission may still insist upon Scotland leaving before it can rejoin, but perhaps another referendum could be timed to take place shortly before the UK’s formal withdrawal in late 2018. Anecdotal evidence suggests many soft no voters would be willing to vote yes under that scenario.

Think of it another way: if the first minister arrives in Brussels with a clear message that Scotland (subject to a referendum) wants to stay in the EU so could they figure something out, why on earth would the powers that be refuse to engage? It would help limit the damage of Brexit while sticking two fingers up to a rump UK that’s caused them nothing but trouble.

The EU (assuming it still exists) might end up helping to dismember a decidedly shaky United Kingdom of three and a half nations. England and Wales’s difficulty, to paraphrase the Scottish-Irish revolutionary James Connolly, could be Scotland and Northern Ireland’s opportunity. Meanwhile it falls to the cautious Sturgeon to plan the next move, and if politics resembles a game of chess, she’ll have to develop the skills of a grand master in the months and years ahead.