World leaders shouldn't get involved in another country's election but USA is an exception - Nicola Sturgeon

THERE is a long-standing ­tradition that political ­leaders do not – or should not – get involved in ­commenting on elections in other countries.

That’s a convention I have stuck to pretty solidly over the years, but the contest on the other side of the Atlantic, which is now looming ever closer, is one occasion where I am prepared to break with ­tradition.

We are now two days away from one of the most important elections in ­America’s history and ­arguably one of the most important the world has seen in recent times. Many Americans have already voted and, come Tuesday, many millions more will finally deliver the verdict the world is waiting for.

Whatever the result, Scotland will continue to have close ties of business, friendship and family with the US. And, of course, who becomes their president is entirely up to the American people – we will all have to respect their choice.

But I fervently hope that it will be Hillary Clinton who is sworn in as 45th president of the United States in January and who returns to the White House, this time not as First Lady but as America’s first female leader.

I have already made my views on Donald Trump clear, when late last year I withdrew his status as a GlobalScot [a network of business ­leaders with a ­connection to Scotland].

However, rather than focus on the suitability or otherwise of the ­Republican candidate – something which many of that party’s own stalwarts are now openly questioning – I would rather concentrate on the positive case for Clinton.

Her election would be a result which was warmly welcomed around the globe but would also mark the shattering of the glass ceiling in terms of equality for women.