Dawn

Dawn

Friday, October 13, 2017

Thoughts from Galicia: 13.10.17

Spanish life is not always likeable but it is compellingly loveable.
- Christopher Howse: A Pilgrim in Spain

If you've arrived here because of an interest in Galicia or Pontevedra, see my web page here.

Life in Spain
  • Cataluña 1: This weekend sees a clash between Barcelona FC and Read Madrid, in the capital city. Should be interesting. Expect lots of flags!
  • Cataluña 2: Manuel Vazquez, who runs a camera equipment company in Barcelona, said Chinese investors had halted a deal with his company, citing political unrest. “These politicians should realise the damage this is doing to real people who are trying to earn a living. Is this how they are constructing a better Catalonia?” he asked. Good question.
  • Cataluña 3: Much of Spain's political history has been a tale of savage partisan strife. See Article 1 below for the rest of this informed commentary.
  • Cataluña 4: Notwithstanding that, is there cause for optimism? See Article 2 below. 
Many of us have problems with the excesses of modern liberalism. Reader Perry certainly does and I thought of him – inter alia - when reading the 3rd article below. The EU, of course, is a prime example of the new autocratic illiberal liberals.

Some trivia:-
  1. Yesterday I procured the 5th charger – in 6 years – for my MacBook. Happily, this was under the guarantee of the one I bought back in February on my last trip to Manchester. With all the money they make, you'd think Apple could come up with something more reliable. On the other hand, seeing what the chargers cost, perhaps not.
  2. Liverpool airport is infamous for the high cost of parking there. So, ahead of collecting my Madrid-based daughter last night, I checked on the internet what the – hopefully free, albeit short - pick-up option is. Or, rather, what it was in 2014. But now, they're different and, confused by a sign saying that the Drop Off 2 zone was now some way away from the terminal, I parked off the approach road to check on things. Only to be almost immediately harassed by some sort of pseudo-police van with a camera on top of it. Clearly, profits from the parking are so high they can afford to take aggressive measures I've not seen in any other airport around the world. But maybe I'm out of touch. Or too used to the parking in every public space anywhere near a Spanish airport.
  3. Brilliant smile-generating video.
Finally . . . This morning I heard my elder daughter telling her sister: “What happens with men is that . . .” Sadly, I didn't hear the rest.

Today's Cartoon:-



ARTICLE 1

Much of Spain's political history has been a tale of savage partisan strife: Alberto Letona 

Like many of my fellow countrymen in Spain I feel strained and anxious these days. I hate the sectarianism and tension created between two democratically elected governments, whose only victory so far has been to pass on their antagonism to a large portion of the  population. Emotions are running high, and coherence seems to have flown out of the window. Things can only get worse.

I want to hold on to the idea that Spain is not the former Yugoslavia, and that Catalonia is not Kosovo, a country whose conflict I covered as a reporter between 1998-1999. Before those days neighbours who had been living together for centuries became the fiercest of enemies. The amount of cruelty on both sides was unthinkable. I cannot believe that what I saw in the Balkans could be repeated in modern Spain. However, it has to be said that we have had a difficult and ugly history. Much of our political history has been a tale of savage partisan strife.

For many years the Popular Party, with a small political representation in Catalonia, has fuelled the resentment of many by ignoring their demands. The region, one of the wealthiest in Spain, has gone through a long recession and at the same time its autonomy has been substantially weakened by the central government. All this has created a climate of indignation between different layers of Catalan society, a climate that the Prime Minister disregarded completely despite numerous requests from the Catalan government to meet and try to find common ground.

Mr. Rajoy's reaction to the referendum was wrong and callous. He first shielded behind the judges and later behind the police. Millions of people throughout the world could see the  violent reaction of the police against peaceful citizens armed with nothing but a ballot paper. He has obstinately been following that path, and paying little attention to other political forces. Dialogue with those who want independence is out of question.

King Felipe VI has not done much to improve things. His harsh discourse against the Catalan government and his lack of sympathy for the people who were injured has put the monarchy at stake by taking sides with Mr Rajoy.

For the Spanish government, the Constitution - the cornerstone of the legal system- is written in stone, and it chooses to ignore that legality and legitimacy are different concepts. Everybody knows that laws change with the times, without this there would not be any progress. Furthermore, the reputation of the legal system in Spain is distrusted by many who accuse it of being controlled by the two main parties.

Triggering article 155 in Catalonia, that is to say voiding the autonomy of the region and putting their politicians in prison, can only lead to disaster. People will rebel against it, but even if they do so peacefully the situation could get out of hand. Would Mariano Rajoy ready to use the military force against a civil population? Some former politicians are in favour, but for most of us it would be suicidal.

There is another way: dialogue. They could call simultaneous elections in Spain and in Catalonia. The political map could change and the current politicians along with it. If they make their programme on Catalonia clear, we would know who to vote for and would respect the electorate’s decision.

The Catalan crisis has brought out some ghosts from the past. Jingoism has awoken and it is not difficult to foresee the rapid rise of the Spanish far-right that until now seemed non-existent. Their allegiance to the security forces could prove uneasy for the government in Madrid.

For some of us who lived under Franco's regime, a semi-fascist dictatorship that survived the victory of freedom over the Nazis, the problem is not Catalonia, but rather, Spain and her failure to create a modern state. The always glorified Transition did not finish with Franco's legacy. Fear was difficult to overcome after so many years of brutality.

Blaming only the PP is unfair. The Catalan government has ignored its own legality (Estatut). Many citizens in the region, seemingly between 70 and 80 percent, wanted to have a referendum, but not all of them are in favour of independence. They don't have the support of any country and their romantic vision could end in disaster. The main party of the opposition, the Partido Socialista, is also at fault, as is some of the more vociferous and sensationalist media.

Victorian traveller, Richard Ford, said that Spain is "a bundle of local units tied together by a rope of sand". And the truth is that a century and half later, many Spaniards are still arguing how to shape a nation, whilst not asking for total independence.

For many years, Spain was socially, politically and economically torn by civil wars and military coups. I hope that the ghosts from the past will not come back to haunt us.


Alberto Letona is a Basque journalist living in Bilbao. He is the author of "Hijos e Hijas de la Gran Bretaña" -Sons and Daughters of Great Britain – in which he delves into the psyche of the British in an attempt to explain them to his own countrymen.

ARTICLE 2

Federal formula may halt Catalan split: Charles Bremner

Mr Puigdemont hopes to follow a similar route.

In his ambiguous speech on Tuesday he hammered home the point that Catalonia was a European question and implored the EU to intervene in the name of its founding values.

But times have greatly changed since 1992 and the EU has no appetite for embracing new nations, least of all ones that have split from one of its own members. If Catalonia is to combine nationhood with the prosperity of EU membership it must look for something akin to a federal status within Spain.

A self-proclaimed Catalan republic would threaten to Balkanise not just Spain, with Basques, Galicians and others seeking breakaway, but could prompt Corsicans, Bretons, Bavarians, north Italians and others to try for independence.

All would be denied the EU membership on which they would depend for survival. Even Scotland, which prepared for possible independence in agreement with London in 2014, was told that it would take many years to rejoin the union.

Visionaries used to talk of an expanding “post-national” Europe of regions under the umbrella of a federal Union. The idea has fallen by the wayside with the rise of populism, trouble in the east and financial crisis. The EU has no raison d’être if the frontiers of its members come undone, says the new consensus.

Mr Puigdemont must look at Belgium as the model, according to Guy Verhofstadt, who heads the centrist group in the European parliament. The creation of a federal state had calmed Flanders’ demands for separation in the 1990s, he said yesterday. “In Spain, they should do the same and create a federal state”.

Q&A

What will the commission discuss?
Members of all parties in the Spanish parliament, including Catalan nationalist MPs, will debate a possible reform of the 1978 constitution. It could make Spain a federal state, like Germany, or give Catalonia a better financial deal, like the Basque country.

Is Mariano Rajoy laying a trap?
No, it’s a genuine offer. The Socialists have long pushed for this move and the present crisis has allowed them to demand that Mr Rajoy agree.

Does the formation of the commission absolve Carles Puigdemont?
No — it is up to the Spanish constitutional court to decide if the Catalan leader has contravened the law, so he could still face prosecution.

Experts are divided on whether he has broken the law. He could face charges of disobedience and malfeasance, punishable with heavy fines, and be banned from holding public office.

Can Madrid impose direct rule while at the same time discussing reform?
Mr Rajoy might yet invoke Article 155 of the Spanish constitution, which empowers the central government to take any “necessary measures” to ensure the compliance of a rogue autonomous region.

It might involve dismissing or arresting Catalan government officials, calling elections or taking control of the regional police force. Given the atmosphere, such a move would probably lead to huge demonstrations in Barcelona.

Will the commission choose reform?
It might. The Socialists and other smaller parties have campaigned for it. Given the crisis over Catalonia, it could offer all sides a way out. It must report, with proposals, after 6 months.

How is the constitution changed?
MPs must vote on a change to the constitution. A simple majority is sufficient to approve reform.

How would the rest of Spain react?
Some poorer regions might begrudge Catalonia a better deal on finances because it is already a wealthy region that accounts for nearly 20 per cent of GDP. However, if that reduced demands for Catalan independence it might prove popular. Galicia, in the northwest, might try to claim that it, too, should have a better deal.

Does this make Catalan independence more or less likely?
Real reform would make Catalan independence less likely. The Republican Left of Catalonia Party, part of the regional government, has admitted that a financial deal would deflate support for separatism.

ARTICLE 3

From Brexit to Barcelona, liberal elites have lost faith in self-determination: 

There was a time, just a few decades ago, when most young radicals espoused a heady mix of Enlightenment values, Left-wing economics and a liberalised personal morality.

The Sixties’ generation embraced free speech, legal equality, religious freedom, the presumption of innocence and democratic empowerment. In foreign policy, they supported anti-imperialism, and in economics the welfare state and big government.

Some of these ideas were right, others dangerously wrong, especially the rejection of capitalism and the family, but they were coherent and inspired by many great Western philosophers of the past 350 years. They were grounded in reason, liberty and scepticism. As a result, conservatives and liberals, socialists and libertarians could still talk to one another, if merely to agree to disagree.

The great tragedy of the 21st century is how it has become cool and edgy to repudiate these Enlightenment values and to embrace a darker, ultra-adversarial ideology.

Many of our best and brightest still agree with the baby boomers’ youthful rejection of conservatism and free markets: these are easy positions to hold. But the harder-edged ideas have gone out of the window. Contemporary “liberals” – the dominant group in the civil service, academia, the cultural industries and among young, highly educated urbanites – have all too often become born-again authoritarians.

Far too many applaud when Balliol’s Junior Common Room bans the Christian Union from its freshers’ fair on the grounds that it would be “alienating” for followers of other religions and constitute a “micro aggression”; they cheer drastic restrictions to free speech in the name of “safe spaces”; and they no longer believe in national groups’ rights to self-determination.

Forget about democracy, people power and autonomy: the New Left loves authority, elite rule and cultural warfare. It’s out with John Locke, Montesquieu and David Hume, and back in with Plato.
The trendy, right-on classes now seem to oppose all independence movements. In the Fifties and Sixties, young idealists took to the streets to defend the right of the ex-colonies to break free of the imperialist yoke. Today, those who see themselves as their political heirs spend their time decrying “nationalists” and cheering on those who threaten to ruin the secessionists.

Take Brexit, Kurdistan and Catalonia: people who believe themselves to be progressive and enemies of oppression reflexively back the status quo. Big is beautiful; small is seditious. The way that Catalonia has been treated is one of the great scandals of our time, a disgraceful stain on Spain’s and the EU’s reputation. The province deserves a free and fair referendum.

The violence, the intimidation, the bullying have all been outrageous, yet the New Left couldn’t care less. As to Kurdistan, which was originally promised a referendum on independence at the Treaty of Sèvres in 1920, the silence from the “progressives” has been deafening, even though the only way forward in the Middle East is to ensure that states and nations are aligned.

This ideological shift among Western elites is staggering: it risks undermining the foundations of much political progress of these past 250 years. The US Declaration of Independence argued that governments derived “their just powers from the consent of the governed”; and that “whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it”.

The French Revolution also referred to the principle, which became hugely influential in the 1800s. Slowly but surely, the new battle was between the imperialists, who wanted the Great Powers to dominate, and the liberals, who wanted nations to set their own rules. There was much talk, after the First World War, of the “principle of the nationalities”.

By the time of the Atlantic Charter of 1941, President Roosevelt and Winston Churchill pledged that there would be a “right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live”, and six years later India and Pakistan were independent. The United Nations charter enshrined the principle of self-determination into international relations.

So are Western elites really seeking to renege on all this? Do they not see how they are playing with fire? Do they not recognise the connection between their support for oligarchy and the growth of populism in Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Eastern Europe and almost everywhere across the Continent? Britain was a pioneer in promoting self-governance, despite our colonial history.

The Balfour declaration, a hundred years ago, was a milestone, with the UK promising to set up “a national home for the Jewish people”. The Statute of Westminster in 1931 granted self-government to the dominions. There have been two European referendums and one for Scotland, and the public still overwhelmingly backs self-rule as an ideal at home and abroad.

Yet all of this is now obsolete nonsense, as far as the new authoritarians are concerned. Self-determination is too messy, too complicated. It is in this context that the British government’s incompetent approach to Brexit and the establishment’s increasingly successful counter-offensive to sabotage it needs to be understood.

In such a hostile climate, those entrusted with pushing through Brexit need to be passionate, competent and as hard as nails. They cannot be mainstream centrists who just want to follow their civil servants’ advice, especially given that they will be dead set against the principle of self-determination. They need to surround themselves with the best of the true believers.

Crazily, neither Theresa May, Damian Green nor, of course, Philip Hammond can bring themselves 
even to say that they back Brexit, despite it being their policy. Revolutions are hard at the best of times: how can they be executed successfully by people who can 
almost not bear to enact them?

Mrs May, assuming that she stays in office, must therefore urgently involve more Brexiteers. Boris Johnson should accompany her to the negotiations, to stiffen her resolve, and a newer generation needs to be promoted. Leaving the EU is an ideological project, grounded in hundreds of years of Western political philosophy, so now is the time to call in the ideologues to the rescue.

No comments: