Protests are continuing in Catalonia after Spanish police moved to prevent a planned referendum on independence from taking place on 1 October. Mireia Borrell Porta argues that the European Union should take a more active role in responding to the tensions. She writes that the suggestion the issue is simply an internal one to be dealt with by the Spanish government is no longer credible.
Credit: fotomovimiento (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
Today is a sad day. While I’m writing these lines, Spanish armed police are detaining twelve senior officials and raiding Catalan government offices in search of material related to the proposed referendum on independence. At the same time, four ships have arrived at Catalan harbours, which will be used to house 4,000 Spanish policemen that will come to Catalonia on 1 October. This comes after a week in which Spanish armed police raided newspaper offices, printing presses, and private mail services in Catalonia. Even the referendum website has been blocked. Simultaneously, Spain’s public prosecutor has summoned more than 700 mayors who have agreed to collaborate with the Catalan government to hold the referendum, under the threat of arrest if they refuse to appear in court.
The Spanish government justifies these measures by stating that, given the breach of legality, it is obvious that the State needed to react. That’s correct, the State needed to react. To react is what Rajoy should have done when Catalans began to demonstrate peacefully in favour of independence in 2012, which they have continued to do every year since. To react is what he should have done when the Catalan government asked for a fiscal pact that would alleviate the economic grievances of a non-negligible part of the Catalan population. To react. To talk. To negotiate. This is what, in a democracy, is referred to when one ‘reacts’.
But of course, it was naïve to expect Rajoy and his Spanish Court to negotiate. He represents a party whose Minister of Education and Culture said in 2012 that he wanted to ‘hispanicise’ Catalan pupils. More recently, there was the so-called ‘Operation Catalonia’, which aimed at discrediting the Catalan political class, who were deemed to be too insistent on the issue of Catalan independence. Overall, Rajoy represents a political party that confounds unity with uniformity and is outright hostile towards any other culture that is not profoundly Spanish.
One voice that is increasingly absent from this picture is, of course, that of the European Union. The Union which Catalans have always looked up to, admired and cheered. Catalans are fervent Europeans who tend to equate Europe with concepts of diversity and respect for difference. Europe is, to many Catalan minds, a place where things work, where labour markets can be functional and where different languages and cultures are encouraged.
In Europe and the EU, many Catalans find what they have always missed in Spain: love and respect for diversity. And to be sure, the response to the financial and refugee crises has been disappointing to many, but even in the peak of these crises pro-European sentiment remained strong. The reason? Catalans feel European, and are proud of saying that their identity is both Catalan and European.
But unfortunately, identity is no longer in vogue. Identity is what academics talk about when they argue that the European Union needs a European demos to continue its integration process, but it is also a word that too many people connect with nationalism – and we all know where nationalisms lead. In an ideal world, some argue, identity should not matter. Maybe that’s true, as identity can be exclusionary. Yet, it can also bring people together in different causes: territorial identity can and has motivated people to improve their towns, regions and countries, and the same can be said about class identity.
And it would not occur to anyone to point their fingers at those who have made their territories a better place and demand why they haven’t done the same for their neighbouring countries. We all have an identity, and in the Catalan case, what Europeans need to understand once and for all is that it is not Catalan identity that has created a division in society. Rather, it is the contempt shown by a majority of the Spanish political class for anything that doesn’t look Spanish or uniform enough to match their standards.
This has left many Catalans asking: Europe, where are you? So far, Europe has preferred to look away while whispering that this is an internal issue. EU leaders claim they respect the Spanish Constitution and its Courts, but interestingly enough, when it came to the issue of balancing budgets back in 2011, this did not inhibit them from putting enough pressure on Spain’s main political parties for them to change the Constitution. This Constitution, the same one that seems to be set in stone when it comes to the independence referendum.
The EU clearly has the capacity to pressure Spain, and it did so when it felt it was necessary. Did the EU simply act to avoid future negative externalities? Perhaps, and this seems to be their mindset too with the Catalan issue: opening the referendum box would legitimate other similar processes across Europe. However, the EU may want to ask itself about the negative political externalities of not opening this box, about its insistence in running behind events, and about its wider lack of vision and charisma. An issue will not remain ‘internal’ just because this word is repeated whenever the topic is raised. Catalans are also European citizens, and, in the face of a threat to basic civil rights like the one happening now, they deserve a better answer than silence.
Please read our comments policy before commenting.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics.
_________________________________
Mireia Borrell Porta – LSE
Mireia Borrell Porta is a Teaching Fellow in Political Economy at the LSE European Institute.
I believe there is a difference between economics and these fundamental topics (identity, nationhood, etc.) Spain is using the same currency as Germany. If Spain goes under it brings Germany too. Maybe that is true of separatism, democracy and other topics, but the politicians will think if our money is not involved it’s for Spain to sort out. They also hope the topic will go away as other states almost always don’t want separatism. If you are Merkel why would you? You know what the Spanish government is like and you deal well with it. You don’t know what could happen if Catalonia becomes independent so they want things to stay as they are.
I don’t say that is the right thing, but I do say that it’s why they do it. I believe the picture will have to get very bad indeed in Catalonia before they change their mind (and nobody wants that).
Markus, thank you for your comment. I agree with you, and it seems that unfortunately, economic interests matter the most. And yet, when a state goes as far as to do what Mr. Rajoy has done these days, I think it is only right to stand up for the European democratic values. In the long-run, it may even pay off. The EU may be doing alright now, but a vision is needed, and a vision needs principles. There is a whole literature on ‘normative Europe’ vs ‘power Europe’ which is very interesting to look at, and talks precisely on that.
It is an interesting read. however, i had some questions, provided that I am by no means an expert in the catalan issue but rather someone believing it is a fascinating one.
First of all, you argue that it is the Spanish gov’s incapacity to accept cultural diversity that brought what we see today. This begs two questions: why do you believe that? many academics would argue the opposite and, more importantly, how do you reconcile that with the fact that “To react is what he should have done when the Catalan government asked for a *fiscal pact* ” . You seem to argue that the main issue is a deep cultural difference that results in wanting more money?
secondly, you argue that democracy is talking and negotiating etc. But wouldn’t democracy need for state officials to respect the rule of law? respect the referendum of 2014? wouldn’t democracy presuppose a long moment of calm in order to implement policies?
Finally, and this is where i am really curious, i do not understand how the EU should intervene? Based on which article of the Lisbon Treaty? on which legal loophole? I am not sure that what happened during the financial crisis is comparable to what happens today and the tricks used then would be hard to use now.
Moreover, the EU, from a moral standpoint, should probably protect the democratically elected government or the endangered freedom. It is not clear which one is the elected government – but it is clear which one does not respect the rule of law. It is also not clear which, if any, fundamental right is prohibited.
Also a last question: what do you mean Rajoy and his Spanish Courts to negotiate? What exactly is the role of the Spanish Courts in these negotiations? i was under the impression that Courts interpret the law not that they negotiate it? Is it a different role of the Court than the traditional one, is it you arguing that the Courts are corrupted and “belong” to Rajoy, or is it you arguing on how the Court should act?
Vassilios, thank you for your comment and your interest in the topic.
My belief comes from different sources. Over the years I have heard a non-negligible amount of comments coming from senior members of the Spanish Government on ‘the need to hipanicise Catalan children’, or the preference for a firm to be German rather than Catalan’, or the mention of Catalonia as ‘that corner of Spain’, an insistence in meddling into the Catalan education system (even though it is a devolved competence) for language questions… This in itself could be thought of as strange, or irrelevant. However, it gains relevance if you put it together with two other facts: the fact that Catalonia and the Catalan language and culture was strongly repressed during Franco, and the fact that the right wing party is a refoundation of a former party founded by a francoist minister, who stayed on top of the party until the 2000s. In fact, the party has counted amongst its ranks politicians who either served with the Franco regime or had close relatives serving in it. But of course, it is my belief; not a fact, and therefore, debatable.
From the Catalan side, Catalans’ big grievances are economic and language related. Do we, in principle, need a state to tackle these problems? No. So why are Catalans asking for a referendum, and some want a state? Because the lack of willingness to negotiate shown by PP means that voicing our concerns doesn’t work, so once the ‘voice’ option is over, either we stay within the status quo (which a majority of Catalans reject according to polls), or we ‘vote with our feet’. And what’s happening is the latter. Why? Because the fact that some Catalans have a Catalan identity means that the ‘exit’ option is a real option, and not only a hypothetical one. As a counterexample, because so far I feel European, if I feel some things are not up to standards or my preferences, I prefer to keep inside and keep insisting on negotiating rather than exercising my ‘exit’ option. And the fact that PP loves uniformity increases Catalan identity, as it always happens when someone sees their identity threatened.
On the EU intervention; I’m not arguing that there is a legal case for intervention, but rather a ‘moral or civic’ case. But of course there will be on this as many views as individuals in the world. What I disagree with you in is in the idea that the EU should protect the government. The EU should protect the people, and the government is a representation of the people.
Finally, on the ‘Spanish Court’, I was referring to the people accompanying Rajoy, and using it as an expression – the people accompanying the King – to refer to Rajoy’s political friends.
Dear Mireia,
Commentators both on other sides and under your article seem to believe that the “people that need protecting” are not the separatists. I will simple add that your argument shocks me on one thing: it’s dependence on the present moment and to the election of the PP. It does sound like a denial of democracy for the rest of Spain…
However, as an EU lawyer I have to admit that I am profoundly shocked by what you are saying: “rather a ‘moral or civic’ case. But of course there will be on this as many views as individuals in the world. What I disagree with you in is in the idea that the EU should protect the government. The EU should protect the people, and the government is a representation of the people.” the EU is not a sovereign state and needs/can only act inside it s legal framework. Going out of it would effectively take a sovereignty the people of Europe has not agreed to give it! There are many views on what the EU ought to be but until a new Treaty is signed there is an extremely limited number of valid views on what the EU can actually do…
Your questions are really sensible as this article is really biased and clearly the writer seems to be partial to the secessionists. Keep talking about Wert wanting to ‘hispanisice Catalan children’ for example when the reality is they have been subjected to a brutal indoctrination for decades now, they are taught a completely false version of history in which there were ‘Catalan Countries’ including several other regions when the reality is Cataluña was a mere county belonging to the Kingdom of Aragon and it has never ever been a sovereign nation.
Many parents complain that children as young as 8 come home repeating the ‘Spain robs us’ catchphrase and talking about the need to because independent… some schools have even taken their pupils to political demonstrations and now they have planned activities over the weekend to use them as shields to avoid the police closing them down!
Only a fraction of Catalans will vote or at least attempt to vote on Sunday but there’s a very significant percentage of them that considers this a ‘circus’ and hence refuse to do something clearly illegal.
As for the rest of Spain there’s been a surge of national pride, flags have sold out and people have started to boicot Catalan products. They are seen as arrogant and misinformed and it’s all too much when we get called franquists and fascists whenever OUR flag is on show.
I am not against the right to choose but always within the legal framework, the ‘butifarrendum’ as it’s been renamed is not fair, or legal or even beneficial for either Cataluña or Spain!
Regards and let’s hope they see some sense before they have to regret all this.
I can’t understand the article’s argument. European values are democracy and the rule of law. In the past autonomous elections, elections carried out with guarantees and accepted by all, there were more votes against the parties that supported the referendum than there were in favour. Despite this, with a minimal majority in the Catalan Parliament, a referendum is called in violation of the rules of the Catalan Parliament, not accepted by the opposition in Catalonia that refuses to participate, and it is maintained that, regardless of the participation, if there is a vote more in favor of the yes, unilateral independence will be declared. Are those the democratic principles that Europe stands for?
It is simply not true that there were more votes for parties that were against the referendum in the last autonomous elections. There were 1,957,348 votes (47.7%) for the ‘Yes’ camp – comprised by JxSI and CUP, 1,651,222 votes (40.29%) for the No camp – comprised by C’s, PSC, PP and other small groups, and 469,364 votes (11.45%) for neither – comprised by CSQP and UDC. These latter group – CSQP and UDC – ARE favourable to the referendum, and therefore, there is a clear majority of votes for the referendum. What was not clear from this past election is whether there is a majority of votes for independence. And that is the reason why a referendum needs to be done. Everyone can check the votes in many many webpages on the internet. This is one of them: https://eleccions.ara.cat/parlament-27s
Now, on Europe: as it was perfectly put in the EC press conference yesterday, there is a contradiction in the EU between two competing logics: the Spanish Constitutional order which does not allow for a referendum (unless approved by Congress and the President), and the respect for an aspiration to self-determination, which is indeed in the European ideals. Insofar as there is this contradiction, it would be perfectly acceptable for the EU to mediate. And given this week’s events, it is not only acceptable, but expected, if the EU still identifies with its democratic values.
About this so called referendum, let’s be clear about something. This is a coordinated action by a well-organised minority, not complying with the rule of law which is there to guarantee everyone’s rights by trying to make us all equal. To make it even worst these guys broke their own regional laws and regulations defined long time ago by their own regional parlament so citizens righst cannot be guaranteed here when they self- approved laws voted by a shy majority to prepare the path for a split: basically they define the rules of the game, is that fair?. Such actions, did force the rest of the political parties members of regional parlament to decide to formally protest by abandoning the regional parlament session; their representation combined are just shy of the majority. On top of that there is harassment on the street organised by groups financially funded by the regional government (what they call street movement groups/extremists). The regional police are not acting effectively to maintain order and security because their paymasters (regional government) and their commanders only effectively report to the regional government. Regular citizens are experiencing an increasing level of fear and not willing to speak up aloud: daily there are noisy non-authorised overnight street marches through every district organised by these extremist groups as a result regular citizens just keep in-doors, those marches are backed and organised behind the scenes by the regional government and their political opposition is targetted: individuals are publicly identified (from local politicians, judges, even relatives of those,…), their home addresses being made public and then harassed in their own homes. Even more in daily protest they use children as shields, yes, in daily un-authorised protests which can turn badly they bring kids to the front-line. What is next? people with torches escalating to a violent rampage of burning buildings (churches, institutions,…), displace people forcing them to leave their homes, using violence against their “so called enemies”,…? This situation if they are not careful can escalate really quickly and get out-of-control; people with a little bit of culture/history knowledge can check what happened pre-1936 in the same region when things got out of hand; if you play with fire do not complain if you get burned. Those past historical events had some synergies with what is going on right now; extremist organisations had public government backing to take on the street (with the officials looking the other way/turning the blind eye when those terrible events were happening). On the funny side, if you look at the names of the extremist groups leaders, their surnames and names clearly indicate that their family were immigrants from other poorer regions of Spain which came to Catalonia mid 1950s. The “pure-blood” catalonians, who push harder for independence call them “charnegos”; an insult, and these guys to compensate for that become even more agressive to show that their right to be “pure-blood”; in conflict strange bed partners are made and you may find yourself working with strange partners and then feeling sorry about it later, like the US has shown in the past and now when supporting dictators around the world (sometimes openly, sometimes secretly through the CIA) if it was on the benefit of their own national interests. So things are not as simple like black and white, like some people attempt to present them to you (filtered/selected information etc).
I will not waste my time with statements like these ones, highly coloured by imagination and not sustained by evidence. In situations like that, I think it is useful to use Occam’s Razor and ask why most international newspapers haven’t picked up on all those terrible and frightful events you describe:
A) Because they are simply not true.
B) Because, the Catalan government and its people have skilfully managed to hide from ALL mainstream international press the harassment, the widespread existence of extremist groups and the use of kids as human shields, thus managing to convince ALL the international press that the Catalan pro-independence movement is mostly peaceful.
Dear Mireia that’s exactly the attitude that has caused all this mess… you do not agree with me therefore I shall ignore you and continue with my monologue about how great Puigdemont is and how deeply wrong is everyone else.
Please, look at what they are doing to ‘your nation’, to ‘your children’ and the mountain of hate they have place in between friends, families, neighbours… and as Le Monde reported today for rien, nothing, nada. Wake up before it is too late.
I am really sad to see such a partisan entry sponsored by an academic institution that was my home for so many years, a comment that shows such a biased opinion of what is actually happening in Catalonia. What would you think if in your country policemen following orders from a judge were unable to carry out their work harassed by violent mobs that would even trash their cars and throw them stones? Here is how police cars ended up this very same week, in a clear sign of the ‘peaceful’ demonstrations that are taking place right now in Barcelona. The person sent by the judge to carry out the operation had to escape from the building using an exit in the roof.
https://elpais.com/elpais/2017/09/21/album/1505954396_579657.html
What would you think if in your country those having a different political opinion had their personal businesses marked as in the darkest times of European history? Here you have an example of how the small business of the parents of an opposition leader appeared this very same week in ‘peaceful’ and tolerant Catalonia. Just in case you do not read Catalan, one of the sentences says ‘this is not your land’. The same is repeated in houses and offices of opposition political parties. Where is the respect of the civil rights of this this part of the Catalan people?
https://politica.elpais.com/politica/2017/09/21/actualidad/1505985909_541942.html
What would you think if in your country one region decided to organize a referendum against the law, arguing that the laws of the country do not matter and that they will disobey the resolutions of the supreme court maintaining that the rightful law emanates from the people, and that because the two secessionist parties have a slight absolute majority in the Catalan parliament (that represents less than 50 per cent of the total votes) they have the right to disobey any established legal framework? What about if that referendum does not have ANY guarantees at all and they even affirm that will declare unilateral independence no matter the turnout? What would you think if the laws required to organize such a referendum were approved in a parliament overthrowing its own rules and even against a resolution by its own legal services who declared that the procedure was clearly illegal?
This is a very complex problem and this entry presents it with such a simplicity that undermines the credibility of this blog and surely the reputation of the LSE. Suggesting that this is a conflict with a central government that oppresses a whole society and a secessionist movement that is all peace and love is intellectually disappointing and simply wrong. A vast majority of political parties in Spain from the far right to the far left are against this unilateral referendum, it is not just a matter of Mr. Rajoy and his popular party. Polls show indeed that a majority of the Catalan people is in favour of a referendum, but what is not usually mentioned is that a clear majority rejects it to be unilateral and without guarantees, or that most of them would vote against independence. So if we use polls to check what a population believes, what the Catalan government will try to organize on the 1st of October DOES NOT have the consent or approval of the majority, period.
That a negotiation between both sides should start and have started long time ago to avoid what is happening today is obvious, as it is that there were wrongs in both parties. I am one of those in Spain who would have no problems with a legal referendum, been sure that with a proper offer like in the case of Scotland Catalonia would remain in Spain. I am even ready to accept the independence of Catalonia if its people decide to do so. But the solution to this problem is not moving forward in a race to nowhere with a unilateral referendum with no guarantees with no legal backup and no social support.
Carlos, thank you for your comment. You state you are sad to see such an entry in an LSE blog because it is a biased opinion of what is actually happening in Catalonia. And then you show ‘evidence’ of what is actually happening, and claim that this evidence counters the argument that this is a peaceful movement.
If I may, I will tell you what I find sad. I find sad that you – apparently an LSE alumnus – are not able to distinguish anecdotal evidence from more systematic evidence. What you show in your links – both the Civil Guard trashed cars and the stickers in the small business – are examples of shameful acts that a) represent anecdotal evidence, and b) are condemned and highly discouraged by the civil society movements, political parties and the Catalan government. Oddly, you have omitted ‘evidence’ on how Civil Guard cars were covered by carnations, and on how people demonstrated firmly but peacefully, so I am attaching some (see end of my response).
More importantly, your account of what has ‘actually happened’ forgets to mention that since the Catalan pro-independence movement started mobilising seven years ago, bringing millions in the streets, there has been no scenes of violence, and that is why there is no mention of the movement to be a violent one: because it is not. This is the systematic evidence that you so conveniently forget to mention.
The strategy of most of the Spanish press and the Spanish government has evolved from ridiculing the pro-independence movement to trying to portrait it as a violent one. If I may suggest a different strategy, how about listening to what the Catalan people overwhelmingly ask for? How about negotiating a referendum, which 70% of people want?
You vehemently state that polls suggest that this coming referendum doesn’t have the approval of the majority, but you don’t show where you get your ‘facts’ from. Again, I am happy to provide you with some facts. The ‘Centre d’Estudis d’Opinio’, a series of public opinion survey conducted regularly on social and political issues shows in the first wave in 2017 that 50.3% of respondents would be in favour of a referendum, regardless of whether it is agreed and accepted by the Spanish state or not; 23.3% would only agree to a referendum if it is agreed and accepted by the Spanish state, and 23% would not want a referendum to take place in any case. Another question asks about what the respondent would do if a referendum which was not agreed and not accepted by the Spanish state was carried out. Interestingly, 73.5% of respondents would vote: 43.3% would vote for independence, 22.2% would vote against, with the rest voting blank or null. (CEO 2017, Number 850, questions 79 and 80 – link file:///C:/Users/mibopo/Downloads/Taules_estad%EF%BF%BDstiques_-_850.pdf ).
Your comment is therefore based on purely anecdotal evidence and not backed by evidence. And yet, you have no problem in suggesting that the article is biased and the LSE’s and EUROPP’s blog’s reputation and credibility are being undermined by the article. I believe it is time to stop the attempts to portray the movement as a violent one, and time to start getting your facts right: people in Catalonia are peacefully asking to vote.
Links:
Carnations in Civil Guard cars https://twitter.com/i/web/status/910051053399396352 http://elmon.cat/noticia/231240/segona-revolucio-dels-clavells
Carnations for Civil Guards https://twitter.com/Eva_Gene/status/906498720027607040/photo/1
Farewell to Civil Guards https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXH3ww0cCFo
Talking about evidence, it is surprising to see that you did not offer a single number or non-disputed fact to support your points in your entry, and only show a poll by the CEO (that by the way people should know that depends on the government organizing the referendum) when your points were questioned. I clearly stated that “if polls” show what people believe, most of the Catalans do not support a unilateral referendum. A poll by GAD3 for La Vanguardia early this year showed that only 37.3 per cent of the population supported a unilateral referendum without negotiation with the state. Another by NC Report for La Razón showed that just 41.5 per cent supported it and a poll again by GAD3 in mid-September showed once again that for 56 per cent of Catalans the referendum as planned for the 1st of October is simply not valid. Here you have the links from newspapers with very different editorial lines surprisingly showing the same results. You may say that you do not believe those polls or that La Vanguardia and La Razón are part of a conspiracy against the referendum but that would not be serious, as I suppose that the data from an institution like the CEO that directly depends on those organizing the referendum is not more credible
.
http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20170109/413202370986/la-mayoria-de-catalanes-desea-referendo-pactado-y-no-unilateral-segun-sondeo.html
http://www.larazon.es/espana/referendum-la-mayoria-dice-no-a-la-republica-catalana-HB15507563
http://www.abc.es/espana/catalunya/politica/abci-mayoria-catalanes-no-quiere-independencia-201709120357_noticia.html
It is also surprising to see that you consider “anecdotal evidence” what happened to the civil guards, and counter argue with a “systematic evidence” that consist on a video showing how people covered the cars with carnations, just minutes before leaving them in the state I showed in my post. What concerns me are not the carnations, but the stones that followed and what they did to the cars even stealing material from the inside. About the condemnations, I recall a leader of one of the secessionist social movements giving a speech on top of one of the trashed cars that was very respectful indeed.
It seems to me that your post lacks of the systematic evidence that you demand from others as once again there is none in your initial post supporting your points and the one you provided in your response is (at least) as valid as the three I just gave you. About the rest, there is nothing but personal opinion that can easily be counter-argued. That is exactly what I found sad, not that you showed your personal opinion that I completely respect, but the fact that you did it in an academic blog where we expect a minimum level of scientific facts that simply did not exist. Good entry for a twitter account but not for a respected academic institution.
Thanks for your answer, Carlos.
On the polls: I find all sources – yours and mine – credible; I am not up for conspiracy theories.
Your source on la Razon states that: 46% wants dialogue and 42% think a unilateral referendum would be valid. Sure, when people are asked, they prefer dialogue. That is not the same as claiming – as you do in your comment – that the coming referendum does not have the approval of the majority.
Same for La Vanguardia: 77% agree that Catalonia can have a referendum, and 60% of those who agree think it should be agreed with the State, whereas 37% are happy with doing it unilaterally. Now, since you mentioned La Vanguardia, if you have a look at the July article below, the same firm that did the polling you mention finds that when directly asked whether respondents would be willing to participate in the unilateral referendum called for 1-O, more than 54% agree. Very similar to the 50% from CEO. http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20170702/423834402373/el-54-de-los-catalanes-esta-dispuesto-a-participar-en-una-consulta-unilateral.html
As for the ABC source: the question was in fact about whether respondents think that the way the referendum is planned gathers all the guarantees for it to be legal and valid internationally. And 56% don’t think so. Thanks for this source, I hadn’t seen it.
What do these numbers tell us? That there is around half of respondents in surveys that are willing to participate in the 1-O unilateral referendum (and more than 70% that want a referendum). The conclusions that I would extract from here is that, as I said earlier, Catalan people want to vote.
On anecdotal evidence. I have not said in my answer to you that my links provide systematic evidence. It was yet more anecdotal evidence to counter yours. My broader point was in the following paragraph were I stated that ‘your account of what has ‘actually happened’ forgets to mention that since the Catalan pro-independence movement started mobilising seven years ago, bringing millions in the streets, there has been no scenes of violence, and that is why there is no mention of the movement to be a violent one: because it is not. This is the systematic evidence that you so conveniently forget to mention’. Seven years of absence of violence, I’d say, is more systematic evidence than your and mine anecdotal evidence on stones and carnations. And for the record, the stones did not follow the carnations. Civil Guard cars were in many different places – since they registered many buildings in Barcelona and outside – and the episode on stones was a very specific one (and shameful one indeed).
On your comment about where this post should be, I believe it is the blog’s editorial ‘line’ to provide academic commentary and research findings. You may disagree that this is academic commentary, and we can discuss about the nature of what academic commentary is, but I guess this is not the place to do it.
I’m shocked by the short-sightedness of all these comments. Constitutions need to be respected, but so do principles of international law. What most people seem to forget is that the issue at hand is not some disagreement over a 25% VAT. It’s about the right of self-determination, which is one of the founding principles of international law. We’re happy to support Tibet’s struggle for independence, although it’s (quite likely – I haven’t checked the facts) illegal under the Chinese laws. We’re happy to accept the independence of ex-soviet countries, yet that was also illegal under soviet laws. We seem to accept the right of self-determination when that concerns states we regard(ed) as our enemies or as not fully democratic. Yet, we seem to be denying the same right to Catalans, simply because they’re a part of a (democratic) western state? Or is that simply because they were conquered a few hundred years ago so they no longer have it?
And that’s exactly why the EU should have a stance on this subject.
As rightly pointed by the author, democracy is based on dialogue. These tensions could have easily been solved the peaceful way (as in the case of the Scottish referendum) by giving the Catalans the right to express their position and the Spanish government trying to convince them that they were better together than separately. Yet, by denying this right that’s clearly important to many, the Spanish government has shown how little respect it has for anything that’s not Spanish.
I’m neither Spanish, nor Catalan, and for many years I haven’t had a strong position about this issue. However, having seen the current affairs, I really wish the Catalans their independence. They deserve so much better than Spain.
You are right Sara, you are not Spanish or Catalan yet you are shocked by comments that compromise your idealistic view of this issue. If your children came back from school repeating this propaganda they have been spilling into their brains relentlessly maybe you would realise that the real problem is this is not freedom, all the opposite, it looks like 1930’s Germany, not Scotland 2014.
Nationalism and populism on the rise in Europe in the 21st century, I never expected to see this. Of course, I didn’t expect a new great depression either.
Indeed we need the EU, a reformed EU, to be central to the solution before it is too late and these movements destroy what had been achieved in the last 70 years.
If Estonia, or Ukraine, or all other fomer republics of the USSR became independent from Russia why can’t Catalonia become independent from Spain?
Europe must never be confused with the European Union. It is possible to be pro European and against the EU. The EU is a transient and very flawed political institution.
Scottish and Catalonian nationalism is based on a flawed intellectual foundation. You cannot claim to seek independence from a nation state in which you enjoy a high degree of autonomy and then immediately surrender to the financial and political control of the EU. Independence means independence.
“You cannot claim to seek independence from a nation state in which you enjoy a high degree of autonomy and then immediately surrender to the financial and political control of the EU. Independence means independence.”
This is a deeply illogical statement. Take just the financial argument (public revenue/spending) as an example. Under the present situation, Catalonia in principle has no autonomy over its public finances (0%) because the apportionment comes from a central budget that simply gives it conditional ability (now potentially threatened) to determine how some of its apportioned resources can be spent. If it left Spain and became a member of the EU it would essentially have autonomy over 99% of its finances and be making an international commitment to assign 1% of its GDP to a shared budget over which it has the power of a veto in the MFF budget negotiations. If it joined the euro under this scenario it would add shared monetary policy and layers of oversight, as well as things like tax band commitments if it signed up to these, but absolutely nothing that even remotely compares with being part of a single state under the control of Madrid.
Your argument is a bit like saying that it’s worthless to go from a position in which you have control over 0% of your finances and extreme oversight from a central government to a position in which you control 99% of your finances and have much less oversight from shared institutions simply because 1% of your revenue is assigned to a shared budget that you still have a veto over. Even if you want to push an anti-EU line, you’ll do a much better job if you can settle on something that isn’t hopelessly illogical such as this.
I am taken aback by both the Spanish authorities reaction to this informal vote as to the EU not reacting to the violence committed on ordinary citizens , if we are all a part of the EU then we should demand they protect our human rights and not the rights of the technocrats ,burocrats and the quasi dictators , we have been had people we mean nothing except for income to support the burocracy of this EU union LONG LIVE BREXIT AND LONG LIVE CATALUNIA
Joan’s comment has really revealed the issue that lies at the heart of this conflict, that is the Catalunia’s unhappiness about the redistribution of their fiscal contributions to the rest of Spain and their lack of regional solidarity. And based on this predicament, it really surprises me that Catalunia expects the EU to intervene, when one of the most important objectives of the EU is to support less privileged members states to achieve growth, acquire equality and prevent poverty externally and nationally. It also surprises me that bearing in mind that a large proportion of Catalans come from immigrant families from poorer regions of Spain (e.g. Andalucia), they have not acquired the sense of solidarity to those deprived regions.
Further, the EU positioning on this topic is clear: respecting the rule of law and the limits it imposes on those in government is not a choice but an obligation. The constitutional frameworks of individual member states are part of the EU’s legal framework and any action against the constitution of a Member State is an action against the European Union’s legal framework.
Furthermore, let me set out for you (Joan and Mireia) of some the consequences of a hypothetical state of Catalonia, consequences that bearing in mind how important money is for you, Catalonia should be really taking into account: you will be kicked out of the European Monetary Union [note: you may choose to continue using the euro, but with no influence on its exchange/interest rates; independence will lead to the disengagement of Catalonia from the European Central Bank (ECB), which in turn will eliminate access to credit by Catalan financial institutions. Catalan banks would also stop having access to the ECB’s facilities, cutting off the last remaining link between the financial system and the Eurozone. And most importantly, Catalonia would also cease to receive your precious cohesion funds. FYI- your country, as you call it, will totally receive during the period 2014-2020 Catalonia more than 1,450 million euros. Catalonia will not form part of the common tariff system, which will make its foreign trade much more expensive. Furthermore, you will no longer have the protection of the ECB, which will mean the collapse of the credibility of your financial system and the risk premium would substantially increase. Finally, Catalonia, would cease to belong to NATO, the UN, the IMF and the G20, since Catalonia is not a member of any international organization.
Please carefully analyse the consequence of your actions and do not play the role of puppets of a group of politicians who only look after themselves and at the expense of dissolving a whole country; which in turn will cause a domino effect in the rest of Europe. Think of Brexit and you will understand better.
The problem with this article, as well as the exchanges in the comments, is that there appears to be an excessive amount of partisanship and a lack of willingness to accept that both sides must take responsibility for the situation having escalated to the point where there were violent clashes on Sunday.
It is true that Rajoy and the Partido Popular have failed to engage in meaningful dialogue, and that the PP has a history of being intransigent in listening to the concerns of the regions (see Aznar’s policy towards País Vasco for a comparison with Rajoy’s approach to Cataluña). That said, the Catalan pro-independence parties, and the Catalan president have also contributed to the situation in which Spain finds itself by holding an illegal referendum and misrepresenting independence for Cataluña as some kind of utopia in much the same way as the Scottish National Party misrepresents Scottish independence in the UK. Both Rajoy and Puigdemont are, therefore, responsible for the political situation in which Spain finds itself.
Sending in the Guardia Civil was a very heavy-handed tactic adopted by the PP, while Rajoy’s failure to acknowledge those who were injured as a result of the violence was worrying and remains a major cause for concern going forward. I also accept a number of the points made in the article about the history of the PP and its links to Franco. The Catalan pro-independence parties, however, have adopted a very provocative stance, and have been fully aware of the constitutional and political implications of their approach, so they cannot be blameless in this. A return to dialogue from both sides is what is required and progress made towards granting additional autonomy to Cataluña, while maintaining the integrity of the Spanish state.
At the end of a lecture which I delivered on Comparative European Politics this morning, I asked a group of Spanish Erasmus students what they thought about events in their country over the weekend. They held the view that I have expressed above. They want Spain to remain one nation, but they are very concerned and do not agree with the authoritarian response of the Rajoy government. This, I believe, based on admittedly anecdotal evidence at this stage (polls taken prior to Sunday’s referendum have been overtaken by events now, so their relevance is open to question), is likely to be the position of the majority of Spaniards and a significant percentage of those Catalans who did vote in the referendum. It is, therefore, very important to avoid continuing the ‘us versus them’ debate that I have seem emerging in a number of the points being made during the course of this discussion.
This is where the EU may be able to play a role. It could act a mediator between Rajoy and Puigdemont to bring about some form of dialogue. This would, in all probability, be the most that it could do, as the heads of state and government of the majority of EU member states continue to describe this as a domestic issue for Spain in which they are reluctant to get involved. To act as a successful mediator, the EU would have to be seen as not taking sides, which may partially explain why key EU figures have had little to say thus far.
Dear Mireia,
I too am greatly saddened by the totally unjustified violence employed by the Guardia Civil against people who wished to vote in a referendum. However, I disagree with your argument that Europe cannot ignore the Catalan crisis. I believe it proposes to do precisely that. So far, the noises coming out of Europe’s chancellories and the EU Commission are anything but encouraging. I think the EU would stand idly by if Catalonia’s Statue of Autonomy were to be suspended. Were the Spanish Army to be sent in, I doubt that it would raise a finger. One of the reasons for this supine failure to defend democracy is Spain’s bail-out and the vulnerability of the Euro.
The Catalans are naive if they think Europe in general and the EU in particular will give them any worthwhile support.
King Felipe VI’s broadcast to ‘the nation’ about an hour and three quarters ago was anything but conciliatory. It could not have been harder and more uncompromising had Zoido himself drafted it. This opens Pandora’s Box to suspension of The Statute of Autonomy, and maybe strife and Army intervention.
With such a dire outlook, the only real weapon Catalonia has is its ability to wreck Spain’s economy and push its risk premium through the roof, putting the future of the Euro and maybe even the EU itself at risk. Only then will Europe sit up, take notice and try to broker a solution. Otherwise, we can expect the EU to indulge in a bit of hand-wringing, vacuous statements and a lot of looking the other way. Those who want independence had better drop their belief that the EU will ride to the rescue. This means raising the stakes and going for broke.
Thanks Mireia for this article, am glad that the LSE opens its forum to all the opinions and views, and yours are as acceptable as any others.
Am not Spanish, nor Catalan but I studied and lived in Barcelona 20 years ago, since then, I kept a fantastic friendship with many Catalans and Spanish. I have also relatives that moved to Barcelona.
Among all my friends and relatives, no one feels threatened and no one told me about the brain wash in schools, I don t say that it does not exist, but it is definitely not happening everywhere.
It is true that my friends have different opinions regarding the independence, some of them are against (probably not that much after 1-O violence), and others more in favour, but the majority would like a referendum to express their view.
I read earlier in another article that the Catalans institutions have requested a referendum as many as 19 times, “el estatut” had been ruled out despite the political agreement with the PSOE, how far can we push the frustration of part of the Catalans (i.e. Catalonia resident) without expecting a reaction, ie the illegal referendum?
I believe that a referendum is a good way to reduce the tensions and clarify the situation. Am I naïve to think that a referendum cannot be such a bad initiative if it has been held in Scotland and Quebec?
If we had ignored the voice of minorities, the gay marriage would not exist, black people would not have the same rights as the others, women will not be voting…etc.
Regarding the European commission intervention, I don t think we should confuse people with fine juridical details, when recently Poland tried to pass some reforms contradicting the European spirit, serious warnings have been issued by the European commission, another question is whether the European commission and Mme Merkel consider that there is enough ground to raise the voice on the Catalonia issue.
Regards
Thanks Mireia for this article, am glad that the LSE opens its forum to all the opinions and views, and yours are as acceptable as any others.
Am not Spanish, nor Catalan but I studied and lived in Barcelona 20 years ago, since then, I kept a fantastic friendship with many Catalans and Spanish. I have also relatives that moved to Barcelona.
Among all my friends and relatives, no one feels threatened and no one told me about the brain wash in schools, I don t say that it does not exist, but it is definitely not happening everywhere.
It is true that my friends have different opinions regarding the independence, some of them are against (probably not that much after 1-O violence), and others more in favour, but the majority would like a referendum to express their view.
I read earlier in another article that the Catalans institutions have requested a referendum as many as 19 times, “el estatut” had been ruled out despite the political agreement with the PSOE, how far can we push the frustration of part of the Catalans (ie Catalonia resident) without expecting a reaction, ie the illegal referendum?
I believe that a referendum is a good way to reduce the tensions and clarify the situation. Am I naïve to think that a referendum cannot be such a bad initiative if it has been held in Scotland and Quebec?
If we had ignored the voice of minorities, the gay marriage would not exist, black people would not have the same rights as the others, women will not be voting…etc
Regarding the European commission intervention, I don t think we should confuse people with fine juridical details, when recently Poland tried to pass some reforms contradicting the European spirit, serious warnings have been issued by the European commission, another question is whether the European commission and Mrs Merkel consider that there is enough ground to raise the voice on the Catalonia issue.
Regards
I am disappointed to note that Mireia does not explain here why this process of so-called Catalunya Independence cannot be legalised in any way and why it cannot be compared to cases of self-determination such as Canada.
It is false that Catalonia has a right to self-determination, which would have been recognized by international law. United Nations law recognizes the right of self-determination but in an internal sense: as a right of peoples to be able to perform their citizens politically, to vote in democratic elections and participate in institutions. Only in very specific situations this right to autonomy within the State can be converted into external self-determination, against the State, and therefore, to secession. These exceptions are confined to the particular situation of peoples under colonial domination or other forms of foreign occupation, which Catalunya is not.
Further, this right is concurrent with the principle of “state integrity”. The recognition of external self-determination DOES NOT authorize or encourage any action aimed at violating or totally or partially undermining the territorial or political integrity of sovereign States. States that are protected from secession are those who conduct themselves in accordance with the principle of equal rights and are therefore endowed with a Government that represents the totality of the people belonging to the territory- in other words, democracies.
Spanish democracy has been built with the decisive contribution of the Catalans (since their participation in the presentation of the 1978 Constitution); and it has permitted their participation in 38 electoral processes at different levels of governance (local and autonomic elections, general elections and European elections) as well as in four legal referendums: the one of the Constitution, those of the 1979 and 2006 Statutes of 1979 and the one of the Constitutional Treaty of The EU) in order to participate in institutions of the State. Therefore, Catalans are not subjected to colonial, dictatorial or military power.
In exceptional cases, there is the possibility of a “remedial secession”, which is a last resort to stop a massive violation of human rights and democratic freedoms. However, these cases must be validated by the UN Security Council, like in the case of Kosovo, which also respected in its declaration of independence the internal Constitutional Framework administered under the UN mission supervision. Catalunia actions in establish a Referendum have been declared and are anti-constitutional.
Other States have been established by succession or disintegration (e.g. USSR or Yugoslavia), but there is no generic right to secession. Scotland, Canada and Montenegro have held referenda for self-determination, but in accordance with their rules and with the authorization of the central Government and Parliament, never unilaterally like is happening in Catalunia.
The Spanish Constitution does not contemplate [like any other constitution in Europe] the right of a territory to break apart. A modification of this situation would require constitutional reform by a procedure, which requires, among other things, a two-thirds majority in Congress and Senate, and that the reform be approved by all Spaniards in a referendum. There is, however, the possibility of directly consulting citizens about “decisions of special significance”, but then the referendum must be convened by the Government, it is only consultative and not binding and should have the right to vote in it all Spaniards (art. 92 of the Spanish Constitution).
Furthermore, the doctrine and jurisprudence of the Spanish Constitutional Tribunal exclude from the possibility of submitting to a referendum any questions that contradict the national unity and territorial integrity contained in article 2. Referendums contrary to similar constitutional norms, as happened with those of Ukraine in the case of the Crimean secession, have been radically overturned by the European Council, the UN General Assembly and the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe.
EU is freaking hypocrite. It supported separatism all over the world, Tibet, East Timor, South Sudan, etc etc. But when it comes to their own territory, it is a NO NO.
It seems to me that it is in the intetests of Russia to support Catalan independence. But Russia is too politicaly correct and remains neutral.