As a first post, we thought to tackle an issue very close to home. Both coming from a Hispanic background, we were instantly intrigued by the deception and controversy of Catalonian independence. We each decided to allocate ourselves to a contrasting perspective.
Interview with Luis Felipe Ulecia
Should Catalonia be recognised as a sovereign state?
Stance : Pro-Independence
On the 1st October 2017, many around the world awoke to see accounts of police brutality and images of the Spanish government forcibly removing ballot boxes flooding the news. Catalonia, the semi-autonomous region in the North East of Spain had gone to the polls to vote on whether or not it should remain part of Spain, an act approved by the Catalan parliament but deemed illegal by the Spanish government. Despite independence garnering just over 92% of the vote, two and a half years later neither the UN nor any of its members recognises Catalonia as a sovereign nation. Surely self-determination should’ve been granted to this region following such a strong call for independence by its people.
Most staunch Spanish nationalists would claim that the illegality of both the election and the Catalonian unilateral declaration of independence is the reason why the region shouldn’t be recognised. In the days leading up to the planned vote, the Constitutional Court of Spain had ruled the referendum to be illegal – owing to the constitution’s declaration of Spain as “indivisible” and an article which states that a referendum can only be called by the king. Many argue that because of the known illegality of the referendum, many remain voters chose not to vote, leading to the high pro-independence vote share and extremely low voter turnout of 43%. However pro-independence sentiment is clear in the region, with the Association of Municipalities for Independence having the support of 82.9% of town councils, and the 3 pro-independence parties winning a majority of seats in the Catalonian parliament. Standing law is also not valid grounds on which to determine the issue of independence, which is hardly ever concluded within the bounds of law. The United States’ declaration of independence was regarded as treason, as was Lithuania’s - called illegal by Gorbachev leading to an occupation of Lithuania’s capital. It is clear legality cannot and has not stopped credible independence movements in the past, so why shouldn’t the UN or sovereign states recognize a Catalonian secession?
Indeed, “Self-determination of peoples” is included in article 1 of the charter of the UN – an instrument of international law to which UN member nations are bound. Catalonia seemingly ticks most of the boxes for self-determination; it already exercises a high level of autonomy and has a distinctive history, culture and language to the rest of Spain. Most secessionist movements that have possessed these concepts, such as many of the Balkan states have historically been granted self-determination, so the question still remains as to why the Catalonian movement remains unrecognised. The key reason being the European Union. Following the Catalonian unilateral declaration of independence, most EU member states observed the stance of the European Union, which declared Catalonian secession to be “illegal” and an “internal matter”, going on to state that “No EU state would recognize Catalonia”. Of course, this statement influenced EU member states’ policies towards Catalonia and certainly led to a domino effect in which states condemned Catalonia, following the popular opinion. Yet people fail to realise that the EU’s hands were tied over the matter, with article 4.2 of the Lisbon Treaty stating that the EU couldn’t interfere with key state functions like “territorial integrity”. The Catalonia issue occurred when the organisation was occupied by Brexit negotiations, the migrant crisis and worsening EU-law situations in Hungary and Poland, leaving little enthusiasm for another fire to put out in europe. Whilst the EU has experience with mediating independence talks, as it did successfully in Kosovo in 2013, it lacked the influence that it had in the Balkans. In 2013, the Balkan protagonists welcomed EU intervention since the EU was able to leverage financial aid and potential EU membership, it lacks this purchase over Spain and its government. Together these factors contributed to a hasty response, leading to the misguided convention that the Catalonian image is unjustified and not worthy of EU mediation, dooming the Catalonian cause.
Misguided perceptions of un-democratic, illegal and extraneous independence movement in Catalonia haunt its cause. With global foreign policy focus shifting to Coronavirus and more pertinent issues in Europe, it is likely the Catalonian cause will recess from the world stage, with the movement’s followers left hoping the world will take notice and grant the region its rightful sovereignty.
Should Catalonia be recognised as a sovereign state?
Stance : Anti-Independence
The year is 2025, following the independence vote on the 1st of October 2017, Catalonia was declared a sovereign state by the UN under the leadership of Carles Puigdemont. Riding the separatist momentum many regions, even those within Catalonia, like Valle de Aran, Tarragona, started their own independent referendums. In Catalonia there were no less than 500 independent regions, counties, municipalities, or even boroughs. Anyone and anybody with a slight grudge could call for a referendum and try to break-away in order to be king of their own little territory, whatever the size of it. Soon after followed Europe and regions such as Flanders and Wallonia in Belgium and in the Czech Republic with the autonomous movement of the Moravian people. With the Catalonian illegal vote being allowed it became clear that any region or area could form a country with a democratic vote. Over 5,000 countries in the world were formed from anything from suburbs to households, any group of people with differing views were given the right to form a country if ‘Self-Determination’ is showed. If Catalonia were able do this, why shouldn’t others? It is clear that the question regarding the independence of Catalonia has nothing to do with the validity of the referendum that took place or the public demand for the secession, but everything to do with whatever gave a region the right to form it’s one sovereign state by the means of a democratic vote.
When debating the independence of Catalonia it is essential to recognise that the Catalonian land has never before been independent from Spain, it formed part of the Crown of Aragon which later, when Ferdinand II of Aragon married Isabella I of Castile in 1496, became part of a union of kingdoms of Spain. However, in Aragon are also found the states of Valencia and Aragon meaning this logic could only apply when discussing the independence of the whole of the 3 states. Although, it is important to note that Catalonia has a distinctive culture and language, based on that we must also then offer the same independence to states such as Galicia and Aragon. This could also be applied to almost all multilingual societies such as the Canadian Francophones and Switzerland where 4 languages are spoken. Therefore, this demonstrates how we can’t treat areas with different dialects as a separate culture wanting independence without being prepared to welcome a ludicrous scenario where countries are split into corresponding languages and dialects. Independence activists often cite the UN declaration of self-determinism embodied primarily in Article 1 of the Charter as a document which grants their ability to secede from Spain. However, the reason as to why the supposed ‘Sovereign State’ was not recognised by the UN or European Union is due to the situations in which this declaration applies. It was formed following World War I to strip the Ottoman Colonies from oppression of minority groups and was made to only be cited in as a last resort in which ‘peoples’ views are not reflected or are not being represented. This can be seen in the example of when the ‘Aalanders people’ in Finland were denied the right of ‘Self-Determinism’ as it could only be considered as an ‘exceptional solution’ and no sufficient reason was displayed. In conclusion, one can find no reasons as to why Catalonia would be granted a secession when they have never before been separate, share the same history and culture, have a significant presence in Spanish Parliament through nationalist parties and are clearly not a group of people which are oppressed but instead thrive in the Spanish economy.
From an economic standpoint allowing Catalonia to separate as a sovereign state is also illogical considering the disproportionate amounts of money it was given to turn it into the tourism centre it has become today with cities such as Barcelona. Catalonia receives billions from the EU as structural funds and the Catalonian government has a debt of €77 billion , if it was to become independent it would require access to the European ‘bail-out fund’, which would not be possible given that they would not be part of the EU. This would put them in unavoidable and immediate bankruptcy. This type of selfish nationalism would raise the question as to why the rest of Europe would help Catalonia as a new sovereign state to save its growing pension bill and new diplomatic services. Catalonia would have to bear an economic frenzy as a new country and an exodus of spooked foreign investors whilst applying for membership to the European Union and its market assets (a process which Spain and other countries could easily veto). This is simply not feasible and would drive the Catalonian population into a situation of extreme poverty whilst having to balance the inflation of their new currency. Finally, though I believe that the discussion surrounding Catalonian independence can be put to an end much before seeking what the Catalonian people want, twisted figures are often shown by independence activists to demonstrate what a vast majority plead supporting the secessionist movement. On the 1st of October 2017, Carles Puigdemont called for an illegal referendum in which supposedly 92% of the people voted for a secession. However, with a turnout of 43% in which (due to the illegality) an absence of remain voters is clear to see, one cannot claim that the majority of the Catalonian people voted in favour, especially considering how many citizens voted several times. The violent and chaotic means as to how the independence vote took place is a large part as to why the UN dismissed this case, it turned a peaceful union of minds into a vicious and illegitimate coup from a group now portrayed under the light of terrorists.
In conclusion, the main reason as to why the idea of a Catalonian Secession was dismissed so quickly is due to the illegality of their methods and as there is no real valid reason in accordance with the charter of ‘Self-Determination’. If Catalonia independence was permitted, this would open a pandora’s box of a separatist movement. First would be all the states in Catalonia which already stated their unacceptance of such a scenario such as Val d’aran and the large part of Catalonia which sees the lunacy and the ludicrosity behind the movement.
Conclusion
After discussing this together and comparing our articles, we came to the mutual agreement on the Anti-independence stance. We arrived to this as we believed that permitting a country to be split without any real reason opens a pandora's box in which any area of people with different beliefs may secede from an area, taking away from what is meant to be a democratic constitution.
Following this, I was fascinated by how such a violent and separatist movement was able to stage a coup and drive the citizens into such an indignant perspective. Therefore, I decided to reach out to Luis Felipe Ulecia, the president of the VOX youth party, to find out what truly occurred on October 1st 2017, and the factors that lead up to the coup.
Interview shown at the top.
Loved the article, keen to hear your views on Scottish independence Rafael. Would love to see an article on the topic in the future.