Catalonia: Spirit Of The Beehive

In July 1909 there was an uprising in Barcelona and other cities in Catalonia. Workers revolted against being called up as reservists for Spain's war in Morocco. This developed into a revolt against the military, against colonialism, against the church and against Spain. The Guardia Civil fired at demonstrators on Las Ramblas. The Spanish government declared a state of war. The army was sent in. Troops were moved from cities such as Valencia because the local soldiers refused to shoot at their own people. Up to 150 civilians were killed; there were eight army and police casualties. Five ringleaders were executed. There was widespread condemnation of events in Europe. The king, Alfonso XIII, stung by the foreign reaction, dismissed the prime minister, the Mallorcan, Antoni Maura. The whole episode lives in the memory as Tragic Week, Setmana Tràgica.

There are any number of historical examples which can be drawn on to explain the tragedy of Catalonia, a play of epic proportions that has been enacted over centuries, one without end, constantly repeating its plots, shifting in time and context. On Sunday, over 800 people were injured. There were at least no deaths. There will be no executions. King Felipe will not dismiss Mariano Rajoy. Contemporary times require contemporary outcomes, but contemporary times inspire even greater reaction. Gil Scott-Heron was not right: the revolution is televised. It is captured on phones. It is on social networks. The condemnation comes from societies who can witness for themselves. The mute words of Europe's politicians aren't needed, albeit that they should be. What occurred on Sunday was a tragic event for Catalonia, a tragic event for Spain.

Victor Erice's 1973 film The Spirit of the Beehive took as its symbolic theme the emotional disintegration of Spain during the Civil War. This symbolism was captured by one family's experiences. Families were split and divided. In the Franco years there was silence that repressed these emotions, prevented the experiences being reconciled. So much symbolism. Families in Catalonia divided. Catalonia divided. Spain divided. Emotions high as disintegration - that of Spain - is unveiled amidst scenes of police brutality, of the Mossos pitted against the forces of the state, reluctant to turn on their own people, of firefighters in cordons attacked by these same police.

Invoking legality and the Constitution no longer suffices. Deeds have been done. Blame can be attached and will be attached. In the recent past, had Mariano Rajoy acceded to Catalonia claims made by Artur Mas for greater autonomy, especially of a financial nature, Sunday would never have happened. Rajoy's unwillingness to show favouritism in the unending tragedy of Catalonia inspired Sunday. Mas was not a radical. He became so. He passed the baton to Carles Puigdemont, abetted by a more extreme left. I am reassured that my assessment is correct. A friend who has lived in Barcelona for almost forty years and who lectures on politics said in an email that had Mas received a "few more shekels", all of this could have been avoided. The economic affairs minister, Luis de Guindos, attempted to play the autonomy and financial cards. But it was too late.

It used to be all about autonomy. Independence wasn't, even ten years ago, something that Catalonia's people were agitating for. Support for it ran at about 12%. On Sunday there was 90% yes. The referendum was obviously a fiasco. It couldn't have been anything else, given the removal of ballot boxes, the suggestions of double voting, the fact of illegality. The result will of course be questioned, but the numbers are almost irrelevant. Puigdemont has a mandate.

How ever greater was this tragedy when one thinks back a few weeks. In the same city that had experienced terror and where there was - for some fleeting moments -a unity of Spain and Catalonia and of monarchy and republicanism, there were now the scenes of the Guardia Civil reminiscent of Tragic Week. What in God's name was Rajoy thinking? He has served up independence. He has aroused international sympathy. He should go. He has to go. He cannot be the one to attempt to plot the way from here. Felipe won't do it. Someone else must.

And what of Spain in the eyes of the world? That carefully crafted Marca España brand has been wounded along with the 800. Greater damage has been caused than that by terrorists. The brutality had echoes of 15-M and the evictions from the squares. The gag law was brought in to prevent repetition, but it was irrelevant. With or without that law (a Rajoy law), criticised for being inherently anti-democratic, what happened on Sunday would still have happened.

A Tragic Sunday, and now it is essential that sense prevails. If not, the spirit of the beehive will fester. It has been allowed to develop. For a few shekels more, it would not have done.

Vota Terrazas! Sí o no

The campaign's in full swing. Can we expect a televised debate? Will posters be hanging from every lamppost? "Vota terrazas!" A citizen of Palma might stare at this poster and wonder who he or she is. "Terrazas? I don't remember there being a Terrazas running for Congress."

This isn't an election campaign. Not for Congress or Senate. It is to elect terraces staying or terraces going. To terrace or not to terrace? That is the question. More or less. Terraces on the Born. Some say Borne. There are doubtless those who don't inhabit the micro-universe of central Palma who may well never have heard of the Born or Borne. Who may not know that it is both Passeig and Paseo. It has trees, so it would be better if it were an Avinguda or Avenida: avenues by definition of cliché must always be tree-lined. But no, it is Passeig and Paseo, and herein lies a clue to the campaign. Literally, either of these means a promenade, a word more associated with the seaside. It comes, variously, from Middle French (to go for a walk) or Latin (to drive animals onward). There are no animals being driven onward on the Born. Animals are not the debate. Walking is. Walking along the prom, tiddly-om-pom-pom.

Except they can't walk. Not with one, two, three, four terraces in the way. The citizens of Palma are enduring terrace terrorism. "Oh my, where can I promenade? How can I promenade when there are four terraces in the way?" The laments reached the ears of the town hall. Under a previous guise, one removed from the present administration, it allowed terraces. The current administration has heard the cries of the citizens. "Vota no!" And be sure to do so with the use of your citizen's card, as it's the only way that you will be able to. As of today and for the next seven days.

Not long in the post, the not-the-Podemos deputy mayor for public services, Som Palma's Aurora Jhardi, took it upon herself to make the terraces of the Born a battleground over a gentle stroll or a relaxing cup of café con leche. Aurora was digging trenches for the strolling citizenry. Relaxing cups of café con leche, right down the middle of the Born at any rate, were for Partido Popular-ists, Ana Botella having famously (or infamously) uttered the fateful café con leche line apropos Madrid's failed Olympic bid. But it was not only promenaders being denied their citizen birthright as a consequence of terrace invasion, there were also events traditionally held on the Born. There was the book fair, for instance, when vast stalls weighed down with mighty tomes expounding Catalan Marxist dialectic blocked the way of promenaders.

Aurora, to the chagrin of the bar owners, announced that the terraces would be no more, once what had been a trial period (of several years) ended in February next year. Little did anyone suspect, certainly not the bar owners, that a few months later, the citizens of Palma would be voting on their terraces. But that is exactly what they are doing, and Aurora and the town hall are delighted. Why? Because even if the vote doesn't go their way (it won't be legally binding in any event), the terrace referendum will have been a triumph for the new age of online democratic participation, albeit that, with some reluctance, the town hall had to accept that not all citizens are umbilically wired up to the internet: those who are not will be able to go to community centres and shown how to do it on a laptop brought in for the occasion.

Is it granting the town hall too much Machiavellianism to suggest that they might have had this in mind from the outset? Whip up a frenzy of publicity and then call a referendum, thus heralding the new age. Terraces may cause controversy, but they are hardly life or death (though they may be job or no job). They are a useful test project.

But test for what? Participation in the political process is an admirable, nay laudable aim, but there are limits and boundaries, and the terrace vote is not decisive as it has no legal authority. In a similar way, popular legislative proposals, such as the one which did for bullfighting in Catalonia, do not oblige parliamentary approval. The will of the people, sorry citizens, can be denied.

They are having their terraces' referendum, but if they can have one for these, then why not, say, one for the monument in Feixina park? Is a controversy that drags in old Nationalist-Republican feuding too hot a theme for the new age of participation, consensus and citizen proximity?

The consultative process cannot be selective, unless, that is, you hold a referendum to decide on whether to have a referendum.

Catalonia: One big mess

As an example of an exercise in mass opinion polling, the Catalonia not-the-referendum has signalled huge support for the "sí" camp. Yes, we want independence. Now, Sr. Rajoy, let us have it. Or at least let us have a real referendum and not a pretend one.

Rajoy isn't about to agree to this, though were he to and to therefore have gained sufficient support to have changed the Constitution, the result might well be quite different. The 80% in favour of independence were culled from 2.2 million voters, approximately therefore one third of all those who were eligible. In terms of participation the not-the-referendum can only be described as a form of opinion poll and one, moreover, that had an in-built bias thanks to the almost total absence of a "no" campaign and to a Catalan media which, for the most part, came down firmly on the side of Artur Mas and his referendum co-conspirator, Oriol Junqueras.

The result proves nothing other than that 80% of 2.2 million people said yes. It is a percentage greatly in excess of that which regular opinion polls indicate to be the actual level of support for independence. In a real referendum the dynamic would be different and the turnout would also be different. Mas would be quite wrong to believe that independence is genuinely what the majority of Catalonians want.

So, why did he go ahead with the not-the-referendum? He had to in order to save face, having conceded that a genuine referendum was not legal (something which he knew all along). But he also had to as a way of highlighting the sheer lack of any movement in attitude on behalf of the Rajoy government. Its response to the very act of the poll on Sunday was to invoke the courts and to have the police look into who had authorised the use of schools etc. to be polling stations.

Mas argues that he has Catalonian law on his side and this allowed for the not-the-referendum to take place, but regardless of the law, be it that of Catalonia or that of the Constitution, why would the Rajoy government now seek to have the courts decide whether an illegal act has taken place which could lead to prosecution of Mas and others? It is petty, because the poll is not legally binding, cannot be legally binding and only serves as an expression of sentiment of a minority of Catalonians.

What really agitates Rajoy is that the 80% vote boxes him into a corner. To even now negotiate with Mas would appear to be a climbdown and a loss of his face. To agree to a referendum would mean a complete loss of any credibility he retains, while to arrive at agreement would require support at the Cortes for constitutional change that would be almost unimaginable. He would know that a legitimate referendum might well turn out differently, but he can't put that to the test. He has nowhere to go except to the courts. And what good will that do him? It will only reinforce sentiment against him.

Though Rajoy now finds himself in a corner, it was Mas who got there first. It was his foolhardiness in calling an election that he didn't need to which got him to where he now is. That election cost his CiU party seats at the expense of Junqueras's radical independentist ERC who were thus brought into an uneasy coalition in which Mas had little option but to adopt a more aggressive attitude towards independence than he might otherwise have done. It can't be stressed too often that what Mas had really sought was a re-negotiation of Catalonia's finances with the state, and it was a refusal by Rajoy which triggered off the process which resulted in Sunday's not-the-referendum.

Where, therefore, might this now lead, other than to the courts? The leader of PSOE, Pedro Sánchez, might hold the key. His party has been as against independence as the Partido Popular. A solution, perhaps the only solution, is a reform of the whole relationship between the state, Catalonia and the other regions, i.e. a fully federal Spain. It is one that PSOE has recently come to accept, but neither Rajoy nor Mas, for different reasons, has.

Federalism might, for the more radically independentist-minded, now seem like a fudge, but a way has to be sought to combat what is clearly a deeply divided Catalonian society and the ambitions of any other region to seek independence (in truth only maybe the Basques). Both Rajoy and Mas have to share the blame for what has come to pass but both could find a way out of the mess, and a reform on federalist lines with thus greater self-governing powers might well be the only way out.

9/11 In A Catalonian Style

9/11 is about to take on a new relevance. The Spanish love of reducing dates to numbers and/or letters will mean that 9 November is suitably abbreviated. It may be 9-N but 9/11 might, for its potentially seismic consequences, be more appropriate. The president of Catalonia, Artur Mas, has announced that on 9 November next year, there will be a referendum on independence. There will be two questions posed. Do you want Catalonia to become a state? Do you want this state to be independent? Yes or no?

Mas, whose party is the CiU, has been supported in the referendum call by a rag-bag of other parties which represent varying shades of the left and Catalonian nationalism. One of these, the ERC (Republican Left of Catalonia), became a significant force in Catalonia following elections last year. Mas, who thought he was going to enjoy an increased majority for the CiU, misinterpreted a massive demonstration in Barcelona in favour of independence. This wasn't, as things turned out at the polls, necessarily an expression in favour of the CiU leading the march to independence. The CiU lost twelve seats and had to cast around for a partner. It found one in the ERC. In so doing, any possibility that there might have been of Mas, whose party isn't radical, adopting a more softly-softly approach on independence was blown out of the water. The ERC is a fervently pro-independence party. Mas was left with little option but to go full steam ahead on independence, even if there are plenty of commentators who would argue that he has never really been in favour of it and still isn't.

There is by no means total political support for the referendum among Catalonia's numerous political parties. The third strongest party, PSC, the Catalonian branch of the PSOE socialists, is against it. As are the fourth strongest PPC and the sixth strongest C's. Yes, there really are a lot of political parties in Catalonia. Pere Navarro, who is the leader of the PSC, has urged that there be dialogue and negotiations with Madrid and that there is also a dispensing with constantly looking to the past.

But it is this past which forever catches up with politics of a Catalan nature, be the location Mallorca or Catalonia. Navarro has avoided attending a symposium called "Spain against Catalonia: an historical look (1714-2014)". The implication of the symposium's purpose is clear. 1714 marked the start of Catalan repression under King Philip V after the fall of Barcelona in that year which brought to a close the War of the Spanish Succession. Catalonia was never the same again.

Navarro has made a plea for history to be something for historians, but it is a forlorn hope to believe that the past will be consigned to history. 1714 and subsequent repressions make this impossible and so colour the present day and present-day politics.

It has to be remembered, though, how the latest move towards independence came about. It was because Mas failed to secure any change to Catalonia's financing, a change which would have meant it keeping more of the revenues it raised which are then handed over to Madrid. As Mariano Rajoy was not interested in perhaps granting Catalonia a similar status to that of the Basque Country and Navarre (the regions which keep tax revenues but hand over instead what is almost like a management fee to national government), Mas opted to play the independence card. And this has brought us therefore to the 9/11 announcement.

There is of course one major problem with the referendum. It wouldn't be legal, and Spain's Justice Minister has said that it will not be held. But what if it were to be or were to be going to be? What would happen? Rajoy has made some dark mutterings about doing anything to prevent the referendum occurring. Anything?

If Mas had hoped that pressing for independence would extract some changes from Madrid, he has thus far been disappointed. And now that the date has been set, even were Madrid to offer discussions on financing (with a genuine aim to changing it), it is hard to see how the date could be un-set. Mas is in too deep.

The timing of the referendum may well have in mind the independence referendum in Scotland shortly before. If there were a rejection of independence by the Scots, this might influence how the Catalonia referendum would go (polls tend to suggest there is a pretty even split between those for or against independence). Inevitably, there will be, as there already have been, comparisons between the Catalonian and Scottish votes, but there is one very big difference. One is sanctioned, the other isn't. If Catalonia were to vote in favour of independence, assuming it is able to, then things could get rather difficult.

The Gift Horse: The Euro crisis

Beware of Greeks bearing gifts. The advice has endured for many centuries. Far more recent is the advice to the Greeks to beware of Europeans bearing gifts, such as that which slashes what they owe by 50%. The Greeks, though, know a thing or two about deceptive gifts. They invented them. Or it. The European Trojan Horse that the Greeks are expected to admit into their walls comes stuffed with an army-load of more austerity. Ingrates they may be, sending the markets back into further turmoil, but when presented with a dubious gift, they do the only sensible thing - and that's to call a referendum.

When the Greeks say no and send the Trojan Horse packing, they'll be waving it goodbye from a dock side in Piraeus with banners proclaiming the default it was meant to avoid and their fond adieus to the Eurozone. Why bother waiting? Let them default now and get on with it.

Of course there is another way of looking at it. The referendum ruse is a way of extracting more gifts. 50%? Why not make it 25%? Or one can also see it as the Greeks wanting to get a bit of pride back. They have spent the last few months being portrayed as tax-swindling, idle ne'er-do-wells and now have to put up with Sarkozy saying that they made their numbers up on the back of a fag packet after a good night on the retsina.

Well, they probably did make up their numbers, pre-Euro admission, but then most European countries have played fast and loose to different degrees with "the rules". The French, for example.

In the days - when were they, as they seem like centuries ago - when Gordon Brown was arriving at his tests for the UK's entry into Euroland, a key measure was the ability to comply with the stability pact, the one that the French (and the Germans) regularly flouted. In fact, everyone did with the probable exception of the powerhouse that is Luxembourg.

Anyway, let's not worry too much about who made up what figures, more pressing is what happens when Greece goes totally belly-up, as in Papandreou loses the referendum, Greece exits the euro, total chaos ensues and hyperinflation takes over with the printers pumping out so many notes that it will require pantechnicons to carry the money and not the wheelbarrows of the Weimar Republic.

Hmm, ah yes, Weimar Republic, economic and political chaos, hyperinflation. The Germans should know all about what follows from such circumstances. Indeed the Greeks should have a shrewd idea what can happen as well.

But then it is only Greece. Except of course it isn't. There is always, well, Spain for instance. So just hypothesise for a moment. Poor old Mariano Rajoy, some time into his tenure as prime minister, finds himself in dire need of a bail-out, Europe comes along bearing gifts (assuming any of the trillion or so is left or the Chinese keep pumping money in) and effectively takes over the government, which, more or less, is what would happen in Greece. Referendum follows. Chaos ensues.

Leaving the Eurozone doesn't mean leaving the European Union, but much would depend on how the political chaos is handled. The Greeks, and the Spanish, have, when all said and done, some form. It wouldn't be a case of choosing to leave the European Union but of possibly being booted out. Idiotic concerns about having an identity residence card or not would be supplanted by rather different concerns.

The Spanish hypothesis might remain just that - an hypothesis. Much though a Greek no could create the long-anticipated domino effect that brings Spain to its financial knees, the possibility exists that Europe would still support Greece. It is also just possible that the Greeks would vote yes. Faced with more European-imposed austerity or leaving the Eurozone, they may decide to err in favour of the Euro.

Much might rest, however, on what voices come to the fore in the meantime. As this is as much a political as it is an economic issue, chuck some highly populist mouthpiece into the equation, one that damns Europe and anyone or anything else, and who knows what might happen. This might be the worry, either before or after a Greek referendum, and so it might also be for other countries, Spain included.

Whither the European Odyssey now? Who can predict with certainty, just as who could have predicted how the journey would unfold before the adventure was embarked upon. Whether the Greeks prefer to look a gift horse in the mouth will depend upon what they understand by "gift". In German the word means poison.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

MALLORCA TODAY - AENA employees to vote on 24 March

Employees of the AENA airports authority will vote on the pre-agreement arrived at between the unions and AENA on Tuesday. The vote, it is hoped, will go in favour of the agreement brokered by the unions and so definitively mean that strikes that had been called for Easter and during the summer will not go ahead.