The spokesperson from International Commission of European Citizens (ICEC) criticizes the Spanish government and Catalan parties for not having defended the interests Catalonia in the agreement that kept Pedro Sánchez in power. Anna Arqué i Solsona recalls the history of the conflict with Spain until the day Carles Puigdemont fled to Brussels without giving any explanation.
Does the recent agreement that the Spanish government reached with the independence parties also weaken Catalonia, in the same way that happened with the Pyrenees Treaty?
Not in the same way, no. The Pyrenees Treaty was an illegal agreement between two occupying forces without any involvement of the Catalan sovereign Courts over its northern territory. The Amnesty deal 2023 is an agreement between political parties in Spain and Catalonia. However, this agreement doesn’t represent the kingdom of Spain or the People of Catalonia but the political parties in both governments. The only reason why the Spanish side represented by PSOE and Sumar agrees to, it’s only for pure partisan interest, and that is to gain the votes of the Catalan ‘independentist’ parties (ERC and Junts) in favour of declaring Pedro Sanchez (PSOE) as President of the Spanish government. This lack of consensus within the Spanish state makes it very fragile and little trustworthy.
Which party did not defend the interests of the Catalans this time?
If to consider democratic voting as the measurement of what ‘Catalans’ want, none of the Catalan parties in the Catalan parliament has defended the Catalans democratic interest, which has repeatedly been the one for independence. Since this democratic vote has not been made effective many justifications have arisen and many other minor objectives have been marked as priorities by the same ‘independentists’ parties: amnesty, repetition of referendum, better infrastructures, Catalan language officialism, etc. So, unfortunately, in a strict democratic sense, none of them. That may explain why an independentist social movement like ANC is postulating itself as a possible electoral alternative amongst other new political options.
What would you like to have been implemented in the recent agreement between the Spanish government and the independence parties?
Many of us would not have agreed to a pardon from the Spanish state, whose main objective is to erase not only the independence mandate, but also the legal and political implications, for both sides, derived from the events surrounding the official and binding Catalan referendum in 2017. The amnesty does not make the conflict go away, the only thing that drops out are the legal charges against polititians and, maybe, the procedures started by the International Courts, from which Spain was very likely to get very bad news. Not to mention how thousands of Catalan citizens have been left aside from the ‘pardon’ of the agreed amnesty, facing a difficult legal situation who have been charged or with a pending sentence from the Spanish courts out of the events surrounding the referendum, which continues as a burden for them and their families. The solution to the permanent conflict between the kingdom of Spain and the Catalan People is an independent Catalonia. Any other ‘clever’ adjustment will just extend the pain and unavoidable permanent clash amongst the parts because the thought that with time and nice gestures, the will of Catalans for independence will disappear is wrong, it will not. The best thing would be to agree a ‘non-harmful’ process so Spain and Catalonia can cooperate fairly under their own sovereignty and independence. I do believe Spain would get much greater benefit from such an equal relation than from the current toxic relationship.
In your opinion, has the existence of written agreements throughout history harmed Catalonia’s desire to be free?
Catalonia’s desire to be free and its will for independence have not been harmed by them. However, the reality of independence, yes, it has been harmed by every single one of them. The reason being is that they have all always been the lesser of a greater wrong. They have never been real peaceful agreements as a result of recognition and respect amongst both sides, but bloody papers result from constant criminal threats or flagrant illegalities. Even today’s amnesty is the result of ‘this is the maximum you are going to get; take it or else: we keep repressing you with the force of our state’s machinery’. That is when the concept of ‘lawfare’ enters into account. This year’s ICEC conference in the European Parliament covered this precise topic with the title, ‘Peaceful Agreements or Bloody Papers?’ (Catalonia: Peaceful Agreements or Bloody Papers? (youtube.com)). Because it’s of utmost importance for both nationals and international audiences to understand the fact that history is not only a punch of ‘old stories’ to tell in front of a fireplace but what shapes our European reality today, which still functions out of structures imposed by old imperialism tuned up to modern forms of abuse. There is an urgent need to review the current situation of ‘stateless’ nations in Europe and the UK so the current democratic standards can display their true righteous capacity and revoke the painful reality of today’s still captive nations. Democracy must be an efficient tool to amend the flaws of non-democratic periods; it should not get reduced only to technocratic procedures getting us nowhere regarding equality matters amongst core national concerns. Democracy should be able to eliminate second-class national categories. Democracy ought to offer the capacity for all nations to exist with the same equal rights while enjoying their distinct cultural traits. And this may mean new Agreements for national recognition for all. Those cultural crimes from non-democratic periods that have not yet been judged cannot be the basis on which our current legal validity gets established because they will be a democratic fraud that will keep proving to be rotten and unworkable.
What place does Carles Puigdemont occupy in the history of the Catalan movement?
Oh, well, that will depend on the editor’s choice, right? No, but seriously, like all history episodes, each side will pick its own interest and write their own book. But above all, there is a fact that will never be able to be changed in 2017, despite all the odds, despite all the threats, despite all the violence, and despite all the intends by some of the very same Catalan polititians to avoid the voting: Catalan People’s made its way, and we voted and we won. Yes to independence was the preferred option. The Victory of freedom was the people’s victory. Puigdemont and his government had massive support from the people of Catalonia to obey democracy and apply its mandate, but he didn’t; he cancelled the proclaimed independence. And they all left, some to Madrid, others to Belgium, with no explanation, nothing, and the people were left alone with an institutional surrendering message that they were not ready to accept. And what is worse, when the government tried to justify such decisions, they did so by blaming Spain’s disposition to cause bloodshed in the streets of Barcelona, saying that they had nothing prepared for such a ‘non-expected’ situation. How could that be possible? How can a Catalan president act in such an irresponsible way, bringing the people of Catalonia into an official referendum of independence within the Spanish state without having a contingency plan ready? Could Catalonia have a government ignorant of its own history? incomprehensible and sad. The Catalan movement comes from far, and it will stand still despite polititians, that’s for sure. He had a great, great opportunity, and he let it blow into smoke, and today he signs his freedom while his political party agrees to refuse the unilateral Right of Peoples to SELF-determination. I leave it up to the readers to decide.
What is the role that the Catalan movement has played together with other European regions that are also seeking independence?
Catalonia and many other European nations have the right and the ‘duty’ to achieve their independence, and democratic freedom movements are key to achieving such a transcendent goal. We all know that all that happens around our cases, happens because we exist. Trying to take the discussion of independence to a denial point about the national existence of Catalans, Bascs, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, Flemish, Veneti, Tyrol, etc. is politically absurd; we exist. Why are we not yet independent? It doesn’t have a straight-forward answer, and some fall right into our own flaws, but citizens can’t just blindfold themselves to the main reason, which is that states use all their strength and influence to block any attempt—no matter how legit or reasonable it may be—to make it very difficult for democratic movements all over Europe to overcome such corrupted power. Therefore, the network that social independentist movements make, as in the case of ICEC, is key, and it is very important that we stand independent of any partisan ideology so we can focus only on our work for independence, refusing any other gain that the status quo may be inclined to offer. ICEC was created precisely because we know that working alongside other honest, brave, democratic movements for independence in Europe and the UK makes us very strong. Millions of European citizens, with a clear understanding of our national rights and willing to use all of our capacity to make these rights a reality, may turn out to be the empowering push needed. I’d also like to pinpoint that when we started the Catalan popular referendums (2009-2011), the Catalan team had a very clear aim, which was to stop the belief that each of our democratic fights had to work their way alone, isolated from other similar realities. That was a very common idea amongst the different movements, and we wanted to convince our fellow independentist citizens from other countries about the need to change that induced belief and unite our wisdom, knowledge, and passion. The unionists did not like this idea promoted by the base and started to exert pressure, so independentist politicians kept their distance from other movements. Never mind, we did it.
What are the similar demands between these movements, besides independence?
Independence is the cause of Freedom, Justice and Peace at once, because there cannot be Peace without Justice nor Justice without Freedom. The power of People and the right to be heard and respected is by itself a self-explanatory ‘world vision’ shared by all ICEC members and implies a democratic understanding of self-determination and sovereignty. Funnily, we could say that we are also united by our differences: our passion to understand how different our cultures are and how we just love the enrichment that brings to our collective experience. Contrary to imperialism or globalism, we don’t fear what is different, we don’t feel threatened by cultural divergences, we don’t want to control and uniform what strikes different, we actually celebrate the diversity of our cultural heritage, and we care so it continues to flourish distinct from one each other.
The first target of these movements is to obtain European recognition?
I’m not that fond of marking ideologically charged targets before achieving independence, as they tend to divide the independentist movement. I believe this is one other great reason to be independent: to be entitled to decide about all these options. Some movements have no doubt about the need to be recognised within the European Union; others couldn’t care less and talk about all the different options available. For sure, it is a fascinating topic. The debate on different decisions within each nation will be an exciting part of being an independent state, and we are looking forward to all of them! But, to be crystal clear, none of the options can become a condition to be or not to be a free nation, an independent state. Freedom is the most important achievement; from there, sure, there will be government elections with different political parties to defend and promote one or another ideology, and referendums will be held to vote when the decision goes beyond political representatives.
What type of status do you accept from the European Union?
Catalonia, independent state.