Just another Rock
27/8/13 00:12![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
abomvubuso.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpolitics
Iberians do love their wine, so Im'ma start with a relevant metaphor here. See, sometimes a good quarrel is like good wine: the more it ages, the denser and more sophisticated the taste becomes. After nearly 300 years, the dispute on Gibraltar's status has raged on with varying intensity between the two belligerents, Britain and Spain. But just now, it has taken a hint of sourness. The mutual accusations of provocation, the stubborn reluctance to budge a step on either side, and the inherent suspicion between London and Madrid have escalated to absurd levels, all the drama being enhanced by planned naval maneuvers by British military vessels, and threats of suing in international court, and references to the Battle of Trafalgar, and allusions to the fall of the Great Armada, or even the Falkland War. Wow. Obviously, we can't have nice things these days.
Of course the very idea that Spain and Britain could go as far as to initiate military actions between themselves, while being allies both in NATO and the EU, is fiction. But that doesn't mean the war is not being fought with words in the media, constantly being fueled by statements of the aggressive Spanish foreign minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo y Marfil (may the last guy in that list please shut the door behind themselves). On the other side, he's being actively "aided" by the voice of Gibraltar prime minister Fabian Picardo who recently accused Spain of acting like North Korea. Because making the life of trans-border commuters a real pain is on par with holding an entire nation in fear of forced labour camps and starving them to death, right.
Thus, within just a couple of weeks the age-old debate on the status of the Rock (as Gibraltar is lovingly called) has returned in full force. Madrid suddenly increased the checks at the customs along the border, making the exit by land from Gibraltar a huge pain for the thousands of people who cross the border on a daily basis. Now there are enormous queues there, traffic is paralysed and it could take up to 7 hours to exit Gibraltar. What's more, Garcia Margallo has threatened that the air space over Spain could be sealed for planes going to and from Gibraltar, and the analogies with Franco's time have come on their own. In addition, Madrid has announced they'd be seeking Argentina's aid in turning to the UN in order to advocate for restoring sovereignty on that tiny southern tip of the Iberian peninsula. So the rapid escalation of the tensions has shown that at times of crisis, the European (and not only European) governments would not shy away from resorting to the most eccentric measures to distract public attention from the real domestic problems. Because everyone in Spain is talking about Gibraltar these days, and the staggering unemployment has remained somewhere in the sidelines - at least for a while.
The times when "the sun never set on the British Empire" have long passed, that's for sure, but there are still some corners of the world where Her Majesty's banner is flying high and proud, and reminding of the glory of long days past. Gibraltar is one such place. Its 30 thousand inhabitants have a long and heroic history of preserving the utmost Britishness of these 6.8 sq km of rock. They drink cool ale, they eat fish'n'chips, the Queen's image can be seen everywhere almost to Kim Jong Il proportions, the public buses are double-deckers, and the red phone cabins are still to be spotted around the streets. One could think we're talking of a typical coastal town in England. But in fact Gibraltar is located 2000 km away from London, sitting on the isthmus with the same name which connects the Mediterranean with the Atlantic, and separates Europe from Africa. Much like other British overseas territories, the Rock has the fame of a tax haven (although UK is considering ending this), and an attractive financial centre where online gambling flourishes. And the fact that this is where you could still meet the only ape species living free in the wild in Europe, among other things, has turned it into an attractive tourist destination. That, and the fact that the sun does show its face throughout most of the year, unlike the foggy Albion. ;)
But there are differences as well. Unlike the remaining British territories which are islands, Gibraltar has a narrow land connection with continental Spain. Many of its citizens speak Spanish almost as well as they speak English, and its thriving ecomony (7.8% growth last year) is undoubtedly a major driving engine for the nearby Spanish region Campo de Gibraltar, where unemployment is nearing 40%. Every day about 10 thousand Spaniards cross that border to go working at some of the 18 thousand Gibraltar enterprises; almost all food to the Rock is imported from Spain, and many Spanish citizens own property at the other side of the border.
I also love their airport. It's the only international airport I've seen which runs right in the middle of a street. You literally have to stop at a traffic lights and wait for the plane to take off or land before you proceed with your business. Ain't that cool?
Well, back to all the UK/Spain unpleasantness. How did we reach this point, you'd ask? Short answer is, "because of 70 little blocks of concrete". No kidding. The thing is, at the end of last month the government of Gibraltar (UK has granted the Rock the right of self-governance in all domains save for national defense and foreign policy) started the next stage of constructing an artificial reef which was supposed to help preserve the marine wildlife in their territorial waters.
Actually the project had been started in the 70s, when the waters around the peninsula were being used to sink old boats and cars and deposit them at the sea bottom. This soon became a big tourist attraction for snorkeling maniacs, and both Gibraltarian and Spanish tourism companies benefited from the opportunity. The problem is that this new artificial reef was located in a zone that's been used by fishermen for many years, and after placing the concrete blocks there, fishing has been rendered practically impossible.
Although here we're talking of a fishing field with a diameter not more than 700 m (alongside a country with a 5000 km of coastline), and the affected fishermen are about a dozen (not a dozen companies; a dozen actual people), Madrid has used the case to raise the still unsolved issue of the status of the Rock and the sovereignty over its territorial waters. Gibraltar's status as a British colony was first stipulated by the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, which put an end to the British involvement in the 1701 War for the Spanish Succession. The problem with this document is that it's obviously very old, and it fails to address a number of questions that are of key importance from a modern-day standpoint. The agreement says that the Spanish king Philip V of Anjou "cedes to the British crown the full ownership on the town and the castle of Gibraltar, along with the port, the fortifications, and the adjacent forts". But here the word "sovereignty" is notably absent, and nothing is mentioned of the waters or the resources of the peninsula. And this opens the door for various interpretations of the term "full ownership". London argues this means Gibraltar is an inseparable part of the United Kingdom. Madrid believes the Rock remains Spanish, only under British control.
It's a classical catch 22 situation: the territory is originally Spanish, but the Spanish cannot control it. Sounds a bit schizophrenic, but in fact it does sound like the Treaty of Utrecht is supporting Madrid's position. The reasons are two. On one side, the text declares that if Britain decides to relinquish ownership on Gibraltar at some point, it first has to offer it back to Spain, i.e. Madrid's privileged position in regards to the Rock's future is clearly established. But in the meantime, the contract puts some weird conditions to British rule: neither Moors nor Jews are to be allowed to live in the city, and also armed Muslim ships are not to be allowed into the port. While these conditions sound incomprehensible from a modern point of view, in the context of the Reconquista and the subsequent persecution against all non-Christians on the Iberian peninsula they're quite typical for any contract of that epoch. Ironically, they were systematically ignored by the British from day one. But the truly significant issue is that, by agreeing to these terms, London had practically acknowledged their limited rights on Gibraltar, as if these were only partially ceded to them, if for a unlimited period indeed.
On the other hand, some Spaniards often like to use the "moral" argument of, "Look at the map, what is Britain doing at the southern tip of the Iberian peninsula? This is clearly Spanish territory, all logic suggests so". Well, these might like to have a brief look at the map of North Africa. Perhaps then they'd notice the hypocrisy in such an argument, given the existence of two Spanish exclaves on Moroccan territory:
The thing is, from an international legal standpoint, Britain's position on Gibraltar is pretty weak, which is why they're resorting to the UN-guaranteed right of self-identification of the peoples. It's telling that on both referenda in 1967 and 2002, the Gibraltarians unanimously rejected the proposal to return the Rock to Spain (99% and 98% of "No" votes, respectively). But strictly speaking, popular referenda do not have a serious legal value. Only a moral one.
While that may be true, it doesn't mean in 21st century Europe any working solution of the dispute could be reached without the participation of the Gibraltarians themselves. It's just not realistic to expect such a thing. It's clear that by tightening the border checks and the almost entire blockade of the land border, Madrid won't be winning hearts and minds on either side any time soon. In fact Mariano Rajoy's government is not trying to find a long-term solution at all. Because their goals are quite different. On one side, they want to distract the attention of their own people from the horrible economic situation and the recent string of corruption scandals in Spain. On the other, the idea is to provoke a new format of negotiations between London and Madrid, without the participation of Gibraltar representatives. During Zapatero's rule, the government had adopted a tactic of warming up the relations with both Britain and Gibraltar and seeking for dialogue. In the 2004-2012 period some crucial questions were solved: about enhanced border crossing, about the pension rights of the Spanish citizens who work in Gibraltar, about improving the transport connections, etc. When Rajoy took over all of that suddenly ended, and his foreign minister is now openly saying he only wants to talk to London directly.
He may have his reasons, though. While the direct talks with Gibraltar are useful indeed, that's only to a certain extent. Because they usually avoid addressing the significant issues - like contraband, for example. There's no VAT in Gibraltar, and the excise rates are way lower than continental Spain (or Morocco, to that matter), so the tobacco and fuel prices turn out to be 25% lower. We're practically talking of a huge duty free shop, whose sales are increasing every year, contraband flourishes, and Madrid is losing billions from tax evasion in the process. The question has been raised multiple times on the direct talks, but nothing was ever achieved in the end, because the status quo clearly benefits Gibraltar. A similar situation exists regarding the low tax rates which attract Spanish capitals and cause concerns that a black hole is being opened in the Spanish budget. That's probably why the Spanish side believes it would be much more constructive to talk with London first, and only then exert a concerted pressure on Gibraltar, if any useful results are to be accomplished from that at all.
But meanwhile Madrid has made some serious mistakes. The very mention of Argentina as a potential aide in the Gibraltar dispute is utterly counter-productive. First, Buenos Aires would most likely use this opportunity for propaganda purposes. So Argentina is hardly a reliable ally in this respect. And secondly, the code words Argentina and Falklands War can only have the reverse effect on the British public: their use would urge them to rally behind Cameron and will provide him the ammo for arguing that, even as a EU member, Britain still has to defend its interests.
Ultimately, Spain is ignoring the key fact that at the end of the day, Gibraltar has existed mainly because it's a relatively inaccessible fortress. Its citizens have a genetically embedded siege mindset. And such aggressive behaviour against them would only unite them even more. And the Gibraltarians have shown that they can persevere in much harder situations. With the whole of Britain behind them, it's very unlikely that they'd budge any time in the future. So the aggressive tactic of the Spanish government can only have one result: it'll send the issue of Gibraltar into a dead end, from where it could get out only after a lot of time and great effort. And things could've gone along a less bumpy path - if either side had the political will and wisdom to go there, that is.
(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 16:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 16:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 19:48 (UTC)Don't be fooled by the rocks that I got
I'm still, I'm still Gibrie from the block
(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 20:06 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 21:04 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 21:25 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/8/13 17:07 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/8/13 17:07 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/8/13 17:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 16:31 (UTC)Has worked every single time.
(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 18:13 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 18:44 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 20:00 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 20:09 (UTC)Just saying.
(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 20:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 23:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/8/13 06:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/8/13 01:13 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/8/13 07:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 21:21 (UTC)You nailed it. Stupid on all sides, and completely understandable too.
(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 22:04 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 21:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/8/13 06:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/8/13 01:25 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/8/13 07:01 (UTC)I am an Icelander living in South Africa. Of course I wouldn't want to have an autonomous Icelandic enclave in the middle of Cape Town with a population of 7 people. That just wouldn't make any sense.
(no subject)
Date: 26/8/13 23:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/8/13 17:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/8/13 17:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/8/13 00:02 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/8/13 00:59 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/8/13 06:49 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/8/13 21:17 (UTC)