SELF-DETERMINATION

"Every people has the fundamental and inalianable right to self-determination. It defines its political status in all freedom, without any external foreign interference."
Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples. Algeria, July 4th, 1976

Traditional Basque demands have called for the respect to the historical rights of the Basque Country, meaning the local laws or `fueros' and culture. Nowadays, howeverdemanding respect to their identity and will, its , Basques continue contemporary expression being the soto self-determination which is -called right defined as the right of peoples to decide for themselvesSelf-determination is the . right of every nation to choose to remain as part of a state or to form its own.

This collective human right was formulated by the French Revolution and its concept extended throughout the last century was given a new and powerful theoretical push with the expansion of Leninism in this century. Freedom or work are peoples' fundamental rights; the right to self-determination is the fundamental right of the nations. Nothing justifies its repression or limitation, either to nations with their own state or integrated within multi-national states.

Historically, the United States of North American has been the main promoter of the right to self-determination: after the First World War, to dismembered the Germanic states; after Second World War, to decolonize Great Britain and France; and in the 1990s, to dismember the Socialist countries which once, at least theoretically, defended this right.

In May 1990 former president of the United States of N.A. George Bush justified the scarce aid to the former Soviet Union on grouds that an American president would be limited to help the Soviets until the Baltic countries will be able to excercise their right to self-determination.

As a right of the nations the right to self-determination predates the states and is not depend from their recognition. Conveniently, the states have preferred to give this right a political --conjunctive and opportunistic-- rather than a juridical projection lacking a principle and with the purpose of not having to re-establish their internal borders.

However, self-determination is a juridical principle whose very foundation lays in the concept of democracy and freedom of peoples. And it is the peoples in freedom and united by the historical characteristics which define them as an ethnic group, who have the right to transform their natural community into a political community proclaiming their own existence and deciding who make up the nation, what is their territory, designtating their institutions and establishing the type of political relationship they want to have with other nations. And there are international agreements that recognize and subscribe to this right.

Self-determination is mentioned twice in the Charter of the United Nations in the context of developing "friendly relations among nations" and in conjunction with the principle of "equal rights"... of "peoples" and their right to decide by themselves.

The two international covenants on human rights adopted by the UN General Assemby in 1966 (Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) ratified by France and Spain state:

"All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of the right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development."

Article eight of the Helsinki Accord in 1975 refers to the right of the peoples to their self-determination and sets forth the criteria for and human rights obligations of the subscribing states.

The Algiers Declaration in 1976 states:

"Every people has the fundamental and inalianable right to self-determination. It defines its political status in all freedom, without any external foreign interference."

However, jurists all over the world debate whether or not these statements should be only applied to colonized countries or also to national minorities within states, as it is with the Basque case.

Those European states who deny the right of self-determination to Corsica Catalunya, Scotland, Wales, Bretagna and the Basque Country have seen with good eyes and supported these last few years the self-determination of Croatia, Slovenia, Lithuania, and many other countries formerly integrated within socialist European countries. The independence achieved by these mediterranean countries with a great number of the dominant minority in their territories proves that Europe has accepted self-determination only in certain continents and during certain times.

The right to self-determination was invoked in 1990 by all the governments and news media to support the German unification. But the unification of the two parts of the Basque Country is considered illegal.

Regarding the Basque case, jurists who put the Spanish nationality before the Basque argue that the right of self-determination belongs only to the cononies of the Third World, and that the states who deny these right to the nations within them cannot be accused of being undemocratic and they also argue it is not clear who the subject of that right would be in the Basque case. They hold that voting in the general elections is to exercise self-determination. In other words, in a democratic state only individual self-determination and not collective makes sense.

These jurists also believe self-determination was exercised in the referendum in three (Araba, Bizkaia, and Gipuzkoa) of the four southern Basque provinces known as Bascongadas to approve the statute for the so-called `Basque Autonomous Community' in 1979 (there was no referendum to approve the statute for Navarre). But even this statute lacks the recognition of the Basque people or their territory as the text was substantially changed in Madrid. The statute allows administrative decentralization but lacks political power and the possibility of exercising the right of self-determination defended by Basques. The referendum to approve the Bascongadas statute can hardly be seen as an act of self-determination.

It cannot be said either that the Bascongadas statute is the path to follow for a future development of self-determination in Araba, Bizkaia and Gipuzkoa because it denies Basque sovereingty and territoriality and is subjected to a Constitution that opposes self-determination. The Bascongadas statute was rather a way of blocking the road to Basque sovereignty.

The statement made by Julen Guimón, leader of the then Popular Alliance party (the Popular Party today) after the Bascongadas referendum:

"Today Popular Alliance totally supports the Basque Statute as the most efective way to defend Spanish unity."

On the other hand, there are jurists who recognize Basque nationality and understand that the articles cited from international declarations recognize the right of self-determination not only for the colonies but also the peoples within multi-national states as it recently happened in Europe.

Besides the articles cited here from international declarations that recognize the collective right of self-determination, it should be mentioned that the United Nations has recognized the right of self-determination of Palestine and Sahara --two nations without states.

Jurists who support the right of self-determination think that the democratic degree of the state is measured by its degree of respect for the self-determination of its parts at all levels, individual as well as collective.

But the discussion itself on the different interpretations of these articles on self-determination mean two things: on the one hand, that because of the ambiguities in these articles they cannot be applied thus, it is not an undeniable right; and on the other, that the application of these articles to the Basque case is not very clear either.

On the Aberri Eguna (Basque Homeland National Day) celebrated in the Baque Country on March 27, 1978 --the Spanish Constitution was being drafted in Madrid-- leaders of the Spanish Socialist Party (PSOE) who attended the rally held a banner claiming the right of the Basque people to self-determination. The text drafted and subscribed by all the political parties, except the Spanish right, for this occassion included the following quote:

"Obtaining one National Statute of Autonomy for Navarre, Araba, Gipuzkoa and Bizkaia is an urgent solution indispensable to the normalization of the political life of Euskadi. Democrary will not be complete until the Constitution will recognize the right of our people to sovereignty and the right to self-government which would make possible self-determination."

This double wish (territorial unity and self-determination) of the Basque people was shattered by the new Spanish Constitution which, although directed to a multi-national state comprised of the Catalan, Galizian and Basque nations, opposes the right to self-determination.

Moreover, the statute of autonomy granted to the so-called `Basque Autonomous Community' applied ony to three of the four southern Basque provinces: Araba, Bizkaia and Gipuzkoa. Navarre was excluded. A separate statute was negotiated between Madrid and the Spanish Left and Right in Navarre, excluding the left-wing Basque nationalist Herri Batasuna and the Spanish United Left parties from parliamentary debate.

The Spanish Constitution recognizes the Spanish nation as the only political subject and its indissoluble unity. In a similar way, the 1958 French Constituion only recognizes the French nation. The Basque nation exists but not in the two Constitutions that rules it.

However, the French Constitution had to allow the secesion of Argel, formerly French provinces. And the day will come when the Spanish Constitution will have to allow integration of Ceuta and Melilla in Morocco, the former two under Spanish rule.

Article eight of the Spanish Constitution holds:

"The mission of the Armed Forces, comprising the Army, the Navy and the Air Force, is to guarantee the sovereingty and independence of Spain and to defend her territorial integrity and the Constitutional order."

The second of these three missions refers directly to the self-determination of a part of the State, leaving this matter subject to the force of the Spanish army. Therefore, self-determination is outlawed and legally subjected to violence.

The Spanish army is being downsized by 40,000 men throughout the Spanish territory except in Southern Basque Country and Catalunya which, according to the Ministry of Defense, "have been almost unprotected." The four southern Basque city capitals will remain headquarters to a battalion or regiment which "will be reinforced in the event of a crisis with the reserve and whose only mission is to defend the territorial integrity." Therefore, it seems clear that the constitutional provisions regarding the role of the army are more into effect than those relative to the prevention of torture.

The Spanish Constitution was submitted to referendum in the State for a majority of votes to approve it. Therefore, the recognition or not of the Basque nation was decided prior to the referendum. . The Constitution was applied before it was approved. Just like the referendum question, the answer was being imposed.

That is, a majority in Southern Basque Country rejected the 1978 Spanish Constitution but the the answer could not be operative because it had been invalidated beforehand. Unlike in Northern Basque Country where the French Constitution was approved by a majority, the Spanish Constitution was rejected in Southern Basque Country thus, it lacks legitimacy in this part of the Spanish State.

The following statements were made by the president of the Basque Nationalist Party (PNV) Xabier Arzalluz:

"The PNV continues without acepting the Constitution." (February 14, 1988)

"The Constituion threatens with force a nation that wants to claim its rights." (September 29, 1991)

"The problem exists since they deprived us of our sovereingty by force." (November 17, 1993)

"They have an article in the Constitution that leaves the territorial unity to the Army. Now they should not be going around saying that anything can be defended without violence." (April 3, 1994)

"We are a nation, an ethnie, have a language, a people apart with its own personality and right to build our own political power or constitute a Basque state. The Basques will not allow the denial of this right neither by force or anything else."

And Angel Colom, leader of the Catalan Nationalist Party:

"The first violence is that of the Spanish State who does not recognize the right of self-determination of three nations within it." (August 2, 1991)

Numerous and massive rallies in the streets of Iruñea, Bilbo and other cities have conveyed the wishes of the Basque people for self-determination. But this right is not only legally denied but difficult to promote in the electoral debates and mainstream media totally unfavorable to it.

Those who defend the Basque right to self-determinatation are lacking --within the current politico-juridical framework-- the channels to put it in practice this right even gradually. Therefore, they demand a different framework to make self-determination a viable right. Regarding the Spanish Constitution it would not be the first time that is modified. The Spanish Constitution was modified in the 1990s to adapt it to the Maastricht Treaty demanding that all European citizens within the union could be electoral candidates in any of the member countries.

The defense of the right of self-determination in 1990 by the Bascongadas parliament --pressured by the nationalist revival in Eastern Europe--, a legal representative of three of the four southern Basque provinces, proves the incapacity to put in practice this right.

In that occasion the votes in favor of the three moderated nationalist parties (PNV, EA, and EE) defeated those of the Spanish parties who opposed Basque self-determination and subscribed a declaration in defense of the Basque right to self-determination. However, the document is pure doctrinal, limiting the defense of the right of self-determination to only three Basque provinces and lacking a political plan to put it in practice but respecting the limitations set by the Spanish Constitution.

But is this right capable of solving the main problem facing the Basque Country? Historical, sociological and psychological analyses make think that this right is indeed the Gordian knot of the Basque conflict. That a most profound desire of being recognised as a country and as a nation will be satisfied if the Basque right of self-determination would be recognised,

If it does not recover and secure its language and provides itself with the political instruments to govern itself and preserve its own identity, the Basque nation, assimilated by two powerful states, has the risk of disappearing as such. To refuse to recognize the Basque right to self-determination is an attack against the Basque nation.

Recognised or not, the right to self-determination is consubstantial to the recognition of equality among nations which comes from the democratic idea that sovereignty resides in the people and without any external interference. There is no better guarantee to peace and international collaboration.

However, even when its democratic character is unquestionable, the right to self-determination is put into effect usually when there is a physical force that imposes it as it has happened with other fundamental rights of individuals and nations.

Source: excerpts from La Razón Vasca, written by Luis Núñez Astrain, (Txalaparta editorial, 1995).

Euskal Herria Journal
http://www.freespeech.org/ehj/html/frself.html