Spanish Government Forbids International Flights to Barcelona

Barcelona-El Prat airport cannot operate flights to and from 23 countries because several international bilateral agreements signed by the Spanish government forbid them. Theses agreements, which establish priority for Madrid's Barajas airport, include one European country, six in Latin America, eleven in Africa and one in Oceania. This information has been garnered by the Barcelona Chamber of Commerce in a report analysing 80 bilateral treaties currently in force in Spain. Although 42 of these include Barcelona and 15 are open to include the airport if an airline shows interest, the report reveals that 23 treaties explicitly exclude Barcelona, of which 20 name Madrid-Barajas as the operating airport, and 13 of these consider the latter airport exclusively for operation of flights to and from the corresponding countries.

But this legal situation is not the only, and not even the main drawback to the growth of Barcelona airport. The heritage of Iberia as the Spanish flag-carrier and exclusive monopoly for regular flights for 40 years still weighs heavily, particularly with AENA, the State monopoly operator of Spanish airports, aerodromes and heliports, which depends on the Spanish government's Ministry of Public Works and Transport and manages not only the administration of civilian air transit, assignation of slots and navigation control, but also the commercial operations, including all airport premises, offices, car parks, shops, bars and restaurants, etc.

The Spanish government says it is considering renegotiating the older treaties to remove the legal obstacles for certain Spanish airports though this is not an easy process, according to the Ministry's sub-director of Air Transport. This makes clear that these obstacles exist, and even the sub-director admits that if an airport is not included in the government's bilateral treaties, it cannot open routes with the countries in question. It is not difficult to reach the conclusion that the Spanish governments have had and have a distinct tendency to favour Madrid over Barcelona, whether directly and explicitly (via government treaties) or indirectly (via AENA).

From the article “El Prat té vetada la possibilitat de vols amb 23 països” (3/24: Catalan public television news service)

Thousands Demonstrate in Brussels for Independence

15 reasons why Catalonia can no longer form part of Spain

1. Because Spain prevents the Catalans from deciding our political future.
2. Because official Spain is allergic to the Catalan language and culture.
3. Because the 10% of Catalonia’s GDP that is creamed off by Spain devastates our economy.
4. Because repressive sentences passed by Franco are still in force.
5. Because Catalonia is prevented from participating in international sport.
6. Because Spain systematically ignores U.N. calls against impunity for the Franco regime
7. Because the mass graves of Franco’s victims are still uninvestigated.
8. Because Spanish courts systematically overrule Catalan laws.
9. Because many Spanish streets are still named after Nazis and Fascists.
10. Because Catalans are a constant target of prejudice and abuse.
11. Because Spain never apologized for executing our President in 1940.
12. Because Catalonia wants to contribute to the future of Europe.
13. Because Catalonia wants to share its language with all Europeans.
14. Because Catalonia needs a constituency for its own MEPs.
15. Because Catalonia wants France and Spain as amiable neighbours on friendly terms.

No European can fail to understand this

The Economist :: One last, brief point

It has been said here in Catalonia that Michael Reid, the editor of the recent special report on Spain in the Economist, was not received by several Catalan political leaders due to agenda incompatibilities. Not speaking to an Economist journalist preparing an in depth report is perceived here as a grave mistake, given the newspaper's profound influence on the opinion of high level decision makers in international business and politics.

However, shouldn't Mr. Reid and his report also be criticised on this point (along with several others, as in my "How much is enough?") for having failed to obtain crucial information and contrasting opinion to include in the report for a more precise picture of Spain in general and Catalonia in particular, as ought to be required by The Economist to maintain its usual consistently high standards?

How much is enough?

It is revealing to read the comments on the article titled “How much is enough?” in this week's Economist special on Spain. It shows just how polarised the discussions on Spain's devolution to its “autonomous communities” can be. Attacks on nationalism can be really quite fierce, as nationalism (always “regional”, of course) is seen as a threat to the Spanish nation's unity and cohesion.

This confrontation between perceived local nationalist parochialism and what is wishfully understood to be Spanish broad-minded liberalism, as seems implied in the Economist's article, lies paradoxically in Catalan nationalism's historical endeavour to change the political structure of Spain, and Spanish nationalism's constant obstinacy in imposing it's unitary national identity (i.e. uniformity), while subduing that of Catalonia. It is obvious, thence, that the Spanish political mainstream, whether Socialist or PP, (never mind the old Francoists) has always been, in this sense, politically conservative and culturally unitary, opposing today's politically liberal and culturally diverse, multifarious milieu, whether local or global.

Herein lies the difficulty of Spain for the past 300 years. This Spain that has for centuries been unable to consolidate as a nation beyond the regions of Castilian culture (i.e. Spain not including Catalonia, the Basque Country and Galicia), even “by whichever means necessary”, be these outright war, attempted cultural and linguistic obliteration, or economic and fiscal seizure, is still today attempting to secure its uniform identity. The article mentions that “Catalan and Basque nationalism are creations of the late 19th century”. This is true, not only of Catalonia but also Spain, France, America, etc., if one accepts “nationalism” as described by orthodox modernists, such as Marxist philosopher Eric Hobsbawm or functionalists such as Ernest Gellner. But if one is to consider current trends of study, nationalism is not only a “modern” (i.e. 18th & 19th century) phenomenon, but it also has pre-modern origins, as described by Anthony D. Smith's thesis of ethnosymbolism. This is made clear by the history of Catalonia and its struggle for self-rule and its political activism, the history of which goes back a long way (see my Catalan Independence and Political Activism: A very brief history).

A closed, parochial society?

The parochial nationalism that is unable to adapt to post-modern society, with its radical reappraisal of modern assumptions about culture, identity, history, or language, is not in fact Catalan nationalism, but that of Spain. Catalonia, with its distinct singularity, has long been at the forefront of social, cultural and economic advancement, not only in Spain, but also in Europe. It is the most open society in Spain, with 13.5% of its population coming from abroad. Catalonia has long welcomed migrations: between the 16th and the 18th centuries, many French migrated there, escaping from religious strife and civil disturbances. During the last quarter of the 19th century and the whole of the 20th, Catalonia had a net influx of migrants. As of the late 1950s, while southern Europe, including Spain, was 'exporting' labour to the north, Catalonia was a net 'importer', like Germany. Between 1950 and 1975, the population of Catalonia grew by 75%, from 3.2 million to 5.6 million. In the first years of the 21st century, the foreign-born population has grown from 181,596 (2.9% of the total) in 2000 to 939,321 (13.1%) in 2006.

This obvious attraction felt by many hundreds of thousands of migrants does not say much for this image that some hope to sell of a closed, parochial society. Indeed, some months ago, Spanish (non-Catalan) tourist business leaders tried to put over the idea that having our own language somehow hurt our tourist industry. However, the Spanish 'region' that receives most tourists is in fact Catalonia, with 15 million visitors, 25% of the total received by Spain (2006, the last year for which official figures are available), followed by the Catalan-speaking Balearics, with 10.2 million foreign tourists. In other words, two regions with protectionist Catalan-language policies are the most successful in drawing foreign visitors.

Devolution or Federalism? Independence!

The Economist's article describes the estado de las autonomías as a successful process of devolution, and that there have been more and more transfers of powers over the last 30 years. But here lies another paradox: these transfers are no more, and are in fact less, than those that were stipulated by the 1979 Statute for Catalonia. The 2006 Statute was passed because it was clear that the process supposedly governed by the previous one had come to a standstill. Worse still is the fact that the date by which the financial arrangement for the new Statute was to come into force has come and gone, with the Spanish government still stalling on the issue.

Furthermore, devolution is, as described by Wikipedia...

“... the statutory granting of powers from the central government of a state to government at subnational level, such as a regional, local, or state level. It differs from federalism in that the powers devolved may be temporary and ultimately reside in central government, thus the state remains, de jure, unitary.

Any devolved parliaments or assemblies can be repealed by central government in the same way an ordinary statute can be. Federal systems, or federacies, differ in that state or provincial government is guaranteed in the constitution. Australia, Canada and the United States have federal systems, and have constitutions (as do some of their constituent states or provinces).”

The latter is, in my opinion and that of many Catalans, what should have been legislated after the Franco regime, but which was not for fear of the centuries-old demands of unitary uniformity by Spanish reactionary conservatives and the military. This was, after all, what had essentially led to Franco's military uprising and the Spanish civil war: the Catalans had been given an inch and had tried to take a mile. The democratic government of the nineteen-thirties had in many ways devolved more than today in the democratic give-and-take.

And there lies the question: How much is enough? Well, enough is what the citizens decide they want, isn't it? That is the whole point of democratic rule. The Catalan parliament voted for the new Statute by 90% of its members, and it was approved in referendum by the citizens with a clear majority in favour. But still the Spanish government procrastinates with its application.

If the Spanish powers-that-be are not yet ready to accept this, after thirty years of democracy and three hundred years of imposition, there isn't much point in carrying on with their ground rules. Independentists move, therefore, that Spain's solution, for both the Spanish and the Catalans, is Catalan independence.

Catalan and the European Union

The European Union is made up of 27 member states, with an aggregate of 23 official and working languages. Catalan is not one of them, although its speakers are granted certain linguistic rights: they may use Catalan in written communication with the Council of the European Union, the Commission, the Economic and Social Committee, the European Parliament and the European Ombudsman, as well as in the Committee of the Regions.

Catalan is spoken in three member states: Spain – in the Balearic Islands, Catalonia, Valencia, Aragon (in La Franja, a strip neighbouring Catalonia) and in Murcia (in the town of el Carxe); France – in the Pyrénées-Orientales department (known as North Catalonia); Italy – in the town of l'Alguer (Alghero). It is also the official language of Andorra, a small non-EU country in the Pyrenees.

However, although spoken by some 9.1 million European citizens the language is not officially recognised by the EU. Does this mean that there are different linguistic rights accorded to different citizens of the EU, depending on their mother tongue? It cannot be argued that this is an issue of economic rationale, that this is a so-called minority language: Catalan is spoken by more European citizens than Danish, Estonian, Finnish, Irish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Slovak and Slovene, and about as many as Bulgarian and Swedish. All of these are recognised official and working languages in the EU, but not Catalan.

This is not democratic: Catalans are not a minority, we are a discriminated, colonised people.

Join the Facebook Cause to Defend Europarl.cat, stop europarl.cat from being closed down and get the official Euro-Parliament website translated into Catala.

Björk Declares Independence

On the 2^nd of this month, indie webzine Pitchfork published an interview with singer, musician and actress Björk. Björk is Icelandic and still keeps her country in mind, even though she is an international megastar with a manifest, unquestionable multicultural and multidisciplinary style. She is the daughter of a union leader and a politically active mother. You could hardly identify anyone further from the image of provincial nationalism or right-wing jingoism. She does not, however, renounce her roots.

The interview focuses on her album Volta and particularly on her latest single Declare Independence, whose video ends with Björk bearing the flags of Greenland and the Faeroe Islands. Pitchfork asks Björk about this…

It's Greenland's flag and the Faroe Islands' flag. Iceland became independent from Denmark 60 years ago. We were a colony for 600 years, and we were treated really badly, as all colonies are. And Greenland and the Faroe Islands are still part of Denmark. The song was partly written to those countries. In Iceland's newspapers, there's always some talk about the Faroe Islands and Greenland wanting independence, and Greenland seemed close, but then they found a lot of oil, and Denmark doesn't want to let that go. If you were to go into a local bar and ask about Greenland and the Faroe Islands, people get very feisty. People are very supportive of Greenland and the Faroe Islands getting independence. I think that Greenland and the Faroe Islands have looked a lot to Iceland as an inspiration, the way we set up our bank systems, the way we became more and more independent.

And I thought it was hysterical to say to your friend who is having a lot of problems with his girlfriend, to just say 'Declare independence and raise your own flag.' Maybe it's just my silly sense of humor. But it's definitely written to Greenland and the Faroe Islands.

For the full interview, click here.