I visited Gibraltar once in my life – in 1996 – during a
fortnightly group roundtrip in a minivan in Spain. This roundtrip led us
through the magnificent Spanish province of Andalucia and one day we visited
indeed the most British part of Europe, located east of Dover.
I remember the beautiful view on the top of the mountain,
the funny and energetic berber monkeys, the wonderful weather and the horrible
British food – Shepherd’s Pie with overcooked carrots and greenpeas drowned in
gravy – which I suspect until this day
gave our whole group a food poisoning that lasted for a minimum of two days for
the lucky ones and among others much, much longer. But, to be frank, it could
also be a fish dish in Spain itself, that caused our group’s discomfort.
And of course I remember how utterly British Gibraltar was,
as a kind of open air museum crafted after the picture-perfect, proverbially British
city that didn’t exist in reality. With red telephone booths, pubs, souvenir
shops, restaurants featuring British ‘cuisine’ and other typically British
paraphernalia for both tourists and anglophiles.
Now, twenty-odd years later, the same peninsula of Gibraltar
is the subject of heavy, vocal sabre-rattling by both the Spaniards and the
Britons.
Hardly the British government and diplomats delivered their
Article 50-letter, effectuating the Brexit as a process, or the Spanish
government smuggled a Gibraltar paragraph in
the EU draft agreement that was the starting point for the orderly Brexit
negotiations. The New York
Times described the matter in the following snippets:
After it became clear
Friday that the union’s remaining leaders might give Spain an effective veto
over whether any deal applied to Gibraltar — a British territory long the
subject of an acrimonious sovereignty dispute between London and Madrid —
lawmakers in Britain and Gibraltar responded with defiance and concern.
Gibraltar’s chief
minister, Fabian Picardo, made his anger clear on Friday, calling Spain’s
tactic “disgraceful” and “predatory.” He said in a statement about the
insertion of language on Gibraltar into the European Union’s draft guidelines
for negotiating a British withdrawal: “This unnecessary, unjustified and
unacceptable discriminatory proposed singling out of Gibraltar and its people
was the predictable machination of Spain.”
In Gibraltar, which
has a clear frontier with Spain, the fear is different. It is that once Britain
is outside the European Union, which guarantees free movement of people, Spain
could demand concessions or make the border with Gibraltar harder to cross,
effectively isolating the territory.
Although the mounting emotions about Gibraltar are perhaps
understandable with both the Spain and British views and background in mind,
the Spanish action – to make the negotiations with the UK an effective hostage
of the future British plans for Gibraltar – was not so sensible from a political
point of view. Especially as Spain itself has two exclaves – Ceuta and Melilla
– on Moroccon soil; two exclaves which Spain is not likely to abandon soon.
On top of that, the situation around Gibraltar never stopped
both the Spaniards and Britons from actively working together for 40 years within
the European Union and its predecessors. And it also never stopped the British elderly
from spending their finest years in Spanish holiday resorts and second houses, at
the same time that their youngsters spent their holiday money in Spanish
discotheques and pubs, while drinking (much too much) Spanish beer, wine and
cocktails.
So the question is valid “what the fuzz is all about”?!
And while the Spanish action was already quite erratic to these
eyes, the British reaction – especially represented by former minister and current Tory
official Lord Michael Howard, as well as a few warmongering British
newspapers – was straightforwardly bananas, as the following snippets from the
Guardian show:
Theresa May would be
prepared to go to war to protect Gibraltar as Margaret Thatcher once did for
the Falklands, former Conservative leader Michael Howard has suggested, in
comments that were immediately criticised as inflammatory.
Lord Howard’s
suggestion that the prime minister would be ready to follow in the footsteps of
her predecessor 35 years ago came alongside a government pledge to protect the
sovereignty of Britain’s overseas territory.
Downing Street said
May had called Fabian Picardo, the chief minister of Gibraltar, on Sunday
morning to say the UK remained “steadfastly committed to our support for
Gibraltar, its people and its economy”.
Sir Michael Fallon,
the defence secretary, also used robust language. “We’re going to look after
Gibraltar. Gibraltar is going to be protected all the way because the
sovereignty cannot be changed without the agreement of the people of Gibraltar
,” he said.
The highly provocative picture of a British aircraft carrier at full steam in the British Telegraph newspaper Picture courtesy of Telegraph.co.uk Click to enlarge |
And the Telegraph put things in overdrive, with a picture of a British war vessel and the
following bragging
lines about the British military strenght in a possible war with Spain:
Britain's Royal Navy
is substantially weaker than it was during the Falklands War but could still
"cripple" Spain, military experts have said.
Rear-Adml Chris Parry,
a former director of operational capability at the Ministry of Defence, has called on the Government to
"appropriately" invest in Britain's military capacity if it wants to
"talk big" over Gibraltar.
It came as a former
Tory leader suggested that Theresa May would go to war with Spain to defend the
sovereignty of the peninsular just as Margaret Thatcher did with the Falklands.
Prime Minister Theresa May of the United Kingdom quickly downplayed the situation
in the media, reputedly by “laughing off the Spain war talk”, but the tone was
definitely set.
As this incident shows, a toxic combination of aggrieved
pride and an inferiority complex, as well as unhealthy nationalism and an
uncertain future under influence of arguably the biggest and most uncertain, economic
step in recent British history, could quickly lead to mounting anger and
dangerous envy among the British population. And this by itself could lead to irreversible
steps on the path towards war: hence the Falklands war, with its massive bloodshed and
skyrocketing emotions about a few dry and almost deserted islands in the South Atlantic
Ocean.
By focusing on a mutual enemy – Spain in this case – the British
officials can distract the attention from the mounting political and economic uncertainty
and the quite unfavourable outlook, emerging from the inconsiderate, to these
eyes even reckless Brexit that the United Kingdom entered into.
The promise of a war against a ‘vicious enemy’, who
threatens a country’s social, economic and political interests, is a catalyst
for exploding nationalism and national pride. It will probably lead to a
population that stands behind the government as one man, more than willing to
chew through a dozen economic, sour apples on behalf of the greater good and
the national interests being at stake. That is the reason that I am not
absolutely sure that the situation between the United Kingdom and Spain will
not escalate further, before coming to a timely end (or not).
Is the current British escalation strategy a dangerous
strategy? It is very dangerous!
Is it effective? Oh yes, it is very effective for domestic
purposes, as it overcomes political differences within the population and leads
to ‘one people united against the enemy’!
And might the British government – perhaps with Lord Howard
as a straw man – have deliberately (ab)used this Gibraltar crisis as a powerful
weapon of government mass deception and nationalist demagoguery?!
Well, to answer
that question I gladly turn to what Sir
Francis Urquhart, the main political vilain from the (far superior)
British ‘House of Cards’, would have stated in this situation: “You might very well think that! I could not
possibly comment!”
No comments:
Post a Comment