BERRIA has conducted a long interview with ETA by means of a list of questions in writing; it focuses on the resolution of the Basque conflict and the chances for solving it. In its answers ETA has clarified the future of the Anoeta Proposal

2 april 2005

POSSIBILITY OF A SOLUTION?

ETA has said in its latest statements that an opportunity for resolving the Basque conflict exists. Is it prepared to confirm this right now? Why now and not before?

In the light of our reflections, we are on the threshold of political changes and we believe that an opportunity exists right now not to repeat the mistake made at the time of Spain’s ‘transition’ [after the death of Franco].

The thing is we were at a similar crossroads 25 years ago. The Basque nationalist left was demanding, just as it is now, the recognition of the right to self-determination as the indispensable basis for solving the conflict politically. Unfortunately, certain elements decided to take the road that maintained the division of Euskal Herria and denied its existence, thereby passing up an opportunity to provide the conflict with the right solution. We have seen what this direction taken in the last 25 years has brought: the breaking up of the Basque Country, the prolonging of the confrontation and conflict, the condemning the new generations to a situation of conflict.

Throughout these years the Basque nationalist left has refused to accept this situation; it has refused to give up the struggle and at the same time has been constantly putting forward proposals to bring an end to the conflict. We have achieved a lot: there is increasing acceptance of certain concepts: self-determination has emerged as a basic premise and it means we Basque citizens have a voice and the right to decide and that we are going to decide our future.

We have succeeded in exposing the causes of the conflict, and that has revealed the need to respond appropriately to these causes. No one denies that a political solution is required and that a profound political change is indispensable for solving this long conflict, to ensure that there is no repetition of the failure to solve the situation properly, and to prevent ineffective steps that will prolong the conflict from being taken. Therefore, we now have an opportunity for everyone to work together to build what we failed to build 25 years ago, in other words, to achieve a just peace based on the rights of Euskal Herria [the Basque Country]. It is the responsibility of everyone.

What does that opportunity consist of? What are the essential elements of this opportunity?

We believe that the real opportunity will come from the recognition of the right to Self-Determination. And from a project that will take into consideration the Basque Country as a whole by transcending the borders which divide us and which have been forced on us. To achieve this, a resolution process must be started in order to bring about an agreement through dialogue and negotiation that will respect the rights of the Basque Country. The solution will, in the end, come about by asking all Basque citizens about their future.

ANOETA PROPOSAL

ETA said in its statement of January 16 that it was prepared to get involved in a process along the lines of the proposal Batasuna presented in Anoeta. What commitments is it prepared to make in that direction?

The steps ETA could take are important, but what seems even more important to us is to examine what steps we can take together, and what commitments the players involved in the conflict are prepared to take. The Alternative for a Democratic Solution specifies the meaning of these commitments: on the one hand, the Basque players have to establish the rules of play for Basque democracy and have to achieve an accord on the process needed to give the people a voice and the capacity to decide. On the other hand, the Spanish and French Governments will have to respect what the Basque players agree on and what Basque citizens decide. So, specific commitments have to be made by all the players and by those who shoulder responsibilities of government.

We do not think that it is appropriate to be constantly looking to others to see what they do or to be asking the Basque nationalist left. We have made our predisposition clear in word and deed. Rest assured that insofar as a true democratic process is developed, we are prepared to take specific steps. But it is not only the steps that ETA might take that could feed this process, but what we can all do together.

In the statement referred to above, ETA said the only way to solve the conflict was to set up a dialogue process aimed at a general accord. What kind of accord? What would it be about? What kind of process?

The aim of such an accord would, in our view, be to get the Basque Country and the rights of Basque citizens respected. That signifies overcoming the current repression and creating a democratic situation that would make all political projects feasible. For this purpose a change in the current political status is indispensable.

So the accord needs to incorporate solutions for today, and open up opportunities for tomorrow and plan for them. These two components will need to be incorporated so as not to leave badly healed wounds. As far as the nature of the process is concerned, it seems obvious that the resolution of a conflict that has been going on for many years will take a long time. So, it is important not to be in a hurry, it has to be a process whereby preconditions are not imposed on the different sides and in which there will be firm assurances from the start. Finally, there is a very important aspect: the participation of all Basque citizens has to be ensured; what is needed is the involvement of all the men and women who make up the Basque Country in its diversity.

“THE BASIC ACCORD WILL BE A MILESTONE AND A REFERENCE FOR ETA”

On March 5 a number of players in the Basque Country signed the Basic Democratic Accord for Solving the Basque Conflict. The main idea of the Accord is brief: “All citizens throughout the Basque Country have to be asked about the future of the Basque Country.” How important is this Basic Accord?

It will be a milestone and a reference for ETA, because it will create a step forward towards solving the conflict. We believe that through the proposals of this Accord, the armed conflict can be overcome and a democratic process can be started and developed with consensus among everyone.

We are saying that, because it is important to identify the root of the conflict and outline the keys of a democratic process to overcome it. This Accord includes the main components: because the resolution of the conflict is to be found in dialogue, negotiation and consensus; and because the main democratic basis for overcoming the conflict is respect for the will and decision of Basque citizens on the Basque Country’s future.

In what way will this Accord help to solve the conflict?

What is needed to solve the conflict is as broad a consensus as possible and the participation of all the players; this Accord has gathered more support than any other since Lizarra-Garazi. Moreover it is offering a specific formula: Basque citizens should express their wishes and decide.

The impetus will come from there. When the will and decision of Basque citizens become reality, the Spanish and French Governments will have no option but to respect that will. They are aware of that. Just as they know that this reality will predominate sooner or later.

The solution requires the participation of everyone. Bearing in mind those who have not signed up to it, will it be possible in the mid term for all the parties and players to sit down at the table?

The political will is needed for that. Without it there is no process to resolve the conflict, nor any table for resolving it. But apart from anything else, the players who are not prepared to sit down at a table aimed at resolving the conflict will have to have a good think, they have to reflect on the responsibility they have with respect to this country. Our position is clear: let us all sit down and talk about it, without any pre-conditions, without any closed points of view, but also without any limits, either.

In order to reach any consensus, could establishing the dissolution of ETA –as the EAJ-PNV is doing– be a precondition for undoing the knot?

That is the monotonous discourse that certain players use to justify their resistance to change. Those who try to present ETA’s activity as an obstacle for consensus are lying, and behind that lie they want to conceal their incapacity and their lack of will to make commitments. That is blackmail.

But that debate is over, it is a discourse of the past. Today there is a different debate in the Basque Country: what kind of process we are going to develop together to solve the conflict politically and democratically. And the PNV is getting left out of the debate. Because it lacks the will, because it is sticking to its own particular plans. They did the same in the process in 1998 [Lizarra-Garazi?] and we all know what the result is today. At that time party interests took priority and the PNV tried to put the tools for struggle of the Basque nationalist left out of action, by ruining the process and causing a deadlock.

In that respect, the PNV should consider carefully what it is going to do. Is it prepared to put party interests on one side and make genuine commitments to bring about peace on the basis of the rights of the Basque Country? If the answer to that question is affirmative, we would be in a different situation right away. Unilateral steps, imposing conditions on the rest or trying to find a partial solution for the conflict, do nothing but produce badly healed wounds and sow the faulty seeds of future conflicts.

SEEKING CONSENSUS

Can a resolution process be organised while one of the players which presented a peace proposal, i.e. Batasuna, is outlawed and denied any opportunity to stand in the elections?

From the point of view of opportunities for a solution, the decision to outlaw reveals the true nature of the Spanish Government’s attitude today. If we analyse the acts of the Moncloa authorities [the Spanish Government], we will see that they have decided to stick to their policy of repression without responding directly to the key elements in the conflict. Moreover, the attacks are taking place in special circumstances, just when the Basque nationalist left has made a proposal to overcome the conflict and when it has demonstrated that it has a clear will to take steps in that direction. The response has amounted to slander, contempt, repression and punishment. It is difficult to build a process for a resolution that way.

But at the same time we separate the process for a resolution completely from the electoral contest. We see no direct link between ensuring the presence of the Basque nationalist left in the institutions and the representation the Basque nationalist left has to have in a resolution process. The Discussion Table, the Negotiation Process, the process for agreement do not spring from representation in the institutions. Whether or not the Basque nationalist left is in the institutions, its interlocution comes from the public which represents it. That is why it is important to vote for the Basque nationalist left, even in a situation in which it is outlawed, in order to strengthen it.

Could one single player block the process?

That is exactly what we would have to consider: how we are going to gather sufficient strength so that one single player cannot block the process at a given moment, so that the steps that have been taken are irreversible. But we are talking about the Spanish and French Governments, we’re not talking about the ordinary players, but about the elements that have given rise to repression and have created the conflict. So it is crucial that they should have the will to seek a political solution for the conflict, otherwise there is no process to resolve the conflict. It is up to us citizens to engage in a struggle and apply pressure to create that will. We must not forget that the States will always seek impose conditions on the process, block it and create fear with respect to the opportunities that can present themselves.

At the starting point, does the end of the process have to remain unspecified?

In our view, setting pre-conditions could hamper the resolution process and even cause deadlock. The most important things are solid foundations and guarantees from the start. Because steps cannot be taken in a vacuum. Steps cannot be taken from a limited position. Weak foundations will be to the detriment of Basque citizens and the process: because the process will not move forward; and the burden of the failure to move forward will fall on the Basque Country.

On top of certain basic guarantees, the process will be dynamic with ups and down, but it will have a specific aim: recognition of the Basque Country and respect for the rights of Basque citizens, in other words, the creation of a genuinely democratic situation.

Does anyone have reason to fear the results of the end of the process?

Can anyone fear a scenario that could overcome the current confrontation and conflict and lead to peace? If anyone can, it is the professional politicians who have fed off the conflict, or powerful people like the oligarchs from Neguri [Bizkaia], because political and economic interests have grown around the Basque conflict over the last few decades and every day we see these sectors adopting positions which oppose a political, democratic resolution and support the repression of the Basque Country.

What they fear more than anything else is the freedom of the Basque Country and we Basque citizens being in control of our own future.

And ETA?

No one is keener than us Basque fighters, who are immersed in the struggle in which we are prepared to lay down our lives, to achieve peace based on justice. The legitimacy we derive from the struggle we have been waging for years and our clear will in favour of a resolution support what we are saying.

According to the Anoeta Proposal there are two spheres of accord. One among Basque players and one between ETA and the [French and Spanish] States. Does progress have to be made in both these spheres for a process to take place?

Steps have to be taken from today onwards and in all directions. As we see it, the main step has to be taken among Basque players. That is why we attach particular importance to the accord among Basque players and after that to the interlocution that needs to be formed to achieve an accord with the State. That way we would be taking a bold step forward because, when the will of the Basque Country is clearly expressed, the States will have to respect that accord. Insofar as decisive steps are taken among the Basque players, we will be forcing the States to move, we will be forcing them to respect the will of this people.

At the same time the Spanish Government will be forced to speak and negotiate directly with ETA.

Don’t some of the Basque players see themselves as being of lesser importance and harbour greater hopes in the movements of the ETA-Spanish Government axis?

We believe that viewpoint is erroneous. The time has come to speak out and what is needed for this is the participation and involvement of all Basque players and citizens. We think this tendency of looking to see what moves others make needs to be discouraged, the tendency of citizens and players to have their arms crossed has to be discouraged. Now is the moment for each player to make commitments and implement them.

ETA’S INTERVENTION

The Anoeta Proposal distinguishes between two spheres of accord. One among the Basque players and another one between ETA and the [French and Spanish] States. In the second sphere the issues that need consensus are: demilitarisation, prisoners, refugees and victims. From the point of view of negotiation there is a change of approach in the current position. What does that mean?

When we took a fresh look at our analysis, we took different factors into consideration: firstly, the increasingly clearer opportunities being presented by the fact that the possibilities offered by the Moncloa Statute [Statute of Autonomy] have been exhausted, and the frameworks that repress the Basque Country; secondly, the specific response that has to be given by the Basque nationalist left to the proposals being made by different players on the basis of self-determination and the consultation of the people.

But we have, more than anything else, modified our approach, if one looks at the steps we have taken in the last decade and the changes that have taken place since the Democratic Alternative was published. The 1998 initiative [Lizarra-Garazi] caused a watershed in the evolution of the conflict and since then all the players have been adapting their positions and political proposals. With respect to the negotiation process, within the Alternative for a Democratic Solution, ETA will have to negotiate directly with the States on the consequences of the conflict. At the same time, the Spanish State, for its part, will have to guarantee respect for what is agreed among the players of the Basque Country and what Basque citizens decide in order to overcome the armed conflict.

Are there or have there been any contacts between ETA and the Spanish and French Governments?

ETA has publicly shown again and again that it is prepared to solve the conflict politically and democratically. We could say that it has been trying to open up a process of negotiation and solution with the Spanish Government in order to take steps in that direction. But for the present there is no ongoing negotiation process.

ETA is prepared to speak to the Spanish and French authorities tomorrow in order to get involved in a negotiation process and achieve political agreements.

What does ETA expect from the Spanish and French Governments?

In short, the Spanish and French Governments have to show that they have the will to respect what the Basque Country decides and they will have to stick to it. No more and no less. Basically, it is about going from a situation of repression by the States to one in which the States will respect the voice of the Basque Country in democratic circumstances.

The Spanish Prime Minister, Jose Luis Rodriguez-Zapatero, has said more than once that weapons and bombs need to fall silent before ETA can be listened to. Does the Spanish Government’s conduct constitute more than just words?

Beyond the words, the Spanish Government and the PSOE have many spheres and opportunities to show their will and take steps. The practical course so far has shown nothing but political repression. It is mainly up to the Spanish Government to respond positively to the attitude shown by the Basque nationalist left through its words and actions.

How has ETA reacted to what Rodriguez-Zapatero said in an interview given to the ETB [Basque Autonomous Community TV corporation] about the Basque public’s right to decide?

We don’t play down the importance of some of his declarations, we value them to a certain extent, but we are looking to him for specific action more than just his favourable disposition.

Under the PSOE Government the police forces, just as they did at the time of the PP [Popular Party], violate the rights of Basque citizens and use torture, the dispersal of prisoners continues in just the same way, the Spanish National Criminal Court continues to be special court… What is going on? Is it a lack of will or an inability to change things?

What we see is that the PSOE Government’s response to the Basque Country, since it came to power in Spain a year ago, has been repression. They have been closing the door on opportunities for a solution and fuelling the conflict even more. Unfortunately, the Spanish and French authorities are continuing this way with the collaboration of some of the professional politicians and parties in the Basque Country.

SCOPE OF A DIALOGUE WITH THE GOVERNMENTS

With respect to the issues ETA needs to raise with the governments, what does talking about demilitarisation mean? Does the demilitarisation have to be bilateral and progressive?

On the issue of demilitarisation, it will be necessary to ensure that the voice and decision of Basque citizens is expressed without any pressure or threats. And that, by overcoming the armed conflict, the right of Basque citizens to live in peace and freedom is guaranteed. So it will be indispensable for the armed forces that carry out the repression to leave the Basque Country. Something can be said as far as the Ertzaintza is concerned, too, because unless this police force under the orders of Spain is deactivated as a force of repression, it will not be possible to guarantee a situation of peace in our country.

The process, ways and deadlines to achieve that will have to negotiated and agreed upon, as both sides will have to ensure that their armed forces are deactivated for the resolution process.

As far as the [Basque] prisoners are concerned, the first essential step will be to transfer them to the Basque Country, won’t it? The Basque Political Prisoners’ Group is fighting their political status recognised and to play a direct role in the process. To what extent is the participation of the prisoners important?

Basque Political Prisoners are a consequence of the conflict and the issue of political prisoners, their release and amnesty will be solved when the conflict is resolved. But until we get to that situation, Basque political prisoners have their rights and the additional punishment of the prisoners and political revenge are unacceptable. That is why until there is a general resolution of the conflict, there are measures that can alleviate the consequences of the conflict, and one of them is to transfer Basque prisoners to the Basque Country.

What contribution can ETA make with respect to the victims, in particular to the victims that have resulted from ETA’s armed struggle?

There are victims on both sides of the struggle, and it will be necessary to see from that general perspective what has to be done in this sphere, and under no circumstances from a partial or one-sided perspective. Among other things it will be necessary to analyse the historical reparations owing to the Basque Country, the consequences of the repression by the States, the victims from 1936 to 1939 [in the Spanish Civil War], the victims and consequences resulting from the Franco era from 1939 to 1975, or the ones resulting from Spain’s pseudo-democracy from 1975 to 2005, whether they are victims killed by police forces, or killed in the dirty war, or people tortured and a whole long list.

As far as we are concerned, ETA is prepared to look at the issue of victims resulting from the armed actions as a whole and to make gestures that could be helpful within the development of the process.

INTERNATIONAL MISSION

ETA has on a number of occasions referred to the European dimension of the Basque issue. What role can the European Union or other international institutions or authorities play?

As we recently pointed out in letters sent to embassies located in Spain, the contribution and involvement of European institutions is needed to help solve the conflict. Recognition of the Basque Country by international players and an attitude in favour of a negotiated, political solution to the conflict would constitute major steps forward.

European institutions should consider that the conflict between the Basque Country and the States is more than just an internal issue of Spain and France, because the right to Self-Determination lies at the heart of the conflict. Other small countries in Europe are involved in a similar struggle and that has a direct influence on European institutions.

Could the possible intervention of European observers be important in a resolution process?

The presence and participation of international observers gives a resolution process seriousness and solidity. It offers guarantees for the steps that are taken, because it can somehow ensure that there is no reneging on the commitments that are made. Some would prefer the commitments not to be binding and this would be more difficult if international players were to participate in the process, while they are monitoring it.

The experience of other conflicts clearly shows the importance of the international dimension. That is why we think the intervention of international observers is positive and necessary, especially when it comes to guaranteeing the accords.

THE ARMED STRUGGLE

In its January statement ETA said: “The time has come to talk.” What place does the armed struggle have in this day and age?

We would have to ask the following question: Is there a place in Franco-Spanish democracy for Basque citizens to express themselves and for what they say to be respected? How can we guarantee that Basque citizens are allowed to speak and decide? Today we are not allowed to speak, the doors for us to express ourselves are closed, we cannot decide about our future.

ETA is in fact struggling to open up that opportunity. We use the armed struggle to open up those democratic spaces that today are closed. To provide all Basque citizens with an opportunity to speak without pressures, limits or threats. When that situation arrives, the armed struggle will end.

IBARRETXE’S PLAN

After the New Statute Proposal of the tripartite Basque Autonomous Community Government was endorsed by an absolute majority with three votes in favour from the Sozialista Abertzaleak (Batasuna) group, it was debated in the Spanish Parliament and rejected by a very large majority. Did the PP and the PSOE want to make it clear that Spain’s sovereignty cannot be questioned?

The Plenary that took place in the Spanish Parliament was of great importance, because of its political scope and depth of meaning. Because at the heart of the debate lay the rights corresponding to the Basque Country, the power of Basque citizens to decide. The response was a foregone conclusion, and that shows, on the one hand, that we can only expect rejection from Spain, and on the other the EAJ-PNV’s powerlessness in that situation.

Ibarretxe wanted to appear as the staunch defender of the rights of Basque citizens, but the PNV made another mistake, because it responded with a unilateral initiative to the situation created by the Basque nationalist left’s initiative, to the opportunity for an accord in favour of the Basque Country’s fundamental rights. They refused to appear as a whole nation [the Basque Country as a whole] in Madrid and gave priority to putting forward a party perspective. The EAJ-PNV has still not given a specific response to the move made by the Basque nationalist left on December 30.

How can the conflict between sovereignties be solved? Could the proposal for shared sovereignties provide an alternative?

We find that concept curious. Because here, more than a conflict between sovereignties, we have the denial of the Basque Country’s sovereignty, which has gone on for centuries, and the situation in which the rights of the Basque Country have been repressed in the name of the sovereignty of Spain and France.

That perspective is part of Ibarretxe’s fraud. A country which is under the thumb of a state does not voluntarily share its sovereignty, and the signing of any kind of accord will never result in free association. They say the aim is to reach agreement on a new coexistence pact between Spain and the Basque Autonomous Community, but the only possibility being offered is to form part of the Spanish State voluntarily. And nothing more. The bond with Spain is being concealed behind the word “free” in the formula “Free Association Status”.

The promoters of the Basque Autonomous Community Government’s New Statute Proposal, led by Ibarretxe, say they want to let the citizens of Araba, Bizkaia and Gipuzkoa speak by means of a referendum. Can this referendum be regarded as a tool to exercise the right to decide?

That is the other side to Ibarretxe’s fraud. They present their proposal as the putting of the right to self-determination into practice, but that is not true. Because there is no possibility of choosing among different options, for example, the opportunity of building the Basque Country as an independent nation is not part of the debate. That distorts the very nature of the conflict itself.

Ibarretxe wants to acquire for himself the fruits of the Basque nationalist left’s 25-year struggle. That would be ok if it were to lay the foundations for a process that could lead to the restoration of the people’s rights. The hands of the Basque nationalist left are open for this. But unfortunately, the PNV still has no political project for the Basque Country. All it is offering is a regional project for three of the provinces using words like Euskal Herria and ‘Self-determination’ as decoration.

They prefer to stifle the hopes of Basque citizens in continual electoral contests and in the process to renew the Moncloa Statute (i.e. Statute of Autonomy). Ibarretxe has shown us that in his black, four-year legislative period. He has been telling people one thing but doing something else behind the scenes, and has so often given us nationalists a stab in the back.

ELECTIONS IN ARABA, BIZKAIA AND GIPUZKOA

Has bringing the elections to the Basque Autonomous Community Parliament forward to April, when they originally expected in May, created problems from the perspective of an opportunity for resolving the conflict?

Mainly because bringing forward the elections indicates the true nature of Ibarretxe’s vocation, the aim of which has been to fatten up the PNV’s electoral purse right from the start. Ibarretxe has committed a grave mistake in completing an electoral process which will lead to the exclusion of the Basque nationalist left, and now they are all prepared to take part in this undemocratic exercise, and then to divide up the cake among everyone in order to push his fraudulent plans without any opposition through their mock parliaments.

Of course it does not help the efforts towards a solution, because they have made the banning [of Batasuna] permanent in the evil forecasts they have made for the elections and have shown they are prepared to confer legitimacy on that undemocratic situation.

In these elections the consequences of Batasuna’s outlawing will be completed in all the institutions in the Southern Basque Country [under Spanish jurisdiction]. How big an obstacle will this exclusion be for implementing political change?

There is no doubt that this situation of the Basque nationalist left will cause additional difficulties, the political outlawing has hurt. But we, too, learnt long ago how to find our way out of the brambles and now, too, the Basque nationalist left will progress as a decisive political player by reviewing the means it has to act, and by adapting its points of view. The problems notwithstanding, the Basque nationalist left will continue to be a solid reality in the towns, because it represents a political project well rooted among citizens.

As we have seen over the last few months, all the players acknowledge that the Basque nationalist left is an indispensable interlocutor, both in a process to resolve the conflict and as a major political reference for the Basque nationalists of the left. In the future the Basque nationalist left will continue to be the driving force behind political change, because the heartbeats of its struggle constitute the very heart of the Basque Country.

Looking towards the future, what is at stake in the April 17 elections?

Mainly, there is the challenge to consolidate the political offer of the Basque nationalist left and to give a firm response to the political ban by demonstrating once again the dignity of the people. The Basque nationalist left will have to emerge from the elections in a stronger position, in order to open up a process that will lead to the resolving of the conflict on democratic foundations, and to strengthen moves in that direction. That is what is mainly at stake. And what is needed for this is to support and vote for the Basque nationalist left’s electoral choice.