SPAIN: CIVIL POWER AND THE RULE OF LAW

By IPS Correspondents and - - Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

MIAMI, Jan 1 2006 (IPS) - For the first time in the existence of Spanish democracy, a high-up military official has been placed under house arrest and dismissed for expressing his dissatisfaction with the process of expanding regional political autonomy, writes Joaquin Roy, Jean Monnet Professor and Director of the Centre for the European Union at the University of Miami. On January 6, the commander of Spanish land forces used an institutional address to attack the plan to reform the autonomy statute for Spain\’s Catalonia region. While noting a sense of complicity between Spanish officialdom and the general\’s basic point, Roy argues that what is totally unacceptable is that a member of the military, claiming to represent the position of his subordinates, arrogates himself the right to determine when and how a political project \’\’exceeds the limits\’\’.

For the first time in the existence of Spanish democracy, a high-up military official has been placed under house arrest and dismissed for expressing his dissatisfaction with the process of expanding regional political autonomy. On January 6, Lieutenant-General Jose Mena Aguado, until now commander of Spanish land forces, used an institutional address to launch an unprecedented attack on the plan to reform the autonomy statute for Spain’s Catalonia region.

Not only did he claim to be representing the discontent and concern of a certain number of his subordinates; he also stated that if the autonomy statute ultimately approved exceeds limits set out in the constitution, the army would be obliged to intervene to guarantee the territorial integrity of Spain. It is by any measure an unusual statement, particularly as we near the 25th anniversary of the coup attempt of Lieutenant Colonel Tejero on 23 February 1981.

The decisive promptness with which Defence Minister Jose Bono accepted the recommendation of the Chief of Staff to punish Mena should put the matter to rest. However, certain elements of Spanish society for whom this was not just a one-time event deserve special consideration.

To begin with, there is nothing surprising in the attitude of the right-wing Popular Party (PP) towards any matter that it could exploit to hound the government, particularly in areas that could affect the image of the president and certain of his more high- profile ministers, like Bono. Given the near unanimous condemnation of Mena’s remarks in political circles, the silence of the PP leadership was striking. Only later, through a parliamentary spokesperson, did it express regret about the incident, adding however that the statements reflect the sentiment of the party.

Also worrying is the fact that the leadership of two military associations have differing views of the matter. One supports the decision of the Defence Minister and even laments the obvious lightness of the sentence, which amounts to early retirement with honours, given that in any case Mena would pass into the reserve this March. The other association, in contrast, justifies Mena’s statement on the grounds that it was in defence of the constitution. On the one hand, the most prominent politicians were quick to assert that the Lieutenant-General’s remarks did not reflect the majority and that the bulk of the armed forces is neutral and follows orders. However, there is a sense of complicity between Spanish officialdom and Mena’s basic point.

This is normal; indeed, it would be strange were it not the case, which would indicate a striking failure of the normalisation of Spanish politics and all sectors of government, including the military. Rather than feeling itself different, the Army should be an accurate reflection of Spanish society, which is reticent about, if not openly against, attempts at reforming the autonomy statutes, like Catalonia’s. While the proposed reforms are in principle reasonable, they can ”exceed” constitutional limits and threaten the certainty of the ”indissoluble unity of Spain”, the only entity worthy of being called a ”nation” — the term used in the draft autonomy statute that arouses real fears.

What is totally unacceptable is that a member of the military, claiming to represent the position of his subordinates, arrogates himself the right to determine when and how a political project ”exceeds the limits”. Evaluation of a text that is subjected to intensive parliamentary review and media analysis and which in time (in whatever form it leaves the Congress) will pass through the filters of referenda and the Constitutional Court, is certainly not within the responsibilities of those who can move to guarantee national sovereignty and integrity only when ordered by the government and head of state, and not before.

Meanwhile, they should tend to their professional duties, insuring their guns are in working order and their uniforms are clean, and learning the many languages spoken in this globalised world.

Curiously, it is precisely here that the sector Mena believes he represents fails. This is the only way to understand how, in a statement of a few paragraphs, the general could denounce as a ”grave danger to the country” the fact that functionaries (the military included) must learn the language of the regions they are assigned to, because this would be ”discriminatory”. What Mena is an accurate reflection of is the disdain of the majority of Spanish society for learning other languages, whether foreign or national. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)