28.03.2014 - 11:30
He is one of the most favorably valued MEPs both here and abroad. But he is not running in the elections on May 25. Raül Romeva (ICV) has been in the European Parliament for ten years and now he’s leaving with something of a bad aftertaste. He says he’s disappointed and frustrated, but he clarifies that he’s anything but “euroskeptic” because he’s convinced that the European Union is useful and that it just needs to be changed. In this interview, he gives an overview of his time in the European Parliament and explains how the obstacle that he came up against in order to speak Catalan in session was the catalyst for his independentism. “If something so easy, so symbolic and so inexpensive can be impossible in the current framework, that means we have a problem with the framework”. And he concludes that the only path is becoming a state. He also speaks about the problems with Europe, how they see Catalans from Brussels, and also what he plans to do from now on.
Let’s begin with the required question. The Constitutional Court has just rejected the Catalan Declaration of Sovereignty. What consequences might that have?
Personally, I don’t think the Constitutional Court has any credibility. It’s an organ that since its ruling on the Catalan Statute of Autonomy has been absolutely discredited. For me, this ruling has no effect whatsoever. It doesn’t surprise me, unfortunately, but it doesn’t change anything.
Let’s talk about Europe. These are your last weeks in the European Parliament. You’ve been there ten years. Are you satisfied with what you’ve gotten done?
For starters, ten years are a lot. And with respect to that, the first thing I’d like to point out is that the European project is dynamic. In ten years, I have been able to see that everything changes and that what seemed impossible ten years ago is possible today. Therefore, it’s a project that adapts itself to the needs and circumstances at hand. Second observation: Europe is a good idea but it has serious difficulties getting things done. Maybe that happens because it’s too young; it’s only sixty years old. Whatever the case, it has serious leadership, credibility, partnership, jurisdictional, and institutional problems, among others.
Are you leaving disappointed?
In many instances, Europe has been disappointing, yes. I can say that those of us who were “EU enthusiasts” have become, and I count myself among them, “EU frustrated” or “EU disappointed”. We continue to believe that Europe is a good idea but we are very disappointed in the way those in charge carry out this idea. There is a problem at the command bridge, not just of transparency but also of accountability and the way that decisions are made. And that makes a lot of people, who think that Europe is necessary, feel skeptical today about this Europe, as it stands, being the answer.
Have you become a “Euroskeptic”?
No, being a “Euroskeptic” is not the same as feeling disappointed with this Europe. “Euroskeptics” have stopped believing in the concept of Europe. In contrast, I want to change this Europe. This Europe is not the Europe that we need.
What would have to change?
The very concept of it. Europe has to understand, or those of us who have a role in the construction of Europe have to understand, that there are two important challenges. The first is that it can’t be exclusively an economic space. That is, Europe is basically an economic union with some political jurisdictions. And that has serious limitations: the suit has gotten too small and is out of fashion. And it’s not just me saying that, others have said the same thing, including Jacques Delors. He said, when the Euro was created, that we if we didn’t back the Euro with one common fiscal policy, not twenty-eight different policies, just one; and a common economic and monetary policies, and a banking union, that it wouldn’t work. And that is what has happened and that I can bear witness to these last ten years. I have been a direct witness to what many warned would happen even back in 2004. Therefore, the first problem is political credibility.
The second: Europe also has a problem with democratic credibility. That is, it doesn’t makes sense today that you have a European parliament without the power of legislative initiative; it also doesn’t make sense that you have a transparent parliament but that co-legislates with the Council of Europe, which is an opaque organ about which it’s impossible to know who decides what and how; it doesn’t make sense that you can’t—through the European parliamentary elections—decide who will form the government, the European executive; it doesn’t make sense that in the big economic decisions the parliament only has a consultative power. Therefore, there is a whole series of structural and institutional deficiencies that make it difficult to engender confidence in European institutions in the citizenry.
Is this disappointment your motive for leaving?
No, my decision to step down was made when I accepted the candidacy in 2004. At that time, I began with a very clear idea, that institutional politics must be cyclical. That doesn’t mean that you can’t change spaces, that is, being a member of the Catalan Parliament and then in some other institution, as long as there are always transitional phases. But whatever the ambit, cycles are good. And in the representative institutional framework, they’re even better. I went in in 2004 with the commitment of doing five years if I won a seat in the parliament and at any rate, I might stay on for an extra mandate, if necessary. I decided that from the beginning and I said so publicly, and I was so convinced that if I broke that promise now, it would look really bad.
But not so long ago, you announced that you would join Bové’s list in the French State…
Not after all, no. I agreed to join the list as a symbolic gesture, that’s true. But it turns out to be a candidate of a given place, you have to be registered there. Six months ahead of time. And I want to be able to vote in Catalonia, which is where I should vote and where I want to vote. I will campaign with them, yes, and whatever necessary, but I won’t be on the party list.
What have you done in the European Parliament that you are most proud of?
Wow, it’s hard to pick just one thing. In general terms, what I’m most proud of is having fought to put at the top of the priority list in an institution like the European Union everything that refers to the rights and liberties of citizens: personal and collective rights, equality between men and women, immigrants’ rights… Having made that a standard of my activity in parliament for ten years makes me happy.
And what disappoints you most?
There are two things that have left a bad aftertaste. First: everything that has to do with the European welfare state. For me, Europe makes sense as a bastion for the welfare state. And the welfare state, in Europe, right now, is gravely wounded. I hope it’s not fatally wounded, but I can tell you that it’s a deep wound. It’s in a very fragile situation. That has been a serious personal, but also political and collective, disappointment. But it’s also true that that is a, shall we say, titanic task.
The second thing that has disappointed me, a lot, is something that was really easy to achieve but we have not been able to do it, and that has really frustrated me terribly. I’m talking about the ability to speak Catalan in the European Parliament. This has been one of the factors that has made it most clear to me that if we stay in Spain, we will not survive. If something so easy, so symbolic, and so inexpensive turns out to be impossible in the current framework, than that means there is a problem with the framework. That was the catalyst that convinced me that we have to change our status. It has been enormously frustrating. If those of us who believed it was possible to fit within the Spanish State declare that not even that is possible, there is only one solution: become our own state.
Did you become pro-independence for that reason?
Let’s say that I’ve ruled out other options for that reason, yes. I recognize that I have never been viscerally opposed to independence, I always was clear that it is the country’s historic and national right. But for me, independence was always one in a series of options, not the only one by a long shot. And if the Spanish State had made a good, respectful, federalist offer to Catalonia, I would have accepted it without any trouble. If they had recognized me culturally, linguistically, nationally, and institutionally, I would have felt very comfortable there, I’ll admit that. What happened? Well, the other options, besides independence, have disappeared. And I’ve had to opt for this choice because there are no alternatives. Independence was never a vital necessity for me. Now it is a necessity, but it was possible that it didn’t have to be. These last ten years have convinced me that independence is a necessity.
Given what you’ve said, do you think the European Union is still useful?
Luckily for Europe, it’s a dynamic project. If we look at the historic picture, Europe is a brilliant invention, in every sense. If we look at its evolution, it has been very useful. Therefore, it is useful and necessary. Even essential in some aspects. But now it needs a restart. Europe has stopped being attractive and it’s not what many of us dreamed of. A Europe that changes democratically elected governments simply for tactical maters; a Europe that allows shooting at immigrants who are trying to make it by sea to European, not Spanish, but European coasts; a Europe that considers that there are first class and second class languages; a Europe that imposes a whole series of measures that imply that many people will be left homeless or without their basic needs covered and even find themselves at the brink of suicide… This is a Europe with a serious problem. It has a structural problem.
You’ve made a long list of problems. Are you sure it can be changed?
We have to be very conscious that this isn’t going well. For me, for example, I don’t care at all about this idea of European flags and symbols. Europe has serious problems. The thing that I’m interested in knowing is which values it guarantees and which it doesn’t. The people are angry with Europe. And people from all over, from all different countries, for a variety of reasons. And the vision they have for moving the project forward varies from person to person. If we listen more carefully to the voice of the frustrated people who want to renationalize and center European policies on the state, then I think we are making a mistake. We have to change Europe because it is useful and it serves a purpose, and for that we have to direct our efforts to those people or those political forces that, from a critical point of view of Europe, want to change it for the better. This is the debate that we’re getting into and that will be the key in the May 25th elections and beyond.
During these ten years you and other Catalan MEPs have demonstrated clear unity in the defense of the Catalan language. Will that be maintained?
I hope that is not lost. I also want to say that this unity of action was there before I got there. I continued the work of other MEPs. I even remember Santiago Fisas, from the PP, at our side, defending the Catalan language with other Catalan-speaking MEPs. But it turns out that he was pressured and that’s over with now. But this unity was there. Yes, it’s true that the times have brought us to a place in which this division between Catalonia and the state is more visible than ever. But this unity is not a unity of parties. Or it shouldn’t be. It’s a natural unity, of the people. And I witness everywhere I go that there is a clear demand in certain areas for us to not be partisan and to demonstrate unity. I believe in it, because among other things, I am first a citizen, and then a political representative. Said in another way: we are living a historic moment and therefore, let’s not screw it up, no matter what party we follow.
You’re referring to the sovereignty process…
Yes, and if we analyze the independence processes that there have been in Europe—and it’s not me who says so, but Martí Anglada, who has studied them very carefully—there is a very interesting idea: those cases that have come out better are the cases in which the sovereignty process has been multicultural and nonpartisan. The movements that have come out best are the ones in which sovereignty has been diverse. And the ones that have come out worst are those that have created a single color sovereignty of a homogenous flavor. I am absolutely convinced that this is what’s happening with what we’re cooking up at home. The force of Catalonia’s sovereignty is its diversity. You might be a leftist, in the center or on the right, and be convinced that we need a different framework in order to begin to finally confront a range of political projects for real. And I have understood the unity of the European Parliament in this way. And I have promoted it.
You were the vice president of the Green party in the European Parliament. Do they understand our case?
Yes, I was the vice president of the European Greens, that’s true. And this is a group in which nationalism is not looked at favorably. It’s a universalist culture, that I share, of breaking down borders and not creating new ones. And therefore, this group conceptually goes toward a world in which there are fewer states, not more states. And I totally agree. But meanwhile, while those states exist, there are realities that have the right to have the same status as all the others. Neither more nor less. The same. I agree that one day all states should disappear, that would be better. But while they exist, it’s not fair that one part of a state which does not feel comfortable within that state should not have the right to express itself democratically. My job has been to convince my colleagues in the Green Party that this is a democratic right; not a nationalist need nor a matter of flags or anything about being better or against anyone, but rather a democratic demand. And if there’s one thing that the Greens as a political family has, it’s that they are scrupulously democratic. And therefore, they understand it. Maybe we haven’t found the empathy that we would have liked, but at least there is a clear democratic agreement.
Do you see an independent Catalonia within the EU or outside?
If it were up to me, it’d be better if it were inside. And I repeat, inside a Europe that must change. Now there are two equally important processes. The first is the Catalan sovereignty process. And the second is changing Europe. I even think that in order to change Europe, it’d be better to be inside rather than outside.
And if it weren’t up to you?
I’d say that legally and politically, Catalonia could be perfectly within the European Union. What does it depend on? On the political will of those involved.
Barroso currently says no…
Careful, Barroso—like many other people in Europe—is simply reading the treaties in a particular way. In the same way that people read the Spanish Constitution in a particular way. Which doesn’t rule out other different readings. And those that say that Catalonia will have to apply for readmittance like any other state starting from scratch forget two things. First, that there are no precedents, it’s never happened before and there is no mechanism set up to handle it yet. There is none, as has been reported by various scholars like Graham Avery who says that we are European citizens and therefore a new mechanism must be established. And second, it doesn’t say anywhere that a referendum is prohibited, nor that an independent Catalonia would be out of the EU. If there is one thing that Europe has demonstrated is that it is flexible enough to resolve all of the challenges that come up. Remember East Germany, the Baltic Republics, the Balkans, the Czech Republic and Slovakia… All of that seemed impossible and it happened anyway. Europe has always known how to find solutions. And Europe, which like I said is a dynamic project, has shown us that whatever is not explicitly prohibited is not impossible.
Do we have enough friends in Europe?
Europe is made of states and the friends of states are other states. Therefore, we don’t have any friends of our own, neither will we. But watch out: Europe is pragmatic and it is in no condition to deny a democratic right. I have found a lot of people in Europe who have told me, “I don’t understand you, I don’t agree with you, but you are free to decide.” Note that no important political figure with responsibility in the European Union has ever said that the referendum cannot be held. Everyone has made interpretations of the treaties, speculating about what will happen once the referendum is held, but no one has said that the referendum cannot be held. That would be to deny a democratic right. And Europe is based on democratic foundations. Therefore, if we do it right, we will find fewer and fewer adversaries. Allies, maybe not, but fewer adversaries, if we do it right.
And are we doing it right so far?
Yes, I believe we are. Now we are an uncomfortable dossier for Europe, but if we don’t make any missteps, sooner or later that dossier will have to be opened and studied. We are coming at a bad moment and we’re a bother. Some would love to hide the dossier under the sofa and let it disappear, but right now, the dossier is on the table. Not only is it on the table but every day it grows and gets fatter. And each time that someone wants to hide it under the mat, there’s another Catalan Way or big demonstration. And it comes right back up on the table. It’s a dossier that must be opened. Those people who said three years ago that we are “a nuisance” now say, “hey, ok, go ahead, tell me what this is all about”.
Well, I imagine that losing a territory like Catalonia is no small thing for the European Union…
Precisely. And that is another factor. Catalonia has an importance in Europe with respect to infrastructures, commerce, economy… It has the importance that it has, neither more nor less. But it’s an importance that must be contended with. It’s pretty hard for me to imagine, and this is certainly a speculation, that the interests that are currently based in Catalonia as a market space and in investment will just stand there with their arms crossed when they see that this whole territory is disappearing from their market. Further, I’m one of the people that believes that Catalonia has been, is, and must continue to be one of Spain’s principal allies. Economically, socially, politically, with personal relationships, etc. Therefore, if we do this process properly, everyone wins: Catalonia, Spain and Europe. Here, it’s not about seeing it as a victory and a defeat, but rather a victory for everyone.
Does your probable successor, Ernest Urtasun, think the same?
He is totally convinced that the current moment demands democratic steadfastness with respect to the right to decide. He is completely committed to that, as is the party. And we’ve talked about it a good deal. That’s what he believes and what he will work for. And many of the other things that I have worked for are part of his DNA. I think he will do an extraordinary job. I have no doubt about it.
What will you do from now on?
My priority right now is to stop. I think transitions have to be well carried out. I need to distance myself a bit. These ten years have been very demanding and I need to evaluate how I can work better. There are so many things to do and so many spaces in which each of us can contribute our amount of commitment, that I have to look at it calmly, to see what the needs are, what I can bring to the table and where I feel comfortable. For now, I’m just stopping.
You’ve just published a novel, your second…
Yes, and look, now I’m going to publish a book about Catalonia and Europe. Ten years give for a lot and some of the thoughts that I’ve shared with you are going to make up this new book, a book of essays, that will be published in September. How is the Catalan topic seen from Europe? The answer is in the book. And the novel that I’ve just published is indeed fiction. It’s a reflection on one of the debates that for me is most current: the debate on energy. It’s a global and cross-generational debate. It talks about the consequences of what we’re deciding today: how it affects the planet, and above all, future generations. It’s a fictional story based on real problems and with a clear political side.
No matter what you do, will you continue to write?
That will always be true.
