'Independence' or 'statehood tools'?

I can see that, perhaps willingly or out of sheer necessity, the events of the last four months have prompted a rethink of some of the elements in the Catalan process. This became necessary because of the dissatisfaction crated, and a number of statements by members of the government and people around them suggested that much. In the unlikely —but not impossible— event that the next Spanish government had a different attitude towards Catalonia, we would enter a more flexible scenario. It is for these reasons that, while keeping our ultimate aspirations, I feel this is a good time to rethink our strategy and rationalise our arguments. The meaning of words is of paramount importance.

1. Words. Obviously, the conflict with the Spanish state arises when a majority of Catalans long for a number of tools that we do not possess and are denied to us, even though we deem them necessary. In any negotiation or a feud, it is important to use clear language to formulate your demands, if you wish to avoid any misunderstandings in the minds of those who want and demand, as well as in the minds of those who hear and fear. I would like to analyse the meaning of several words: Statehood Tools, Independence, Sovereignty and Solidarity.

2. Statehood Tools. Besides the recognition of our national identity, which is of utmost importance from a political and emotional point of view —albeit without legal consequence, strictly speaking—, Catalans wish to have two kinds of tools: in the economy, tools that allow us to decide how our economy is supposed to work, the scope and quality of our welfare services and the collection of the taxes needed to fund public spending and all those services. Likewise, from a cultural standpoint, we want tools to defend and spread our language and culture, tools that are much to do with education and cultural transmission. I am delighted to see that there is increased talk of “statehood structures” (I call them tools) because it is a way of being precise and avoiding language that different people might interpret differently. I could be wrong about it, but I think that when they talk about building tools they do not actually mean creating a separate currency, an army or a Customs police force, even though currency, army and borders were some of the essential structures for the independence of nations in the last century. The conflict would be greatly clarified if we specified exactly what “statehood structures” we pursue.

3. Independence and sovereignty. The first of these two words is becoming increasingly nuanced, as supranational entities arising everywhere (federations, confederations and associations) hugely diminish the “independent” nature of any nation. We can see this clearly with the EU, where member states can no longer pass laws in many areas without the consent of Brussels. They cannot control the value of their currency; unless there is a joint agreement, they cannot put up a border and set up a Customs office; and they need the EU to authorise their public budget, among other limitations. Whenever we talk about independence we need to make such realities explicit so as to curb the enthusiasm of some and allay the fear of others.

The case of “sovereignty” is similar, but with an additional element. The sovereignty of political decisions is increasingly limited by financial and economic forces through the markets. Their influence is inversely proportional to the size of a nation’s economy. For this reason, a small country may actually end up enjoying greater sovereignty if it has ceded a good deal of it to a well-organised supranational entity that defends it, rather than if it tries to stand up to the markets all by itself.

4. Solidarity. There is a broad consensus about the need to show some degree of solidarity with other people and territories. We cannot send the message that Catalonia, a wealthy nation, wants to eschew solidarity with poorer regions. What we need is a debate on its limits and to ascertain whether it can be best accomplished via transfers between states or through the EU. Any possible alternatives must be discussed bearing in mind the tax reforms that the EU will soon need to implement, especially in the eurozone.

An effort to be more precise by using language that is more clear and less emotionally laden would avert ghosts and be immensely helpful for the inevitable negotiation, both with the Spanish State and the EU.