A history of the Spanish policy towards the end of ETA, and its EU foreign policy consequences

Introduction

In December 1973, terrorists tied to the armed Basque separatist group Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (“Basque Homeland and Freedom”, abbreviated as ETA) assassinated Spanish Prime Minister Luis Carrero Blanco. This assassination was the only instance of a Western leader to be killed by a terrorist organization between 1946 and 1999. [i] The killing of the Prime Minister, who touted as potential successor of the weakening dictator Franco’s, sent shockwaves through the Spanish political environment. Within the Spanish left, the belief is shared that this assassination was the catalyst for regime change. Carrero Blanco was believed to be the prodigal son of the continuation of Francoism in Spain, his death is considered by some to have opened the door for a democratic Spain after Franco. The role of ETA in Spanish political discourse remained ever present in the decades that followed. [ii]

Violent separatist group ETA had the goal to accomplish the independence of Basque country from Spain. After Franco died on November 20th, 1975, Spain entered a process from decades of oppressive dictatorship to democratization. This led to institutional changes of governmental decentralization, which included more autonomy to the Spanish regions. The Basque Country gained its own parliament, government, police force, fiscal system, broadcasting network, power over education and health, and a large list of other administrative and political responsibilities. It however took decades to erode the support for (violent) operations of ETA. In its existence, ETA and its various sub-organizations have killed almost 860 people, mainly during the post-Franco era.[iii]

How different was the situation in 2018, when ETA completed a full transition away from violence. The group had given up their weapons and disbanded itself. The separatist movement now fully became a political one, giving up its violent branch. A difficult relationship between the separatist Basque movement and the Spanish government still exists, however. The Spanish government has not entered any political negotiations with ETA, and political deals with pro-separatist party Bildu have been met with widespread criticism.[iv]

This situation has influenced Spanish foreign policy on other separatist states, such as Kosovo. In these situations, Spain has opted for a conservative approach, defending sovereignty and territorial integrity of nations over separatist movements. [v] This poses the question how Spain worked internally to end ETA, and how the Basque situation reflected itself in Spanish foreign policy in the European Union (EU) on separatist movements. This article aims to address these matters.

the end of ETA and the Basque independence movement

In understanding the dynamics behind the end of ETA, the period 2006-2018 is of great relevance. In 2006, ETA and the Spanish government had entered failed peace negotiations. What followed was an ETA bombing of the airport of Madrid on December 30th of that year. This renewed but ultimately final wave of violence lasted for another three years. From 2009 to 2010, the radical Basque nationalist milieu heavily discussed the future of the separatist movement. A document was agreed upon within the radical Basque nationalist environment that subtly requested ETA to abandon the use of political violence.

The ratification of this document meant the beginning of the end for ETA, as an embodiment of the use of violence for the Basque separatist cause. In this period, ETA lost the traditional social and political support for maintaining an armed strategy. Consequentially, the political environment started to relax, giving the radical nationalist organizations the opportunity to integrate within Basque mainstream politics. This integration 30 came with clear deradicalization of most ETA standpoints. The process could only happen because of the goodwill of the Basque actors and international intermediaries to incorporate the radical milieu into a non-violent institutional context. Now the independence movement embarked on a shift towards becoming a protest movement pushing for independence within Basque politics.[vi]

The document therefore was a product of a lingering process of decreasing support among the Basque people for violence, combined with organizational weakness within ETA. This weakness was caused by decades of increasingly effective counterterrorism efforts. These events led ETA to declare a ceasefire in September 2010. One year later, a unilateral declaration of permanent abandonment of violence was presented. In this period, peace between Spain and the Basque separatists was finally considered as consolidated and irreversible. It took ETA six more years to complete its disarmament on April 8, 2017, and to dissolve approximately one year later.[vii]

Spanish policy to end ETA

In the beginning of the 21st century, initial attempts to reach a ceasefire with ETA were unsuccessful. After the 9/11 attacks in the United States, the international community tended to support fights against any kind of terrorism. This changed the international perception on ETA actions negatively, who were already considered to be terrorist by the Aznar government. This prompted Spanish Prime Minister Aznar of the conservative Partido Popular to crack down on terrorism. They now could count on broader cooperation of France and notably the European Union. Police actions against ETA followed, and in 2002 the Spanish parliament banned Batasuna, the political wing of ETA.[viii]

The peace process with ETA afterwards is marked by political tug-of-war led by different Spanish governments with their own accents and opinions, broken ceasefires and gradual improvement. Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero from the Partido Socialista Obrero Español, the socialist workers party (PSOE) in 2005 initiated the negotiations. PSOE’s openness to reconciliation made an initial difference, by making unprecedented strides towards peace. In the negotiations, two tracks were established: disarmament and victim-related issues with ETA, and political dialogue with Basque forces on future governance. Early talks led to ETA’s 2006 ceasefire. However, this progress was hurt by internal leaks, opposing party PP firmly resisting any negotiations, persecutions by the independent Spanish judicial branch, internal ETA divisions, and ceasefire violations by ETA. This came to a breaking point with ETA’s 2006 Madrid airport bombing, which killed two civilians. The Spanish government promptly ended formal negotiations.[ix]

In 2007 Spain opted to invite international mediators to the negotiations. However, these negotiations failed over ETA’s demands for a public endorsement of a unified Basque institutional entity. After this failure, the ceasefire was ended by ETA and Spain cracked down further on ETA, detaining ETA leaders and members. At this point, Batasuna, the political branch of ETA, began pivoting toward nonviolence, which was mainly influenced by global peace processes. Sortu was then established, a Basque political party rejecting ETA’s violence. Furthermore, Basque nationalist yet peaceful party Bildu celebrated a major electoral victory. [x]

After the 2011 Aiete Declaration, where ETA announced the end of its armed campaign, an end to ETA seemed near. However, change in Spain’s government threw up yet another barrier. Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy of the conservative Partido Popular (PP) refused to talk further without unconditional disarmament by ETA. The PP harboured a more critical position towards reconciliation. The Rajoy government was therefore sceptical over ETA’s gradual disarmament. This positioning delayed the disarmament process and provided a missed opportunity to reach a more positive starting point for the PP government and the Basque people after the inevitable end of ETA. The role of international intermediaries in this phase delayed the process too, due to the need for international certification of disarmament. Despite all these challenges, ETA dismantled its structures and approached full disarmament by 2015, before finally seizing operations in 2017.

Parts of the tensions between the Basques and the Spanish central government persisted during Rajoy administration and the SPOEled Sánchez government that followed in 2018. The lack of presence of the Rajoy government in this final phase of negotiations further caused the underlying issues in the region to remain unresolved. [xi]

The other great source of underlying tensions is the fate of ETA prisoners. Many Basques consider the more than hundred remaining prisoners to be political prisoners. The strategy of the Zapatero, Rajoy and Sánchez governments to disperse the prisoners across Spain is widely protested in Basque country. [xii] Furthermore, rumours of Spanish prisoner guards torturing ETA prisoners were confirmed in 2010 when a Spanish court convinced two members of the Civil Guard of torturing two ETA prisoners. This case caused more uproar among the Basque people. [xiii]

The Basque independence movement NOW

31 There are two major movements on the independence issue within Basque country. The radical Basque nationalists aim for independence, while the mainstream Basque Nationalist PNV party aims to increase regional Basque autonomy within the Kingdom of Spain. It already has significant policy competences on health, finances and policing through its Economic Agreement with Spain. Within the region, PNV has mostly governed with the Basque Socialist Party (PSE). Its political rival is Bildu, which is a radical left-wing, secessionist coalition that emerged after the end of ETA. The PNV pushes for further “cosovereignty” with Spain, aiming to extend the terms of the Economic Agreement to the political sphere. A potential shift in Madrid towards a conservative or farright coalition favouring recentralization would likely revitalize the independence movement in Basque Country. [xiv]

A Basque Country-wide opinion poll from 2021/2022 showed that 40.5% were in favour of an independent Basque state, with 29.2% against, indicating a significant appetite for independence still being present. [xv] The future of the Basque independence movement is insecure. Research has shown that there is no one factor that can explain positions in favour of a Basque state. Positive views on a Basque state can change more easily. This fully depends on the interests and emotions at any given moment. Most Basque citizens consider themselves people of mixed identity who decide upon independence based on factors that have to do with their welfare and specifically the welfare in society. So, economic consequences of potential independence are likely to be crucial influences on the near future of the movement. [xvi]

Implications for Spanish foreign policy

In response to this, Spain’s internal affairs regarding the separation movements in Basque Country and Catalonia have impacted the Spanish government’s foreign policy. Internally, court rulings introduced a legal process for pro-separation political forces, the socalled Procés. Spain has seen the issue of regions desiring separations as a legal one, instead of a political one. Therefore, the Spanish Government has declared a clear stance: it will not recognize the independence of any state declaring this independence unilaterally. In Europe, since 2014 this has meant Spain does not recognize Crimea, Scotland and Kosovo as independent. [xvii]

Within the international arena, Spain positions itself as a ‘protector knight’ of international law. It aims to protect international procedural law on independence matters. If an agreement is not signed between multiple consenting nations, Spain will not see the process as just. as has happened with the independence referendum in Crimea, or the referendum held in Scotland, despite being totally different cases. Regarding Kosovo, Spain has therefore been somewhat proactive in working towards a bilateral agreement between Serbia and Kosovo. [xviii]

To prevent Catalan and Basque independence, Spain has furthermore opted for economic suppression mechanisms. The Iberian nation uses legal mechanisms within the EU to keep separated countries out of the internal market. This effectively cripples independent economies before they even leave their cradle. Spain sees it as a likely consequence that further success of the separatist movement in Catalonia will serve as a catalyst for similar processes in the Basque Country, because they too have significantly different profiles from the rest of the Spanish regions in history, language and other cultural aspects. This strategy of Spain to ‘preserve its territorial integrity’ can count on the support of the international community. The application of this deterring mechanism has weakened separation ambitions of Catalan and Basque politicians. However, it did little to address the relationship crisis between the central Madrid government and the regional governments of Basque Country and Catalonia.[xix]

Conclusion

The evolution of the Basque independence movement has evolved from the violent campaigns of ETA, such as the assassination of Luis Carrero Blanco, to a new political and social discourse. This era is marked by an end to large organized violent independence movements. Yet, the relocation of ETA prisoners remains a recurring issue. The Spanish government has opted for a multifaceted approach, combining counterterrorism measures, limited decentralization, and using legal mechanisms. This played a critical role in ending ETA’s violence but has left underlying tensions unresolved.

In the domestic arena, the enduring divide between radical and moderate Basque nationalist factions persists. The citizens of the Basque nations see themselves as multi-identity people who let economic repercussions influence their stance on potential independence. As the Basque independence movement continues, it does so with little remaining approval of using violence to achieve this independence. Internationally, Spain’s firm stance on sovereignty and its use of economic and legal tools to deter separatism highlight its broader geopolitical concerns about setting precedents that influence independence matters on its own soil.