At the beginning of the year, the Zedarria group publicly supported the "opening of the debate" on the "defense" industry (as well as the nuclear industry), to which the Basque Government has immediately joined. First, through Mikel Torres, Vice President and Economic Counselor, who advocated for the promotion of military production. If there was any doubt, a few weeks later it was the spokesperson María Ubarretxena herself who spoke in a similar way, and then the Minister of Industry, Mikel Jauregi, followed the same line.

Well, in the Vitoria-Gasteiz group, as part of the anti-militarist movement, we want to participate in this debate, but first and foremost, to start a debate without traps, taking into account some of the keys that we consider fundamental.

The framework of the debate cannot be partial, but must be opened up to its full extent: not only to determine whether, as until now, the sector continues to be helped to increase its presence, business and profits, but also to put on the table the possibility of ending the sector by turning the arms industry into a civil production that benefits society and, with it, to end the participation of the Basque Country in the manufacture of wars.

We know that, unfortunately, the public debate that is already taking place will be less balanced. The proponents know that they have a great advantage: access to public and private forums, institutional support, the support of lobbies, and the possibility of participating in the mainstream media. An illustrative example is: We were invited to participate with some expression from two talk shows on Basque public television, so that later a group of participants could discuss the topic. In both cases we said that we would go if we were invited to the debate, but not in this tricky format. They didn't want it. We think we guessed it: in one of these discussions, a fellow Tertullian was allowed to say this barbarity without anyone from antimilitarism having a chance to get rid of his lie: “When the movement emerged, it was anti-militarist but also pro-terrorist, so they have no legitimacy to talk about it.” We will not participate in discussions on this dire condition and level.

It is also convenient to abandon euphemisms from the beginning and call things by their names. In this sense, this sector cannot be called the "defense industry", because if 80% of its production is destined for export, it is not destined for its own military defense; it is even sold to the armed forces of other countries, which are hypothetical enemies in the militarist logic. Let us add that the so-called military industry is one of the main unproductive activities of capitalist society: on the one hand, it does not generate values in economistic terms, but it does consume them; on the other hand, it does not materialize formally in the market because it is directly dependent on public budgets (that is, on taxes that come out of our pockets). In addition, if we take into account that this production is, at best, corrupted in arsenals or barracks and, at worst, used for war, we propose to give the following name to the armaments industry: Production for Waste and War in the Basque Country (EHXGE). Not forgetting that all this is also a euphemism of "war", which is used to designate a legalized mass murder.

The Basque Government’s call to do business with wars and their context

As we have carefully studied in another text, beyond the geographical and cultural proximity of some wars, it is the interests of the merchants of death in Europe that are causing the growing social distress about the danger of a war on a European scale. With the aim of promoting a new arms race that will multiply their profits (for which they are prepared to promote the very war they claim to avoid). It is easy to understand that the Cedars in this dynamic describe the current situation as a "wonderful opportunity" for the "defense" industry: it responds to its lobbying functions.

But it is a very different matter to hear from Mikel Torres, second vice-president of the Basque Government and Minister of Economy, Labour and Employment: "I think it is an important opportunity, the arms industry is a strong industry in the Basque Country, we cannot look the other way, it will have an important development in the future and, of course, the Basque Government will help these companies in everything that can help, so that they can develop and open new markets and products." The seriousness of these statements (confirmed by the Government spokesman under similar conditions) consists essentially of three points.

First, the complete lack of ethics that results from considering the current arms race as an "important opportunity" to conduct business. For the vice president, business seems to be the first thing, "another thing is the ideological positions that each of us can have in this field." The ethical message for citizens is terrifying: business comes first, and ideals are a secondary issue. What kind of society can be expected based on these ethical principles?

Second, because the statements are almost a prevarication. Article 10 point 4 of Law 3/2024 on Cooperation and Solidarity of the Basque Parliament states that "the public sector of the Basque Country, in its economic promotion policies, will not collaborate with natural or legal persons who use weapons or technology militarily". It is true that, unfortunately, we are not surprised, because the Basque Government itself, in addition to the aid and subsidies it provides to EHXGE through the Consolidar fund, maintains 6% of the shares of ITP Aero. ITP Aero, one of the main Basque companies in the arms industry, has just inaugurated a new factory with the presence of the President of Spain, Imanol Pradales.

Third, and most importantly of all, Torres’ statements are very serious because Amaia Pérez Orozco makes them in the context of the current multiple crisis of what they call “this scandalous thing” or “cannibal capitalism” by Nancy Fraser, for all that it means.

With the bases for the establishment of the debate and the initial context thus established, before descending to the mud of manipulated or false arguments that are being used in relation to this debate, it is necessary to begin to study the psychosis of war that they have established. To this we will dedicate the second text of this series of articles.