ETA recognises the damage done. The ETA communiqué has come in two texts. In one of them, he has sent to Euskal Herria "a declaration on the harm caused". The second is a note of clarification on the expression. It is no wonder that ETA recognises the pain caused, it is even more reassuring for the citizens who have supported it, to whom ETA calls Euskal Herria. In any event, the drafting of an “explanatory note” on the declaration does not guarantee political normalization in the way in which work is currently being done to resolve the conflict.

There are two reasons why ETA’s statement was made possible: one, which has nothing to lose and nothing to gain politically. Neither ETA nor politically the political option closest to it. Two, through this document, believe that the future of Basque political prisoners can be improved. However, this second is not guaranteed. Moreover, ETA will demobilize, prisoners will go to the streets, but no one guarantees that in the future there will be no political prisoners, victims, armed struggle or “terrorism”.

The ETA communiqué does not say everything, because everything cannot be said. I mean, 1958, 1968, 1978 -- is ETA current? How many ETA have been in six decades? Has ETA spoken today on behalf of all those who have acted in ETA?

To say more and start sharing, the editors of the communiqué should start sharing the experience with the 60-year-old bodies of the ETA itself, at least those who are alive. In these bodies there are citizens of all kinds, victims of all kinds, tortured, reprimanded by the states or persecuted by ETA, marginalized or ultimately “repented”.

Is accepting the damage caused by ETA not “regretting” what it has done?

What ETA calls Euskal Herria can begin to digest what has happened then. And even if we say everything, that does not guarantee that those who have the monopoly of violence in law enforcement recognize “the damage and imposition they have caused.” The Spanish and French States, not the citizens or the authorities that support them, do not have to acknowledge “repentance” or mourning for the damages caused. They are exempt from their laws.

What ETA calls Euskal Herria has to be ashamed, it has to be feared. Instead, what is Euskal Herria beyond that and the Basque Peoples that are closer? Can you be Euskal Herria being Spain and France, without these two states next door?

Can you be Euskal Herria, what ETA calls Euskal Herria, once ETA has dissolved or ended?