Today, despite the weakness of the antimilitarist movement in our country, it was able to operate vigorously during the most terrible years of the armed conflict and without falling into arrogance, I would dare say that our contribution was of great relative importance. Needless to say, I cannot write in the name of Basque antimilitarism, nor about the patriotic current that was operating within this movement. However, to the extent that some of us have continued to work as a permanent working group for the past three decades, I consider it legitimate to give an opinion.

The Basque antimilitarist movement increased in its struggle against the NATO referendum and military service. The negotiations in Algeria experienced particularly strong growth in the following years. In other words, the armed struggle of ETA acquired new and more severe characteristics over the years. In this context, antimilitarism put a new tab on the political stage, that is, a revolutionary struggle without violence, a confrontation with the State and a fervent proclamation for human rights. By then, the LAG was finished, but the multi-lateral political violence was hitting us every week. Ajuria was built in conjunction with the Treaty of Aenea above, below and outside the wall, but it was very difficult.

This situation created great tensions in antimilitarism. Some decided to dedicate themselves to groups like Gesto Por la Paz because they considered it a priority to respond to direct violence nearby; many found the pattern in Interi, while others, denouncing all the faces of militarism, began a political career of the same.

Although I often participated in events organized by Elkarri, I opted for the third behavior, which has always coincided with the current of active non-violence from the currents that operate within antimilitarism.

The fact that ETA has had the need to disappear definitively without asking for anything on its own has surely created pain and unbearable frustration in various sectors, while I think the opposite, the choice of active non-liberation gaitu.Indarkeria by unilateral nature, is said by some to be “classical” antimilitarism, which feeds on historical sources of civil disobedience, and which, among other things, has its main origin in Gandhi. At least I have read this since I was young and I love the radical and coherent action that this trend proposes. In its entirety: revolutionary socialism; participatory and assembly democracy, feminism, antimilitarism, respect for nature, which proclaims the value of indigenous peoples, and demands action for all human rights.

This ideological structure and foundation provided us with tools to be able to make our contribution in the most difficult years of the armed struggle and was especially useful when we thought that the armed struggle would end in 1998.

The change that could take place at that time was well understood by the Spanish State and was strongly shaken. The ETA of that time did not understand. At that time he did not know his people, did not know the needs and desires of the pro-independence left, did not listen to the popular demand and followed the path that led to the abyss “in the name of all”.

Violence, victims, forgiveness

I think it is correct to say that there have been several groups operating under the name ETA, as well as that some historical phases have been milestones. Before the death of Franco; after the death of Franco, Algeria, Lizarra-Garazi, Loyola... That is why the recently concluded ETA organization, in my opinion, is not responsible for all the actions. For this reason, at least I find the demands made by various actors incomprehensible, especially those who want to speak on behalf of the victims without being victims.

Under the slogan “All victims are equal” it seems that they want to increase the distinction between victims and this behavior seems to me very obscene. As hypocritical as mold, many of them do not believe that all violence is worthy of condemnation.

I also find it inappropriate to talk about forgiveness, because I believe that the dialectic of forgiveness is an exercise that must be placed in the interpersonal sphere. It is true that at the end of some of the crude stages of history it has become common to make public requests for “forgiveness”, but at least in my opinion, these gestures are framed in posture and aesthetics rather than in a true and profound reflection. Furthermore, in our context, where a public apology is requested from the unilateral party, I would question the purpose of these requests.

We would not be able to reach a consensus on the timetable for the date of the beginning of the armed conflict. However, to say that the political violence we have suffered in the Basque Country has been multilateral is an objective fact. There’s nothing new about apologizing to each other at the table. A commitment not to use political violence again, on the other hand, would be a more important contribution. Of course, I’m talking about the Basque independence movement, because Spanish nationalism will never reject political violence, like Catalonia.

Hangouts and Strength Zones

To claim at a possible negotiating table that ETA could represent the Basque Country was militarism; to defend in the days of Lizarra-Garazi that ETA had the right to represent the patriotic left in front of other actors was militarism; the unilateral decision to return to armed struggle in 2000 was militarist. After some milestones, ETA lost all opportunities to join a political negotiation and the only possible outcome was a permanent unilateral ceasefire.

The fact that ETA has had to disappear definitively without asking for anything on its own has surely created pain and unbearable frustration in various sectors, while I think the opposite, we have been liberated by the unilateral nature.

The recognition of the strategic superiority of ETA by the main trunk of the pro-independence left for many years gave rise to a number of problems. These problems have yet to be overcome by the hangover, and if these hangouts are not overcome, the frustration felt in certain sectors can be extended to the whole sphere of left-wing independence.

Strategic, practical, affective or symbolic submission influenced the structures, behavior and habits of many organizations of the patriotic left. The groups were very hierarchical, the information was not shared, the decisions were made by whom, and according to what they were made, nobody knew little, dissent was a sin, public criticism was betrayal and arrogance, diversity was a mistake.

Now, however, in order for the pro-independence left to acquire enough strength to change the situation, it must invent itself. Rejecting all these old habits, nurturing diversity, promoting self-criticism, democratizing information, guiding decisions in participatory processes, organizing collective leaderships. However, he must maintain other qualities that are absolutely necessary: his ability to work, his commitment, his generosity.

The process of demilitarization of all the groups of the pro-independence left has brought benefits and will bring more, because it will provide ethical values to its actions and will enable resources and new alliances to combat this corrupt system.

However, these alliances are not in those sectors that supported NATO, those that consider the current system good, those that do not have the courage to resist the neo-Talitarianism that is spreading across Europe, or those that believe that there is a looting of the beast. The alliances are ready to fight before and now can be found in the popular sectors, making a total break with all the corrupt politicians and filling our daily practice with coherence.