To begin with, what was the environment you met at the time of the beginnings?

The atmosphere was very bad, very narrow, both socially and economically, and had nothing to say in religious or political terms. But in the case of our family, for example, it was wider than the street, because we were in America for ten years, and we were always talking to the father and mother about the problems of Euskal Herria. Yes, when we returned to Euskal Herria always saying "beware, here is something else, we have to do a great case of today's people and the police here, because if you do this or the other you will be taken prisoner", etc. At least, the family environment was very broad.

But outside the family, it wouldn't be so extensive, right?

Of course, people back then talk a lot about how tight the environment was and we felt completely drowned. For example, we didn't have books, we didn't have journalists -- magazines from other countries came later and we took them with real thirst. From that drowned environment came the idea of "Undertake" first, and then, as you know, we went from "Ekin" to ETA.

According to what you said, it is clear that the environment you knew was like a wealthy, liberal family, as has not happened in the case of the others from ETA.

Yes and no. I have a clarification to make. I think among the founders we were a few or a few small, medium or large burks. Then, over time, things have changed from happiness, ETA, and our movement has become more popular. In our case. For example, my father clearly belonged to a bourgeois family, and on behalf of my mother, small, liberal jokes.

So you created "undertake." Tell them a little bit more about how this happened.

As you all know, we met for the first time 1952.an. Prior to that, Txillardegi on his side, Jose Mari Benito del Valle also with his friends at the Bilbao School of Engineers, at the University of Deusto and Agirre... each on his side, tried to do something: make a group, meet some friends, and talk about our culture and our language. 1952.eko That year we finally met, little by little. And so "Ekin."

What is eta.urrundu of the PNV?

From that we have to say that all of us at that time had a great deal of sympathy for the PNV, and that is absolutely normal. He had it in the legend of the Basque Country for his unknown. There is no doubt, therefore, that for Txillardegi, for me and for any of us, the PNV was a very popular party, and we were in favour of it, and also in favour of the Basque Government. We tried to get in touch with you from the birth of "Ekin." Why? We were very young, we had no experience and from them we expected a Formation and an Education. We waited, but unfortunately they did not give us any.

But what differences do you see with the PNV?

It is true that we gave ourselves a perfect account of one thing: That what was done in Euskal Herria at that time was not enough, or taking it in another way. Nothing was done. They were made like three small actions, but nothing else. So we thought among ourselves that we had to do something, and the first thing we had to do, in our opinion, is to train ourselves, to dress and to learn from this and that. Each one of us prepared a topic and studied it from one to the other. So we formed the first group: seven on one side and seven on the other, fourteen. We were therefore a very demanding group.

Apart from practices and actions, will there be no difference?

There is something very important. We were all very independent. Txillardegi, Jose Mari Benito del Valle, Jose Manu Agirre, etc. All of us were in favour of independence, at the root and from the top down. On the other hand, I remember that I met some patriots, a little slow, who had grouped around their parents during my childhood years. And for us. We were for complete independence. Of course, it is already known that in the first era of "Ekin" socialism did not appear. Gradually he joined nationalism. Just as consistently, patriotism has led us to the other side. But the environment back then was only patriotism, and it was that we created "Ekin," not to stay in autonomy, but to bring our struggle to the end, that is, to achieve full independence. In that there is no doubt, and until death we will say the same thing. We always thought that it was not possible that so many men (and what men!) be possible. Killing for autonomy doesn't make sense. That is why it is better for us to recognise each other, for us to leave ourselves in that, among other things, and for us to achieve poor autonomy.

He mentioned earlier that they had high sympathy with the PNV. Why did the clashes arise?

We were acting in favour of total independence, and the PNV saw in us a certain shadow of the future. And we don't know why, the people of the PNV turned against us. It should be taken into account that the differences in the beginnings were not of a social thematic type. For, after all, and without realizing it, we were authentic abertzales and they were not. But without realizing it, because we now understand a lot of things, but then we couldn't understand anything but to surprise ourselves. We talked to the PNV and the people of the government, but it was in vain.

What reasons could the PNV have for not getting into a harder fight?

It is clear that the PNV was with the allies. In the Second World War, the Basque Government stood alongside the allies, hoping that Franco and Hitier would go to hell. But once the war was over, cold wars and so on came. And the United States and Franco were somehow reconciled. Thus, the PNV was in contradiction: by following the question of the allies they could not fight Franco clearly. That is, of course, when it starts to fight, it is also a question of armed struggle. Or, at least, be willing to enter into an armed struggle.

1958.an was the session of a twinning process with "Euzko Gaztedi", so "Ekin" disappears and ETA is created. Why did you see the need?

Of course, this process was not the same for everyone, but among us there was a sector that thought it had to start doing tougher things. What was tougher? Well, one of them is making ikurriñas and putting them in the trins of the shops. They're nonsense, we laugh today. Then, on the wires, the biggest ikurriñas, much more dangerous, and later began our first painted ones: we had no more tools, and with a common brush and a boat at night, and "Gora Euskadi Askatuta" and so on. Yes, we never signed it, because the police didn't know who we were. The police were crazy and eventually found out about a fall of some of the members of the "Euzko Gaztedi" who we were.

When you took the step of the armed struggle, what drove you most, the model adopted by the dynamics of the situation itself or from other countries outside?

Well, I think it's all. On the one hand, our nationalism, we were in favour of independence and we were seeing in some way that we had to fight to achieve it. That's one side. In the other case, we then saw the case of Algeria, the case of Cyprus ... The cube was also an example for us.

The cube model seems a bit shocking, right? In the case of Algeria there is a question of colonialism and it looks much more like ours. Cuba's, on the other hand, was much more different.

The case of Cuba was very nice to us. The technique may be in the sense of breath. If many of us were quite American at that time, we began to see with Cuba and those around us the true essence of American imperialism. And we realized that in a company like this, in a struggle like this, a small group of men, full of faith, can gradually win an entire people. In this respect, I think it was a great example. It is true that, from the point of view of nationalism, things could not be compared. Despite the fact that its struggle has been primarily economic and social, there is also a small burden on the national side.

In the cases of Algeria and Tunisia, parallelism is more evident, right?

There is a big difference with the case of Algeria: in our case, before we achieve independence we have become socialists, and in the socialist it means that socialism is already consciously recognised in us. In the case of Algeria, however, some nationalists gained independence when they were on the path of socialism, and although that was a wonderful step, it is also true zirela.beren that they did not have time to reach socialism. So, achieve independence, a sort of small self-management, and stay there.

We would like to see whether it relates to the cases of Algeria, the issue of the national front that was so much mentioned at that time. How do you see it from the current point of view.

You know that ETA has wanted that many times. The greatest effort in this current was made nineteen years ago. And that was also what the Isidro and Telesforo brothers intervened in. Undoubtedly, to do so, we and we had a divine influence or influence on the panorama of the time.

What reasoning did you use to defend the idea of forming a front like this?

We saw that in Euskal Herria there were, in addition to us, other important political forces, and in the first place the PNV. The other thing is that we wanted it or not, but we had to take into account that in Euskal Herria, as in other countries of the world, there was everything: right and left, good petals, bad and bad walks ... and that in such a process all these forces had to be grouped together under such important points as national freedom, independence, Euskera as the national language, such a country, etc. ). I thought - and I think from a government - that it is worth taking such a step.

Do you think it is still possible to do so today?

I think we need what's called the mabai that recently began to form. It doesn't matter. Either the PNV and other similar forces are betrayal and are therefore against us, or if this does not happen, the base will require the PNV to make a current or a convergence with the rest of the Basque forces.

In any case, it is not so easy to think about that today, especially when the paths of each go by their side.

That is why I believe that we have to look throughout history at many other examples, such as those in France or Germany. At the time of the war everyone came together, those from the extreme right and those from the extreme left. I think that if the leadership of the PNV betrays from top to bottom and puts its whole body and soul in favour of the Spanish or French, it will become Spanish or French, and it is. But the base and the real patriots, I suppose, will be with us and we will do something.

It is often said that ETA has brought Euskal Herria a hobby of independence (but that already existed), but also what we could call a new thing socialism or Marxism. Now that Marx celebrates his centenary, what did Marx mean to you at that time?

It has been and is very important. On the one hand, a very suitable path for the analysis of any reality (therefore ours). I think that is the right thing to do. On the other hand, even if it is not Marxist, that path is appropriate. But if you're a Marxist, then you'll go further, because it's no longer just a method application, but a worldview. So, I believe that the greatest merit of ETA (that will be seen later) has been on the one hand nationalism, but on the other dialectic, and that both have joined together. You know they had faced. The hardest and most heartbreaking drama of the time was that: it couldn't be both socialist and Abertzale. Those two things that were contradictory to surfaces or superenvironments were joined by ETA.

As you've lived a broad history within the Abertzale movement, what sense do you think independence can have today?

Before we were or I was independent for the education received from my parents. It was, I am, and I will be to death. But then, from another point of view and above all, watching the class struggle around the world, and seeing our struggle across this world in its autonomous framework. My old feeling is weaker than stronger. If someone asks why you are independent, why do you necessarily want independence? On whim? No, nothing. Simply, the legend tells us that, in view of historical materialism, it is not possible to carry forward the identity of our People if we do not cut the ties we have in Madrid and Paris. We've seen many other examples of the world, and I'm going to tell you an anecdote that comes in my favor. I was in Flanders with an intimate friend of the Communist Party and he said "listen to me" about the national problem. their national problem will be recognised by all the Communist parties in the world, except those of Spain and France." The same happened in Algeria. And all the examples show that we have to break all the ties with Spain and France.