What do you think of the policy implemented by the Basque Government in the first year?

BY ANDER ITURRIOTZ. I want to address the issue of legitimacy at the starting point: The government of Patxi López is illegitimate, composed of a majority after the deception of Basque political sociology. Not just that. López goes against whether he promised or promised the Pact he made with the PP to acquire the government. López insisted that “I will not interfere with the PP.” He said that his Government would not be formed around the issue of identity, but rather would be built around the genuine concerns of the population. The government’s most notable effort has been to destroy the Basque national identity. He has completely forgotten the other issues he promised during the campaign. Therefore, my assessment of this government is very pessimistic.

XABIER GURRUTXAGA: I think there was a way to form a new majority in view of the election results. In other words, there was the possibility of forming a new government according to the word and will given by the electorate: a government between socialists and nationalists. According to polls, this could be the political pact that most people wanted. It was a difficult pact to embody politically, but the PSE-EE quickly abandoned this possibility. Although he said that he was not thinking about forming the current government during the electoral campaign – he said he would not take advantage of the opportunity of the PP to reach Ajuria Enea – Patxi López decided to make a political pact with the PP. Although aware of the great political and social limitations of the current Treaty in the Basque Country, even knowing that it is the least appreciated treaty by the socialist electorate, the socialist party made this bet. But not because they think this is necessary for the Basque Country, but because it is the only way to get to Ajuria Enea and take the position of President. It's not about the legitimacy of the government, it's about illegitimacy, that's all. The PSE abandoned the government that society needs most, but this choice has already made it start paying the PP’s bill.

ASSISTED BY RAMÓN. I have a positive assessment of this government. I think it's the only coalition that could get a majority mathematically. The terms of this Treaty, to which Javier referred, could have been the same if the Treaty had been between the Socialist Party and the PNV, whatever the nature of the Treaty. The treaty between the PNV and the PSE is binding at this time. I say it’s a positive government and I’m not talking about management. I consider it positive because it shows that it is possible to carry out other political formulas in the Basque Country, and also because it makes it possible to guarantee the rights of other people. The citizens of the Basque Country do not see the need for a nationalist government to manage the problems of the Basques. Every day that this government lasts seems to me a victory, for the political forces that make up the government as well as for Basque society.
The change of the authorities is enough for me, and I am glad I made the change. Having said that now, it is likely that in the coming years more will be demanded of this Government in management and in certain matters. It will have to show what capacity it has, to what extent it encourages political change and to what extent it is not a simple change in favor of “prescribing”. I mean, is he going to get into other problems in the future? It is a government with weaknesses. People with little experience are doing it. I do not even know if it is possible to bring about change in this terrible economic crisis, a government that has the necessary economic impulse. He has a difficult situation.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Anders said the government is illegitimate. Let's see, then. We know how governments and presidents are elected in the democratic system in which we live: the one who gets a majority in parliament. And legitimacy or illegitimacy must be seen at the origin of the composition of Parliament. If anyone says that this government has an original vice, it would be true that the will of Basque society is enshrined in the PSE-EE and PP Treaty and that all the fruits that come from it are alive – according to the valuation in principle that Ander has made – it is true. But beware, the consequences would be very damaging when it comes to making political assessments. Although many people oppose various applications of the Law on Political Parties, including myself, this legitimate or illegitimate debate cannot be held after receiving the Strasbourg judgment or without it being taken into account. If the verdict had been against the illegalization of the [Union], what Ander says should be discussed very seriously. However, this is not the case.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. What Javier said is a formalistic retolica. If that is the case, then the legitimacy is conferred by Parliament, which is not true. If Parliament is elected on a universal basis, that is all right, but this is not the case in this part of our country. There are levels and levels of legitimacy. And it is useless to go to Strasbourg because we know that it is de facto looking at Madrid. Therefore, his argument is unfounded.

The government’s policy is positive. That the government has promoted change, given it a new identity and another non-nationalist vision, which, in his opinion, is non-nationalist. For the example: Most of the Spanish authors of El Correo gave Patxi López a score of 6-7. Javier [Gurrutxaga] gave him the only suspense with a 4. Everyone who gave him a positive note agreed on one point: the identity problem. That was the only reason for the change. No one saw any problems in the management. It is obvious that: López approves the year “because he has approved the issue of the identity problem.” Let’s look at management, for example, the transformation that has taken place in education is enormous. López wants to make a social pact, but realizes that he can’t take steps because the majority of parents and teachers have opposed him.

He won’t like it, but we have a glimpse of what the Treaty has done in the Basque world. An example is: Etxęstoceta himself has resigned before the end of the year, and in the press he has described his resignation as a personal failure. But I must confess that yours was a personal victory and a defeat for the government. Even if Etxezeta says otherwise, we know what people are in the Department of Culture. One of the two elements that have jumped from the University to the Department of Culture has gained strength in the department, which, for example, passes its reports to Ms. Blanca Urgell [Minister of Culture] in Spanish.

The identity problem: The PSOE had no intention of touching him. The flag of Spain is placed in the place of the ikurriña. He has delivered the message of the King of Spain on ETB. He has transformed the weather map in an absurd and pathetic way. Because the EITB had a nationalist tone, it is said that it has now been given a cosmopolitan tone. Well, no, no. The touch that has been given to him is not cosmopolitan, but Spanish. He did not like the shield and changed it. He's been trying to change the signs of identity. Look, Lopez says the bullfights are certified in the Basque Country.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Okay, in part. But recognizing the legitimacy of a President is a fundamental starting point. Otherwise, if we say that his government is a government that has no legitimacy, and that what he does as a result is not valid, it is over. Patxi López has been elected and this legitimacy cannot be challenged. More than one has said that the Basque Parliament has a great vacuum – Joseba Egibar has said that it is a short leg – and that is a big problem. All right, all right. I understand the political position of the patriotic left, but I do not agree with the legal reasons that it has used after hearing the Strasbourg judgment. It is precisely now unquestionable whether the decisions taken by the courts to prevent the nationalist left from being present are democratic. These are decided by the courts, like it or not.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE: Whether you like it or not... be careful!

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Whether you like it or not... The decisions of the courts cannot be accepted when they are in my favour, and the democratic legitimacy of that court cannot be questioned when it is different. If, instead of the Strasbourg court ruling in favour of the illegalisation of the Union, it had stated otherwise, then the court would be excellent. The case has passed the Strasbourg test, and we would be in a completely different situation if the resolution had been adopted in the other sense. If it had ruled against the Law of the Parties, Parliament would have been compromised. This does not mean that this Parliament is fully representative of Basque society. We know clearly that he doesn’t, but not replacing everything doesn’t mean he has the original vice.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. There will be people who will deny the legitimacy of the Basque Parliament, but surely not as much as the government. In that sense, I'm with Javier. I understand this argument from a member of the Nationalist Left. Whether you agree or disagree, it's another matter. The case has been dealt with through the legal channel. For Basque society, the illegalization of the Union has made the non-legality of the Government an argument, but with caution, the Government has been appointed with the same legitimacy as Egibar, Ezenarro or Arana, for mentioning the three opposition parliamentarians. If Parliament is not legitimate, then neither is the Government.

Besides, Andy, you've united identity and a certain patriotism. Therefore, you have considered everything that goes against Basque political nationalism as an attack on identity. I do not know how Basque citizens, subjects of this identity, have evolved since the formation of this Government, I do not see how my identity has changed. For some, identity has been an identity nationalism, and the underlining of this supposed identity has become great in politics. This Government runs the risk of replacing this exclusive identity with another exclusive identity. All right, all right. But it is not about the struggle between identities, but about the coexistence between multiple identities. There is more to the population than just "Basque identity" and "Spanish identity". Bringing in the Spanish national team can be a sign of identity, and for me it has seemed like a reductionism of politics. This is the failure of this government. What you have said about ETB is another matter. You are the President of the Basque Writers Association (EE). I don't know what you notice. This government was supposed to make a mess, we heard it would almost ban the Basque language. What you said about teaching: Despite some government blunders, you've been a little exaggerated. The people of the Department of Education are fully dedicated to teaching, they are professionals and, in practice, they are more Basque speakers than members of the former Government. This does not stop us from proposing the main language’s bet – that Basque is a transmission of language. Instead of being a uniting component of the proposal of the pre-Basque Government, it was an element of division and that Government did not have the strength to legislate. The Department of Education had to draw up the law by decree because the other parties did not support it. So how can such catastrophic comments be made?

My own failure? The victory? Yes. This is my government. Right, I haven't had a way to fit in. It’s a personal failure in that sense. What are the factors? I think there are structural flaws. The socialist party has inherited the old structures. For example, the cultural domicile of language in political nationalism has been welcomed, so it should not be less independent of nationalism. We have been governed by old structures and transversality is a difficult issue. I have had operational difficulties, but I have not reached political confrontation with anyone.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE: Two more words on the subject of identity: López promised to rule out the identity problem before he took over the government, unlike the nationalists. That it would be linked to the essence of the socialist ideology and program: the problems of social service and unemployment... Then, to give an image to the socialist government, he put Rodolfo Ares on the front line. Ares came out against ETA and the nationalist left, against the images of the prisoners, and he entered the identity struggle strongly. It didn’t leave a single topic untouched, it transformed everything. How is it possible to reject what was promised because the PP asked for it and generate such a fuss on the issue of identity?

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Haven't you noticed Ares's shortcomings before? The ones who criticized the PNV for not dealing with these issues?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Ares put up a picture of the change. Yes, we know how that sells in Madrid. That was the first change. When Isabel Celaa was injured, Ares took over the Department of Education. It's just one example. This individual has a special psychology, he has entered every department and every corner, which has given this Government this trajectory of style and a year. López’s government has a better image in Madrid than here. But this is where Lopez comes out as a loser.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. You are wrong, Ander. Ares’ bet is to get the mayors of the three capitals, as well as the provincial councils, something that is not achieved in Madrid. It’s all about what the Basque society will look like. The Socialist Party has an organic dependence on Madrid, of course. The priority is there, to advance their budgets, but Ares doesn’t have to be focused on Madrid.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Looking at Madrid or looking at Basagoiti to understand. The PSE-EE took a step, but the PSE has prevailed, that is, a sector that is not a Basquist at all. I remember the time of Ramón Jauregi, his basketball campaign with Mario Onaindia, but the cuts that came later, the pendulum always goes to the other side. This has always happened to him. Even now, the Pact with the PP immediately after the formation of the Government has forced it to go through a difficult situation, since the Pact is very unbalanced.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Oh, yes, of course. There is also an imbalance in internal relations. There are a lot of people from the Socialist Party who support what our sector says, but then they go to the antipodes instead of paving the way for the solution. Because it's hard. This is inevitable.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. I want to continue with the question of legitimacy: there is no absolute justice and democracy, otherwise we would be platonic. Plato said that “there is and will be no democracy among human cattle.” There is no absolute, everything is adjectivized. So let’s talk about French or German democracy, or let’s talk about Spanish justice. Look where Garzon is.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Can we talk about simple democracy without adjectives?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Democracy does not exist, democracy is an operational system. And it becomes operative in a socio-political reality. So it doesn’t help me to say, if he leaves Madrid in any way or in any way, whether or not that court has more legitimacy. The Diary case for the example is valid. Now that a favourable resolution has been given, but be careful, the Town Hall or the 18/98 cases are there.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Some must realize that they often look only on one side. I don't put you there, because I think you're more open than them.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. It's not about that. In this I am dogmatic: Spanish justice is Spanish justice.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. It's not dogmatic...

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. ...yes, yes, yes, I am dogmatic. I recognize my dogmaticity, in which the legitimacy of justice must be examined. And another thing: the Basque political sociology has been stripped of 12%, the Basque nationalist bloc has been stripped of 24%.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Has there ever been a nationalist bloc?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Just like it was on the other side.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Yes, yes, I know, but the Basque nationalist bloc?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Yes, nationalist voters have their sociology and constitutionalists have theirs. What’s more, behind what has happened now were Aznar and Mayor Oreja. It was their strategy and not because they wanted the nationalist left out, no, no; Ibarretxe didn’t want it and EAJ didn’t want it either. What they said: “We organized it, so far it hasn’t been possible, but now it is.” All these nuances must be mentioned when dealing with the issue of legitimacy, it is not just a question of the courts.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Ander, all these arguments, since they are political reasons, anyone can put them in a political debate and everyone can give them the weight they want. When we talk about legitimacy, we are talking beyond the political sphere.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. I don't believe in that.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. One should never believe... Not even in American democracy.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Not at all, either.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. If we want to go further and talk about legitimacy, we must have a clear reference: who gives the diploma of legitimacy? In our democratic systems: the courts in Spain, France, the United States, the Soviet –when it existed– or the Cuban dictate the resolution of this field. Ander, if the Strasbourg resolution had been the opposite – even if Aznar and Mayor Orejá had said what they wanted – the political consequences of the resolution would have been irreversible.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. But could he have issued another resolution?

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Of course, of course.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. I don't believe in that.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. If you don’t believe in it, those around you will have to believe it.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. I'm talking alone, I don't know if you're talking about the person...

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. I'm talking about taking a reference. If I – as a lawyer – am told by a client: “Sharon, I have this problem and I want to fix it. Where do you fix this?” “You fix it in that house in front of us, if you and your counterpart don’t agree otherwise.” “I don’t trust these houses because I know they’re going to fight me.” I'll do it again: “Jode... don’t leave then...” I'm talking about

A. FROM THE SOURCE. And... what do you want to tell me?

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. That the [Union] should not have gone to Europe then.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. That's not my problem. That story came out of you.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Come on, you've been on the subject over and over again. I have said this: if the Nationalist Left has decided to take the question of its illegalization to the courts, that is, if it has decided to enter into a judicial framework and debate it, it has not confined the matter to a purely political one.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. But here we are not talking about the strategy of the Union, but about the legitimacy of this Government.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Jode Ander, what I'm saying has to do with what the sociological space that you consider marginalized has done, or not? If I don't believe in the courts, and if I leave knowing they're going to oppose me, I'm being silly, I give legitimacy to those courts. The nationalist left appealed to the Spanish Supreme Court and the National Court to then go to Europe. There is no way to go to Europe without going through the previous ones. This is not what Plato said: that there is no perfect democracy or that he did not believe in perfect democracy.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. That is what I have said and I have added that democracy and justice must be adjectivized. Whatever Madrid or Strasbourg have said, legitimacy is something else, much earlier.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. In the terms in which the debate has been conducted, the problem has arisen: where is the verdict of the legitimist, if one is the subject of recognizing or denying the legitimacy of the system?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. This must be decided by the policy, by the policy in each area, which is a political problem.

(...)

X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Back to the Post: I gave the López a score of 4, believing that in the coming years he can go down to 2 or go up to 7. The government has brought about change, the wrong change. I agree with some of the things Ander says, but I think his speech is exaggerated. And I think the government is also paying for the exaggerated discourse that the socialist party made of itself. Because the change in the political situation has not been given in the terms they thought. The essence of the change has been the expulsion of the PNV from the Government. This is undeniable and objective, since from there there are difficulties to indicate that there has been a change. This government declared the Treaty of its predecessor as a front and argued that it wanted to break with that character. In other words, “we don’t want to make a front, we want to respect the pluralism of society.” He said that the multi-party agreement would complement the integral through integrative consensus. And that's gone blank. I do not accuse the Government of its intention to form a front, but of its irreducibility. Ibarretxe was not a nationalist government, he was not a frentist, so in front of him this government has a great limit. And it is: This government has said it wants an agreement on one issue, on another, and on another, but it has no margin to do so. He has enormous difficulties in making comprehensive and transversal consents. Even in the time of Ibarretxe, the issue of identity was exploited to the extreme and was not good for Basque politics. For example, Euskadi Day should not have been celebrated, most socialists did not agree. That’s because he did it with the Anthem, for example. As he had the majority, he got away with it. Egiguren himself said: “We have accepted the Basque Country Day, but not in the right way. Half of Parliament with votes against the other half is not the best business card.” They want to show that it is something different from the previous government, but they have not succeeded. López promised the development of the statute, consensus and reform of self-government. And for that, he also said that he would hold the meeting between the parties. It was announced and canceled. For what reason? Because Basagoi told him “in this legislature, don’t even move that.” Then it has limits of consensus. On the other hand, I don’t see any destruction in the Basque language.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. I didn't mention that word, Ramon mentioned it.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Nor do I say that you have mentioned [Iturriotz], which the elders have mentioned.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. The time of Ibarretxe was exaggerated. The slogan of the PSE “Euskara y libertad” has always seemed to me as beautiful as it is delicate. Because it indicates in some way that in the time of the previous government, the Basque language was not speaking in freedom. You have to be very careful, the debates about the Basque language are very delicate, not only because they damage the Basque language, but also because they damage coexistence. For example, in the field of education, the present thought that nationalism had traded the issue: that the results were not given in the true freedom of the parents. And now Celaa and the members of the Department have taken a huge surprise when they look at the pre-registration data. They are the data of the process controlled by them. Celaa preferred a different result to leave PP satisfied. In other words, they were expecting other objective data to strengthen model A, to say to the members of the previous government, “we will liberate that zone that was cautious.” But it's not like that.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. There has been very little basic change. All right, all right. There is a problematic discourse around education and we come back to the issue of legitimacy. Nationalism – I say nationalism, not patriotism – has had a virtue in some way: The sociology of the Basque Country has impregnated it with a nationalist santoral, and non-nationalism has somehow followed it. That is, instead of managing the issue properly and adapting it to coexistence, there is always the risk of going to the antithesis. I don’t know if it’s more acceptable or more identity than Easter. But the mechanism fails, a basic consensus has failed in both cases.

On the subject of Basque: I do not know to what extent the cabinet of Isabel Celaa did not breathe when she saw the results of this study, because we can make a proper management of Basque with the minor consensus. But let’s say it clearly: both Celaa’s department and the other departments do not want to be recognized for any adherence to the Basque language. What is more, we want to highlight the hostility towards the Basque language and that is the lie that is very widespread in this country. In other words, the Basque language is felt by Basque citizens, not all of them of course, but nationalists and non-nationalists feel it. And this government has to go against the speech that says otherwise: “It’s Russian for everyone.” We all love to say that it’s too much, of course, it’s a dangerous speech. But Basque must be stripped of its negative connotation in certain sectors of society, given prestige and given a different path. I mean to say: The government has an extraordinary opportunity to show a closeness to the Basque language that it has not had until now and to gain credibility. Sometimes I think the political dynamic is perverse, I hope better times come to listen to each other.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. As Ramon said, this government is a continuist government. Well, it's not just that, it's reformist. For example, he said that health ambulances will be closed in several places. This is a measure envisaged by the previous Government. Celaa then said that this measure was a terrible barbarity. That we were on the threshold of the dissolution of the welfare society. The PSO did it again. And he will do more because, among other things, he has had to manage a very rapid economic crisis and he doesn’t have a partner in Madrid. Change, therefore, zero. In terms of style, Javier says that López announced a new style: integrality, transversality... I mean, the consensus culture. A new style that fits an ideology or an illustrated aspect. But Javier also said that transversalism is more non-transversal than ever. The decisions that this government must make are within this limit, very strict, its policy is “whether we want it or not.” For example, in the de-escalation of terrorism: “We will do it or not. We have the majority.” What kind of transversalism does this attitude allow? None of them. The front is very marked, it is strict, and in addition they have formed a front with a Spanish and retrograde tone, a front made in the likeness of the PP.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. They are arguing with... [The House is talking about education].

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. We'll see how far... They will not change their position in the identity struggle. Because of the Basque language, you say that there are people who do not believe that there is a pro-Basque sensitivity in the PSE. Well, I do. Here and in Navarre, I know that both the PSE and the PSN have pro-Basque voters.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. You seem to know more than I do, I'm not so sure about that, at least in Navarre...

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The counting is easy. Count the percentage of votes cast to the parties in Navarre. English is 60% of the population.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Partiality is a positive value, as is the slogan that Real wears on the shirt.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. That's another matter. You say that the PSOE is not recognized for the Basque language, but hey, you also have to show style. The terms of Javier’s manifesto “Euskara y libertad” are: identitarian, historicist, sectarian, discriminatory. All this is in the Basque language in the document.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Where is that written? Are you talking about democracy? As an adjective or a substantive?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The document raises the “democratic prestige of the Basque culture”.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Are you against that?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Why not call for the democratic prestige of Spanish culture? Does Basque culture not have democratic prestige?

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Who says that?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The documents. The documents.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. In what place?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The proposal says “to recover the democratic prestige of the Basque culture as soon as possible”. Did he lose or what?

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Do you think it has prestige in the whole Basque society?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. What democratic prestige can a culture have? Should the Spanish culture not regain its democratic prestige?

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Yes and others as well. I mean, it's written because many non-Basques have to be convinced.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. A scholar reads the document and...

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. ... it’s not just written for scholars.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The document contains excuses and references to the Basque language. There is a problem of style. For example, in the last video of Ares there is also a problem of style. Mr. Ares unites ETA militants with people who have never had contact with ETA. People were persecuted and tortured by the Franco regime. It's confusing the ikurriña with violence, that's a matter of style. This is repeated in all areas.

We have spent an hour on the legitimacy of this government and the issue of identity. Where do you see the government’s problems from now on?

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. The PSE and the PP knew when the Pact was implemented that the economic crisis would bring difficulties, however, the Pact was drafted for the entire legislature. López considers the preservation of the Treaty as his own goal. Without him the situation will not be better: “Since the situation between the PP and the PSOE in Spain is turbulent, it is better to take care of this than to open the door to other unknown situations,” both sides think. Both sides want the situation to continue. However, in 2011, the PSE and the PP will have a real time to analyze the situation in depth in the provincial and municipal elections, in order to calculate how well the benefits of the Pact go. In the art, each of them maintains the Covenant in the belief that it benefits them in the Basque Country. If it is found that the election results do not contribute to its objectives, the Treaty will be reviewed. However, I do not think it will be in a position to break the Treaty. In addition, if they are successful, they will propose the second edition of the Treaty to achieve the governments of the provincial councils of the capitals and the Basque Country.

Won't the PSE and the PSE get closer?

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. Not in terms of government formation in this legislature. There is the eternal problem of achieving the Treaty between the PNV and the PSE. The PSE would like to govern with the PNV but with the president as its own. The PSE would prefer to be in government with the PNV. This is the political dream of true socialists, but to be in government together with the PNV while not obtaining an absolute majority and to have the president as their own is a political dream.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. This government has taken a step towards normality so that the citizens can see that nothing is diminished, as well as that in the future it is possible to develop coexistence between adversaries. In addition, if [ETA’s] disarmament comes to politics, everyone should renew their approaches. Violence has ruined many people and left them without the manoeuvre to make policy. Violence has excluded many people from living comfortably, it has pushed them into intellectual laziness. There’s a huge legitimacy problem there too. With such schematic political approaches, we have learned to persevere in this precariousness. We will have to pass this barrier and learn to make politics more complicated between the different. Of course, if the Government did not raise any other expectations at the end of the legislation, it could be at the starting point – I say it could be, because a year is a little short. Therefore, he must flee from the frentism. There is little data to indicate that Uneon is in frentism, but it could be in the medium term.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The treaty has been very welcome to the PP, but not so well to the PSE. I have said very strongly that it has been a political suicide for the PSE. The PSE knows that it has given a profile that they did not want to give: the belligerent and the frentist profile. There's another profile in the PSE, the basketball player. In this way, we will see what happens in Madrid with Zapatero, because things are not right. The PP scores ten points to the PSOE [in polls of voting intentions]. It would be contradictory for the PP to gain power in Madrid and for the PP to support the PSE here. I don't see that as possible.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. When Felipe González fell, the PP struck him with the PNV in Madrid.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. In Madrid, not here.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. It starts somewhere.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. We know how he plays if we don’t know what he brings to Madrid...

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Or if he acquires the government...

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. It's just like that. But the Treaty between the PNV and the PNV has never been proposed here as an alternative. However, with the PP in Madrid, it is not very congruent that the PSE is in government with the help of the PP. In Spain it would not be well seen, now it is, because of the so-called anti-terrorist policy and the other.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. In the case of Ander: If the PP were to win in Madrid, would the PNV enter the government here?

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The PSE would not fall into the arms of the PNV, but would try to give it another profile. That's where we got Egiguren's line, isn't it?

(...)

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Municipal and provincial elections are coming. Some say that it will not be a nationalist left, socialists and populists will try to remove the nationalists from the deputations. However, I do not believe Rubalcaba. I believe that, in part or in part, the Patriotic Left will present itself.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. He said something like that last time.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The nationalist left has won a political war. I don't know any more about Uneo.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Today is the news [17 May], Egiguren mentions the possibility of presenting it.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. This hypothesis cannot be ruled out. If a new configuration were formed in the deputies and municipalities, and ETA were removed from the context, we would be in the other political context. In the face of this spectacle it is not known, but the current bet and situation is detrimental to the PSOE.

How do you see the future of nationalism, especially that of the nationalist left?

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. From the moment the violence of ETA disappears, it is difficult to know when, but the patriotic left will acquire a

huge force X. THE GURRUTXAGA. If the Patriotic Left has arrived, it is because, among other things, it has realized that the majority has within it the greatest “war” that must be fought in order for the project of the Patriotic Left to continue. They have discovered that these tools called for struggle are a major obstacle to progress today. The era of these tools has passed and they have made a serious commitment to the political project. Egiguren says that the Patriotic Left has placed itself above ETA, that the Patriotic Left has managed to be itself and not to be controlled by ETA. In the last 30 years, this political framework has been an important reference in Basque politics. The nationalist left has gone through extremely difficult times, including those of illegalization. But it has been revealed that illegalization is not a legal problem, but a problem of a political and social reality. That ideology can’t be illegalized, let alone eradicated. The Union is the main political benchmark of this political framework and when the burden of armed struggle is properly channelled, it will be a huge change.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Once the ETA has disappeared, the cathartic process will begin. The institutional political referent of patriotism is the PNV, but in the last 30 years the ideological discourse to patriotism has been given by the nationalist left. He has done so in a dismissal and in patriotism that is the main discourse. He did some moderation and moderation. The nationalist left has not had a stable institutional representation and who has assumed leadership in the future will be at stake.

Within what time frame? How many laws, I mean?

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. It depends on how much time you spend trying to convince people of this project. If the citizens really believe that they will abandon political violence, the success of the patriotic left is guaranteed.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. With ETA gone, it's only a matter of time. At first the project will inflate, even overinflate, then it will recover. But the left-wing and nationalist bipartisanship has a huge social political dimension. In 30 years, 15-20% of the population has completely conditioned the policy with a vote.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The three of us agree on this point. Objectively, there are four main areas of Basque politics: The PSOE and the PP on the one hand, and the PNV and the nationalist left on the other. Within the framework of the patriotic left, there are also EA and Aralar. They are conjuncturally important, but in the medium term they are epiphenomes. It will be necessary to see, of course, the dynamics that the patriotic left acquires, the EA can turn towards the PNV or settle on the patriotic left. I don’t know if the nationalist left will be refounded, but that would bring normality. Because the patriotic left's bet is serious. It will bring two dynamics in particular: one, the situation of patriotism will be fluctuating, sometimes the PNV will be at the top and in others the patriotic left. In the other camp, the PSE has almost the whole camp to win. The PP does not have a sociological framework, as it does in Catalonia. The PP’s discourse only feeds on violence, if it disappears, it will go down a lot.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Here in Catalonia you have another opportunity, attention!

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. Only 7% of the population.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. If the politics of the front start to take root in us, the PP will eat the place of the PSE. It will be a situation to be managed intelligently. He will influence here what he commands in Madrid.

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The political keys are there, but in the cold, the PP here has no political sociology, in a normalized state, of course. In addition, this would stimulate debate within the PP.

I'm talking about R. IN THE HOUSE. Even in a normalized situation, the interests of the PNV and the PP can be approximated, the possibilities expand...

I'm talking about A. FROM THE SOURCE. The most important thing is to spread basketball once and for all, in the Catalan style, to see where the PSOE goes. It seems that the PNV can come to terms with each other in the medium term. But the PSE can also turn to the patriotic left side. Some say they could have approached. I don't believe much, though.

I'm talking about X. THE GURRUTXAGA. To complement what Ander says: the most appropriate way to bring an end to violence, the integration of the patriotic left and the equal opportunities of all others will force patriotism to speak in a different way. First of all, there will be a lot of controversy and controversy. In the PNV there are two trends that are not yet defined. Some will be thinking about doing something in the long run, but others won’t.