A team of researchers from the UPV/EHU has been at Columbia University in New York presenting studies on the Basque state. The analysis of Western secessionist processes compares Scotland, Flanders, Catalonia and Quebec. It remains outside the Basque Country because the independence claim has been linked to political violence. Now, when ETA’s activity is over, in New York we were gladly invited to present four papers. However, the Basque case was not present at the round table on self-determination: Scotland, Catalonia and Quebec have been analysed under the direction of a flamenco.

Historical inertia explains why, but it's not just that. At the international level, the Basque secession process is still not credible for different reasons, among others, the lack of definition of the subject hinders the socialization of the project. Our institutional, sociopolitical and cultural fragmentation are an obstacle and these weaknesses can be reinforced according to the definition of subject that would be agreed between the abertzales.

The problem is similar to that of Flanders. Brussels has historically been part of this country, but since the twentieth century most of them are French speakers. The capital of Flanders has therefore become a bilingual region, apart from Flanders. This situation means that the Flemish nationalists are not planning a referendum on self-determination in the short term. In return, they use the strategy of the gradual process of secession to demand confederation. It is understandable that there is no hurry, the Flemings are not a Belgian national minority, they represent 59% of the population and are involved in the management of the Belgian State.

So, in New York, three cases of secession were analyzed. François Rocher opposed the idealization of Quebec. Since the Canadian Parliament passed the Clarity Act, the self-determination process will be controlled in its conclusions by the Canadian Federal Government. Central power can interpret what would be a “clear majority” for secession to occur. In this regard, Rocher explained that Canada may use the law as a destroyer in favor of its unitarianism.

Elisenda Casanas-Adam referred to Scotland. In this case, the British Government has shown great intelligence and has set two criteria: 1. Secession is decided by the Scots 2. The status of Scotland in the United Kingdom is decided by all State citizens. Therefore, in the referendum there will be no intermediate choice between independence and union and, in view of this, it seems that the Scots may be frightened: the present independence would be supported by 36% according to the surveys.

There was also fear of the quote of Montserrat Guibernau, but for different reasons. Spain has a political culture that has grown in the coup and dictatorship and, therefore, the centralist and anti-democratic perspective scares the Catalans.

In short, the processes of independence of countries without a Western state will not be easy. In history, internal independence in a strong liberal democratic system is the only one that Norway got from Sweden in 1905. Since then, we have had no more cases. For the time being, the clearest candidate for the second case is Catalonia, but unfortunately all those who have been in New York know that the Spanish state is not a normal Western democratic state.