“Zazpiak bat” and “Laurak bat” were the historical slogans used by nationalism to reclaim territoriality. It cannot be denied that these enchanting chorus were outdated a long time ago, if they ever had viability; among other things, because the “provinces” of Iparralde are nothing more than a medieval memory and there is no starting point that can begin at four o’clock in the south. Today in the South we have two autonomous communities and in Iparralde the demand for a similar community predominates; that is the starting point of territoriality.

In the twenty-first century and in the geographical and political situation of Euskal Herria, territoriality can only be achieved through a path and concrete democratic support. So, through self-determination. The key is that the Basque Country does not currently have a general and recognised institution, unless in the linguistic field it is Euskaltzaindia. How, then, to make effective the claim of territoriality in the Basque Country? Recognizing that the three autonomous policy areas are three decision-making areas; that is the way and that is what the Basque societies recognize. Perhaps we should talk about a people with three languages and three societies.

They're inventing Iparralde claiming territorial collectivity. The Basque Autonomous Community is faced with the achievement of a status that gathers the right to decide. What happens to Navarre is that in order to be the last mattress or border of Spain that the Spanish State places it has to overcome; the only objective and reason of what is called “Navarrismo”, and in order to overcome it, Navarre must be recognized and demanded as a framework of decision.

By mandate of realism, any political change must start from the current situation and develop according to the correlation of the political forces. The development of relations and collaboration must compete on the road and the journey. For example, Navarre and the CAPV do not currently have any relational structure, although the economic or sociological or cultural or political needs and benefits could be derived from such collaboration. The commitment to cooperation is essential, and that competition is what must be played and won by Navarrism in the first place. It must not be forgotten that the political breakdown between Navarre and the other three provinces has not emerged from the state of the autonomies and, to a large extent, is prior to the age of 800.

The Single Commonwealth of Iparralde and the two Southern Autonomous Regions are the possible starting points for the right to decide, in addition to the national identity points. The path of independence and the journey with which they are not Basque is an idea that gives the Basque people a full democratic right, not only to assert independence, but to live in full the possibility of our national identity. Recognizing that the Abertzales are still a minority, it is necessary to democratically recognize Navarre as a decision-making area if we are to change the situation. The Abertzales will play the future in the struggle for plurality with navarrism. But one thing is to recognize Navarre as a decision-making area and another is the ravine where Geroa Bai or Zabaltzen have slipped, assuming Navarre as “a single subject.”

Autonomy, therefore, should not be seen as an obstacle or an adversary of independence, but as a starting point, a space of decision and meeting between different; in the end, as the only path and the only path towards possible independence. No one should win an Abertzale in defense of autonomy, although autonomy is not enough for the Abertzale. In short, we can say that Basque territoriality is a political objective of a diachronic nature.

Throughout Europe, and particularly in Spain, significant moments are coming in relation to the right to decide and to build new nations. What is happening in Scotland, Ireland or Catalonia is not going to be strange. The roads opened by one and another will serve Euskal Herria in part. Different types of national attachment societies are being built in an increasingly renewed Europe.

The people are a “norden of many” or a diverse subject that lasts in time; thus, today’s Basques can recognize us Basques alongside our ancestors and descendants. However, every time you have the identity of the people, it is the society of every moment. The people have the titles, but it is society that can exercise its rights at every moment. Self-determination belongs to the people, but it can be carried out by the society of the moment. Fortunately, today all Basque nationalism is in favor of self-determination, because it must be remembered that the PNV has this option clearly from Ibarretxe and until then only talked about “historical rights” or the outbreaks.

The reference to historical rights – or excerpts, customs or the old law – are proof of the status of a country, even if they do not have a specific content. Because the democratic updating of historic rights can only be understood as an exercise of the right to decide. It is precisely this ideological weakness characteristic of navarrism that is the unacceptable democratic update of historical forces or rights. That is the key to Basque territoriality.

Territoriality has always been the most difficult obstacle in all the dialogue and negotiation efforts between ETA and the State. The most significant example is shown in Arnaldo Otegi’s statements on the Loiola talks: “Navarre is not the key to the problem, but the key to the solution.” Miguel Sanz's arrogant challenge, however, reached a deeper and more lasting echo in society: “-Navarra is not for sale”. Otegi himself expressly acknowledges that any political change in Navarre should be supported by the Navarros and Navarras.

After the Loiola talks ended in 2007, reaching the historical peak of an Abertzale force in Navarre, NABAI became the second political force. However, the PSN was offered the direction of change and refused to do so. Recently, in 2011, the PSN refused to accept the motion of censure and lost the change to be a topic or an alternative.

Political change in Navarre must therefore take place without waiting for the Socialist Party. To do so, the Plural Abertzale Left must match or exceed the level reached in its day by NABAI, facing the challenges of the time. François Hollande would not win without the primary who preceded the French presidency. Euskal Herria also faces the challenges of the new times; Basque territoriality begins in political change in Navarre.