Russian views on the separatist referendums in Spain and Iraq

This article was written for the Unz Review

The recent referendums in Catalonia and Kurdistan, while by no means crucial developments for Russia, have resulted in a lively debate in the Russian media and the Russian public opinion. The Kremlin itself has refrained from making any strong statements, possibly indicating that there might be several schools of thought on these issues in key ministries. Let’s look at these two situation from the Russian point of view.

Kurdistan:

This is the comparatively simpler one of the two: there is no way Russia is going to take the risk of alienating Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey. Furthermore, “independent Kurdistan” is so clearly a US-Israeli project that there is no constituency in Russia supporting this concept. Or is there?

Let’s not forget the for all the official smiles and declarations of mutual friendship, Erdogan is not, and will never, be trusted by the Kremlin. Furthermore, let’s not forget that Russia and Turkey fought 12 (twelve!) wars (1568-1570, 1672-1681, 1686-1700, 1710-1713, 1735-1739, 1768-1774, 1787-1791, 1806-1812, 1828-1829, 1853-1856, 1877-1878, 1914-1918). Neither should we forget the role Turkey played in supporting Takfiri terrorism in Chechnia. Or the fact that Erdogan himself bears a huge responsibility in the bloodbath in Syria. Oh and there is the issue of the Russian bomber shot down (with US assistance) over Syrian airspace. So, all in all, there is a lot in the past and the Russian will not ignore it. While it is most definitely not in the Russian national interest to fully support an independent Kurdistan anywhere (meaning not in Turkey, not in Iraq, not in Iran and not in Syria), a Realpolitik approach would strongly suggest that the Russian have an objective interest in keeping the Kurdish issue festering just to have a potential leverage against Turkey. Is that cynical? Yes, absolutely. I am not saying that this is morally/ethically right, only that there will be those in Russia who will make that case.

I think that the real issue for Russia is this: is peace between Russia and Turkey even possible? I personally believe that it is and, not only that, but I even believe that peace between Russia and Turkey is absolutely necessary. And that, in turn, means that it might even be inevitable. Let me explain.

First, 20^th, 19^th, 18^th, 17^thand 16^th century dynamics are simply not transferable to the 21^st century. If the geographical factors have not changed during the past centuries, military realities have. Yes, Russia and Turkey still can compete for influence or for the control of the Black Sea, but for the first time in history the outcome of a Russian-Turkish war has become absolutely predictable: Russia wins, Turkey loses or even disappears entirely. The Russians know that, and so do the Turks. This is exceedingly unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.

Second, I would argue that Russia and Turkey have common problems and common enemies. Sure, Turkey is still a member of NATO, I don’t think that will change anytime soon, but this membership is in the process of losing a lot of its substance. The attempted coup against Erdogan, which was fully backed and supported by the USA, is a stark illustration that with friends like the USA Turkey needs no enemies. So look at it from the Turkish point of view: what do Russia and the USA want for Turkey? The USA want Turkey to be a US colony and use against Russia, Iran and the Arab states in the region and in support of Israel. What does Russia want from Turkey? To be a predictable, reliable and truly independent partner with whom Russia can work. Now if you were Turkish, which option would most appeal to you?

Third, former enemies can become partners – just think of France and Germany for example. That can happen when objective factors combine with a political will and jointly “push” towards a fundamental transition from enemies to partners. I am increasingly inclined to think that this might be happening between Russia and Turkey.

I don’t think I am being Pollyannish here. And yes, there are still plenty of problems in Turkey which can flare-up, including Ergodan’s megalonania, neo-Ottoman imperial delusions, a nasty type of Ottoman Islamism, Turkey’s toxic policies towards Cyprus, Greece and Serbia, etc. But Russia cannot complain about the blind stupidity of East-Europeans who fail to grasp the fundamental differences between the old USSR and the new Russia while at the same time acting as of modern Turkey was the old Ottoman Empire. There are moments in history when what is required from wise leaders is to have the intellectual courage to understand that something fundamental has changed and that old dynamics simply do not apply. At the very least, Russia ought to do everything in her power to encourage Turkey to abandon its old ways and to follow Russia in her realization that her future is not with the West, but with the South, East and North.

Fourth, the Kurdish question also presents a serious indirect risk for Russia: even if Russia is not directly involved, any tensions or, God forbid, war between any combination of Turkey, Iran, Syria and Iraq would be a disaster for Russia because all of these countries are, to various degrees, Russian allies. Any conflict between these countries would weaken them and, therefore, weaken Russia too.

For all these reasons, I am personally convinced that having a festering Kurdish problem is not in the Russian national interest. However, neither is it in the Russian national interest to try to become deeply involved in this issue. At most, the Russians can offer to act as intermediaries to help the parties find a negotiated solution, but that’s is about it. Russia neither an empire nor a world policeman and she has no business trying to influence or, even less so, control outcomes in this thorny issue.

Israel and the USA will do everything they can to prevent Turkey from integrating itself into regional partnerships with Russia or Iran, but this might not be enough to prevent the Turks from realizing that they have no future with the EU or NATO. In the AngloZionist Empire some are more equal than others, and Turkey will never be granted any kind of real partnership in these organizations. The bottom line is this: Russia has a lot to offer Turkey and I believe that the Turks are beginning to realize this. Russia can, therefore, do much better than to simply support Kurdish separatism as a way to keep pressure on Ankara. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” is too primitive to be at the foundation of Russia’s policies towards Turkey.

For all these reasons I don’t see Russia supporting Kurdish separatism anywhere. Russia has nothing to gain by supporting what is clearly a US-Israeli project aimed at destabilizing the entire region. I believe that the Kurds themselves have made a huge historical mistake by aligning themselves with the USA and Israel and that they therefore will now reap the bitter fruits of this strategic miscalculation: nobody in the region supports a “2nd Israel” (except Israel, of course) and neither will Russia.

Catalonia

Catalonia is far away from Russia and the outcome of the crisis there will have no real impact on Russian national interests. But on a political level, Catalonia is highly relevant to the Russian political debates. See for yourself:

The case of Catalonia can be compared to Crimea: a local referendum, organized against the will of the central government. In contrast, when Kosovo was cut-off from Serbia in total illegality and without any kind of referendum the entire West gave this abomination a standing ovation. The Russians then issues stark warnings about the precedent this set and thereafter South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Crimea happened. Is the secession of Catalonia not the next logical step? Is there not a karmic beauty in the fact that Spain and the rest of the EU are now being hit by the very same demon they unleashed in Kosovo? There is a definite Schadenfreude for many Russians in seeing the pompous asses of EU politicians sitting on the red ants nest of separatism – let’s see how smart and “democratic” you guys truly are?! It is rather funny, in a bitter-sweet way, to see how ‘democratic’ policemen beat up peaceful demonstrators whose only “crime” was to want to cast a ballot in a box. A lot of Russians are now saying that Russia is now the only truly democratic and free country left out there. Needless to say, the way the Madrid government handled this situation further damage the credibility of the West, the EU and the entire notion of “civilized Europe” being “democratic”.

My feeling is that the way the central government handled this event alienated most Russian who are simply baffled by the utter stupidity and needless brutality of the police crackdown during the vote: what in the world were the cops trying to achieve?! Did they really think that they could prevent the vote? And what is the point in then denying that a referendum did take place? Or what about the praise on the police and its behavior? I have to say that for all my pro-Spanish biases, the way Madrid handled it all truly seems fantastically stupid and self-defeating to me.

Historically, the USSR was on the Republican side during the Spanish Civil war and there are still a lot of ties between Russia and Catalonia today. However, there is also a sympathy between Russia and Spain and the Russians understand that Spain is supporting any and all US policies towards Russia because it is a voiceless and totally subservient US colony. Still, a lot of Russian commentator did speak about Madrid’s “Fascism” in handling the events in Catalonia, and footage of anti-separatists screaming Francist slogans did not help.

Some Russians, however, mostly liberal, caution about supporting separatism movements in Europe because Russia herself in multi-national and because of the risk of the separatist fad coming right back to Russia. I don’t think that this is much of a real risk for Russia. Not after Chechnia. I just don’t see any region in Russia really interested in trying to secede from the Russian Federation. If anything, I see more potential for various region on the other side of the Russian border wanting to join Russia (Novorussia to begin with).

The question which divides a lot of Russians is this: is Russia better off with a strong EU because a strong EU might be more capable of standing up to the USA or is Russia better off with a weak EU because a weak EU weakens the Western ‘front’ against Russia? My personal opinion is that EU is doomed anyway and that a collapse of the EU would be a good thing for the people of Europe as it would bring closer the inevitable decolonization of the European continent. This suggests to me that while the eventual outcome of the current crisis is probably irrelevant to Russia, the fact that a crisis is happening is to Russia’s advantage.

I think that most Russians have positive feelings towards both Spain and Catalonia. The only clearly negative feelings I have seen over the past couple of days are elicited by the brutal and dumb way Madrid handled this crisis: most Russians are sincerely appalled at the violence and at the hypocrisy of the EU politicians. But other than that, the Kremlin’s position that “this is an internal Spanish issue” is probably supported by a majority of experts. Russia has nothing to gain by involving herself in this crisis and she therefore won’t do so.

Conclusion

Potentially, the recent referendums in Kurdistan and Catalonia have the potential to turn into the proverbial spark which will set off a major explosion. The Russians are aware of that risk and will do whatever they can to avoid such an outcome. Unlike the USA which thrives of crises, hence the overt support for the Kurds and the covert support for the Catalans, Russia’s “political model” (in the sense of “business model”) does not need crises at all, in fact the Russians dislike them intensively (yet another reason why the notion of a Russian invasion of any country, including in the EU, is just simply ignorant and plain stupid). There is a paradox here: the USA, whose military has not had a meaningful victory since the war in the Pacific, thrives on conflict, chaos and violence, while Russia, which probably has the most formidable military on the planet, seems to consider conflicts like a plague which needs to be avoided at all costs. In reality, there is no paradox here, these are simply to dramatically civilizational models which have fundamentally different visions of the kind of world they want to live in. Whatever happens in the future, the Russians will be observing these to conflicts with some trepidation, and they will hotly debate them. But I don’t see them trying to actively involve themselves in what is fundamentally not their problem.

estouxim on October 08, 2017 · at 12:38 am EST/EDT

Again I must disagree on several points.
I think you confuse the geographical with the political national sense. Do you know of any treaty, for instance, where a foreign power addresses the Hispanic kings as Kings of Spain, before the reign of Felipe V. Or of any document where any Habsburg monarch claims to be king of Spain? They do claim to be kings of “the Spains”, plural, not of Spain, singular. Why should that be if, as you claim, such polity already existed.
A cording to your reasoning a Neapolitan in the 16th and 17th century would in fact be an Aragonese, since Naples was a domain of the crown of Aragon. But I guess that, at the time, he would be considered an Italian, not because there was a polity named Italy, but because Naples is in Italy, in the geographical sense.

What is the difference between the “reconquista” (another myth, Ortega y Basset was absolutely right when saying that a reconquista that lasts 800 years can not be called such) of Portugal and that of Aragon? Because I can’t see any. Unless I’ve been reading revisionist history and Valencia, Murcia, the Baleares were not conquered by Jaume I de Aragon.
Portugal and Aragon expanded in the Peninsula at about the same time, as did Castilla.
That Portugal and Aragon expanded later one to the Atlantic and the other to the Mediterranean is another story, but there was, in the conquest-cruzade period, no difference between the 3.

The Spanish State did not react against nationalism, unless you consider that a bunch of treacherous, genocidal military commanders were the Spanish State.
It inherited the institutions of absolutism, and built on that foundation. As did the French State, by the way. Absolutism tried to kill diversity, liberal constitutionalism continued the effort. Neither really achieved it. It was, first, compulsory basic education, second, compulsory military service, and third and most important, mass media, particularly modern mass media, radio and tv, to nearly achieve homogeneity. But as things are, not even in France, where the effort was longest and possibly strongest, that aim was fully achieved, as the Breton and Occitan nationalist movements attest. How much that contributed to the regionalisation of the present French State I can only guess.
The Spanish Republic recognized diversity and enabled it, and it was the legitimate, constitutional and lawful power.
Should legality and legitimacy be followed all institutions of the Franco Regime, including the Monarchy, should be abolished. But that is another story.

You misunderstand me. I don’t despise Spanish nationalism, I have no horse on that race, as the saying goes. I merely analyse it and my contribution to this discussion is to set the record straight regarding it’s origins, since both you, F.MAN in the other thread, and a couple of anonymous claimed the 500 years old Spanish nationality as legitimation of your/their defence of the indivisibility of Spain, and simultaneously delegitimisation of Basque and Catalan national aspirations.
As I would set the record straight if someone, as some still do and once was official history and historiography, would claim that Portugal, my country, had any right to Angola, Mozambique, or Guinea on the ground that it had been there 500 years, “civilizing”.
If I would despise something it would be precisely the homogenisation I mentioned above.
Brassens sang it much better than I could ever write on his “Le Grand Pan”:

“Mais se touchant le crâne, en criant ” J’ai trouvé ” La bande au professeur Nimbus est arrivée. Qui s’est mise à frapper les cieux d’alignement, Chasser les dieux du firmament”

Since we seem to agree on the roots and timeline of Spanish nationalism, let’s see if we can agree on some facts of Catalan identity and history.
I would first say that the expansion of the crown of Aragon takes place after it is integrated by the County of Barcelona, that is, Catalonia. The main driving force of the Crown of Aragon, it’s expansion south and to the Med is Catalonia, it’s harbours, it’s resources.
Second, that by the time of Fernando el Católico, Aragon is the main power in the western Mediterranean, controlling and benefiting from it’s trade.
Third, that the dinastic union with Castilla and later with Portugal was smooth as long as it’s self rule and institutions were respected. So was by the way the situation with Portugal. The conflict arose when Felipe IV tried to rule without the consent of the Cortes. For this he lost the Portuguese Crown. Catalonia revolted, proclaimed a Republic and seeked the protection of the French king, just as Portugal seeked the support of England. He kept the crown of Aragon by compromising and swearing to respect Catalan laws and institutions, but lost to
the French transpyrenaic Catalonia.
Fourth, the dinastic crisis for the succession of Carlos II. Catalonia supports the Habsburg claimant (as does Portugal) Castilla and France support the Bourbon. The victory of Felipe V will result in the introduction of absolutism in the Peninsula and the end of the Kingdom of Aragon and it’s domains, effectively by military conquest.
Fifth, the carlist wars, it’s incidence on the Basque, Galician and former Aragon territories and the restoration of the Generalitat.
Sixth, the proclamation of the Catalan State, within the 1st Republic
Seventh, the proclamation of the Catalan Republic in !931
Eighth, the proclamation of the Catalan Republic in 1934

Are these events reflective of a united Spain, or of an unabated strive for self-rule and independence grounded on a unique culture, language and past achievements?
Portugal, through it’s 1640 revolt, regained it’s overseas possessions, expelled the Dutch and the French from Brasil and from Africa, at the cost, granted, of becoming a tool and subject to the whims of England. But we could presume to again be a great power for another 160 years.
Aragon, and particularly Catalonia, incidentally the ones that of old had some fetish in getting paired with the Holy Empire, saw the decadence of their Mediterranean power at the hands of the Habsburg. Irony of history.

Russia, as much as I know, is very similar to the Spain of old, pre-absolutism. It’s the only multinational, multicultural empire that was not destroyed by the Napoleonic hurricane and subsequent liberal constitutionalism. I might be wrong I don’t know much about Russian history, but the feeling I have is that liberalism had not enough time to destroy the old russian institutions, and that these evolved to and through sovietic times. That, I think is the reason the Russian federation seems so peaceful, the respect for the institutions and traditions of it’s different nations. The conflicts, preferably frozen, lie in the periphery, most of them due to the intolerance of nationalisms.

Anyway, Spain it’s not going anywhere, unless a cataclysm cleaves the Pyrenees and we go floating around the Atlantic, and even so, we will still be together, side by side if not intermingled. So if Catalonia and Euzkadi decide to quit the Kingdom of Spain, I don’t think much will change. It’s just a question of finding new arrangements.

Personally I am passioned by Iberia, (I prefer to call it so, Spain having been appropriated by a state, like America was by the Yankees, is prone to confusion) it’s landscapes, cultures, cities, peoples, languages, literatures, the tremendous creativity of it’s arts, the riddles of it’s history. Not to mention the food. The only other places I would consider living in, are some of it’s offspring.

Maybe one day the idea of Spain, or, better said, Las Hespañas, the old Spains and the new Spains in Europe, America, Africa and elsewhere can come together as equals, each with it’s own idiosyncrasies, without recriminations or paternalisms. As it could have been if the Habsburg didn’t try to bite more than they could chew, or if common sense had prevailed and instead of Carlos we had gotten instead his brother Fernando. I could never understand how a Dutchman that could hardly speak Spanish became King of Castilla Aragon, while a Spaniard, that could probably not speak German was sent to rule over the Austrian empire.

110 Comments

Cristián on October 05, 2017 · at 9:12 am EST/EDT

I am a Catalan-speaking Spanish citizen. Like more than half the people living in Catalonia, I want to remain a part of Spain. Separatist politicians have seized power only due to an electoral system that gives undue weight to the rural, least populated areas where anti-Spanish sentiment prevails. Daily life is very hard for Spanish-speaking people there: they are discriminated, their children are bullied at school, etc.
The only thing I have to say here is that Spain is one of the few EU countries that has not recognised Kosovo. You can ask the people in Kosovska Mitrovica (Косовска Митровица) how the Spanish Army behaved in front of KLA (ОВК) terrorists. They were of course immediately kicked out of the KFOR…
- Askari on October 05, 2017 · at 12:49 pm EST/EDT
  
  Thank you for giving a much more unbiased view about this catalonian issue than the western MSM normally display.
  
  Also about the spanish Army in Kosovo. I live in Spain and have had many long discussions with spanish soldiers which came back from their missions in Yugoslavia. All of them told practically a complete opposite story about that issue than the western MSM.
- Nikola S on October 05, 2017 · at 2:19 pm EST/EDT
  
  Still Spanish Army took part in attacking Yugoslavia in 1999, in fact Spanish planes were the first to bomb Belgrade. Just because Spain doesn’t recognize Kosovo today doesn’t mean anything, when they did everything they could to take it away from Serbia. Following that logic, Serbia should bomb Spain, give full material support for Catalonia and then not recognize Catalonia.
  - Melotte 22 on October 05, 2017 · at 4:39 pm EST/EDT
    
    Absolutely right. By bombing Serbia, Spain actually supported Kosovo independence.
    It was well known at the time that Kosovo Albanians wanted and fought for independence.
    I do not wish Spain end up having another civil war but the events can get out of control very fast.
    If any relief, Serbia will not bomb Spain.
    - Nikola S on October 06, 2017 · at 3:45 am EST/EDT
      
      Serbia will not recognize Catalonia either, because then Spain would recognize Kosovo, and Serbia doesn’t want that. On surface it looks like Serbia and Spain are allies, but when you look more into it, that’s not really the case.
      
      And neither Serbia, nor Serbs want Spain to end up in new civil war.
      - Serbian girl on October 06, 2017 · at 11:09 am EST/EDT
        
        Serbia WILL recognize Catalonia if both Madrid and Barcelona agree upon it. Kosovo is not Catalonia! There is no Kosovar / Kosovian language, nor Kosovar identity nor Kosovian history. Kosovo is Serbia and now has been taken over by Albanians with NATO help. This is not the case with Catalonia!
        
        Dolors on October 06, 2017 · at 12:42 pm EST/EDT
        
        Kosovo is Serbia, Catalonia is Spain, the language does not make us so different. Catalonia has never been an independent country and more than half of the Catalans want to remain Spanish. The social division is great.
        This referendum has only been voted by the independentistas, it summoned with the intention to provoke and the data that they give are false, there was no census, it was possible to vote 4 times the same person.
        
        estouxim on October 06, 2017 · at 11:25 pm EST/EDT
        
        Let’s suppose you are right, and the majority of Catalans don’t want independence, as the surveys seemed to indicate.
        I suppose the smart course of action would be to allow the referendum, indeed promote it.
        How do you then explain why Madrid tried to stop by all means available, when it would be more than predictable that such action would further inflame catalan nationalism?
        
        I’m looking forward to see new surveys, if anyone bothered to do any.
        
        One Earth on October 08, 2017 · at 12:13 pm EST/EDT
        
        Excellent point. I was still MSM during the clinton regime, so these comments are very educational to me. The comment section on this blog remains intellectual and instructive, ICH remains reasonably balanced but it is the same 8 people who comment overtime – reduced since registry requirement, and RT, well those commenters are all just plain silly with many trolls. So I applaud this section, the Saker and his community at large – well done to you all!!
- nazi-cats on October 06, 2017 · at 1:30 pm EST/EDT
  
  Cristian , very good . The catalan separatists discriminate against the majority of spanish speaking population , spanish language is forbiden in the schools and Universities ,of Catalonia and in the Administration of Catalonia in favor of the catalan language , a mixture of spanish anf french , which is of little use out of Catalonia , Catalonia does nor respect the biligualism of the people od Catalonia , discriminates against her spanish speaking 60% of the population .
  
  The ” pure ” catalans , with catalan family names despise the people with non catalan family names and consider then inferior . Catalanism is a form of nazism .
  
  I understand russian resentement towards the Spanish Governement , a member of NATO , who participates in NATO ” missions ” , but Russia should calm down and realice that the catalan separatists are the banderisti of Spain , very destructive people .
  - ScotchedEarth on October 06, 2017 · at 5:27 pm EST/EDT
    
    It’s the official position at least of Russia that they have no interest in encouraging Spanish separatists, as articulated by Maria Zakharova on September 28:
    ‘As for the so-called referendum on Catalan independence scheduled for October 1 by the Catalan authorities, as well as other unilateral initiatives of local legislators, we consider those in the context of the respective decisions of the Constitutional Court of Spain. In our relations with Spain, we derive from the unconditional principle of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of that country.’
    And on October 4:
    ‘This year marks the 350th anniversary of our diplomatic contacts. Our peoples are united by feelings of mutual sympathy and respect. Despite the unfavourable political circumstances, all the prerequisites are in place for Russia-Spain interaction to expand progressively across various areas. …[T]his is an internal matter of the Kingdom of Spain. We hope that the crisis will be overcome. Unlike many other states, we shared our principled assessments on the territorial integrity of Spain, the observance of the constitution and our thoughts on this issue before the referendum. It was the principled and open position of the Russian Federation.’
  - ToivoS on October 06, 2017 · at 7:31 pm EST/EDT
    
    If Spanish patriots like you consider the Catalans Nazis then I can see why the Catalan people want nothing to do with you
  - estouxim on October 07, 2017 · at 12:12 am EST/EDT
    
    So, if Catalan is mixture of Spanish and French, would it be fair to say that Castilian, sorry, Spanish, is a mixture of Asturian and Arabic?
    
    Since Finnish is of little use outside Finland, do you think that Finland should start teaching Mandarin instead?
    
    You mean that 60% of Catalonia population can’t speak Catalan? Or that 40% can’t speak Castilian, sorry, Spanish?
    - nazi-cats on October 07, 2017 · at 8:46 am EST/EDT
      
      Note to the commentator … please read saker moderation policy Saker’s statement highlighted in bold red …. You are welcome to criticize and even attack ideas, but not people. … your recent comments have failed to meet this standard and will not be posted … regards mod-hs
Lagopus on October 05, 2017 · at 10:07 am EST/EDT

Dear Saker,

I share your sentiment on how Turkey and Russia have shared interests, and how this is complicating Russian support for an Iraqi Kurdistan. But I am not convinced that USA are that thrilled about a new Kurdish state.

The taw between Russia and Turkey is much related to Erdogan and his presidency. USA has (most likely) helped or at least allowed an attempted coup against him, which means they are looking towards a post-Erdogan Turkey. To support Kurdish advances would be to discard all such plans and forever sever ties with Turkey. That is a drastic step to take.

I believe that USA played several horses in the Middle East after the Daesh plot against Assad, back-fired. USA are known to use chaos, but their goal is not chaos. They create chaos to achieve their goals. A Salafist state was not among them, but rather to use Daesh as gun-fodder and then instate a pro-US government in Syria, build whatever pipelines they think they need, and most important, get rid of the only Russian naval base in the Mediterranean. When Daesh suddenly turned on Iraq and were able to fund a large scale operation of the spoils, I think that USA had to get support wherever that was found. Except from Russia and the legitimate government of Syria, of course, because they were always the intended target. So, the Peshmerga were useful to put out the fire. USA had to give them free reigns to get help to drive back Daesh from Iraq, where USA didn’t want them. And I think that the Kurds have been exploiting this to increase their leverage for a negotiation where their goal is increased autonomy. The official signals from USA is that they do not approve of the referendum, but consider it illegal. It might be that those hash words are spoken in anger over a pawn who started to play a game of its own.

No one can support Kurdish independence, not without affecting or even losing their existing allies, one way or another. The sole exception is Israel, which has no allies in the region, and that would like to see a united Kurdistan that is weakening Iran, but also Turkey and Syria.

In my opinion, Russia are best served with an improved relationship with Turkey. They are NATO members, but as you say, that membership is not what it used to be. An improved relationship with Turkey is worth more than a secular Kurdish state as a bulwark against Salafistic influence in Iraq. (Assuming that it will soon be completely wiped out in Syria.) The potential in a Turkish-Russian alignment is much larger that a friendship with a weak Kurdish, landlocked state.

I think that Lavrov will find a way of both satisfying Turkey, and help the Kurds establish an self-government, and then manage to be on friendly terms with both. He is possibly the greatest diplomate in our age, serving the greatest statesman in our age.
- SantIago on October 06, 2017 · at 3:10 am EST/EDT
  
  Good comment Lagopus, but I dIsagree wIth a few of your poInts:
  1.- It Is true that the US does not have a chaos as a purposeful goal, but It Is theIr goal In the end sInce they have no clear objective except world hegemony, so chaos Is the unIntended forceful endgame.
  2.- you solved It yourself why the US Isn’t thrIlled about a kurdIsh state, the fact Is that they are and are pushIng for It below the”water lIne” It Is practically the only move they have left and they can please Israel at the same tIme. They lost the ME they know thIs they can stIll affect bIg change If there IS a kurdIsh state, wIthout IT they have no play at all. ThIs IS why they don’t have to sever all tIes, the Us Is known for backIng opposing players and then dIscardIng one of the players when It
  suIts them.
  
  Thanks SantIago
Nils on October 05, 2017 · at 10:18 am EST/EDT

In the text it is said that “former enemies can become partners – just think of France and Germany for example.”
Now, the recent piece by Ramin Mazaheri entitled “Why no Petroeuro” makes the case that the elite interests of France and Germany are in fact almost diametrically opposed.
Any input as how these views may be reconciled or some elaboration on why France and Germany may in fact have a stronger common interest than Mr Mazaheri outlines would be highly appreciated, as I am a little confused regarding this topic now.
- ChristineG on October 06, 2017 · at 1:52 pm EST/EDT
  
  Nils, I have read again Ramin’s article, and I don’t see anywhere that the elite interests of France and Germany are opposed: on the contrary, they are both eager vassals of the US/high-finance, one a bit more higher on one rung (Germany) than the other (France), one having been involved much earlier (Germany) than the other (France). But make no mistake, Macron and Merkel are on the same page. Therefore no Petro-Euro. It’s austerity all the way, baby!
Mikhas on October 05, 2017 · at 10:29 am EST/EDT

Thanks saker especially for the Iraqi part. I think Scott Humor’s article on Barcelona is more spot on and much more informed.

May i also suggest Crosstalks Maidan..,..Sorry…Catalan edition, Laughland’s part in particular:
https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/405607-catalonia-independence-peaceful-voters/
Vulgo Tosco on October 05, 2017 · at 11:17 am EST/EDT

Good analyse as allways Saker. Can You give me some opinion about this one? Am i right to be concerned? Thank You?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-04/will-brazil-be-next-hotspot-independence-movements
- Bruno on October 05, 2017 · at 3:37 pm EST/EDT
  
  Yes, we have a separatist moviment on south, wealthy states like Catalunia to Spain, but we have a very different situation here, first, we speak the same language, yes there are groups of germans, italians and polish that maintain european tradition, but they are not cohesive as its look like, the separatist are a minority without expression, I really cant see this movement gaining power, Brazil is now beeing controled by a group of nazi-imperialists-old-guys since a coup in 2016, we are in trouble since there, with no perspective to come to an end, but separatism is just unthinkable, even brazilian midia isnt covering this referendum here, its just irrelevant matter til now, and I dont think it will change unless something verry bizarre happens.
  - Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 5:45 pm EST/EDT
    
    Thank You Bruno. I thought this way too, but like a vet i’ll choose to wait cos the guys behind this kind of movement like mbl or this one specificaly até interessed in chaos all around and not only independence. I love Brasil and i know how his people love theyr country (one z or one s there make great diference). I realy hope that a truly nationalism would florish there cause the people of Brasil os realy awesome.
    
    Cheers
paul on October 05, 2017 · at 11:32 am EST/EDT

Crimean separatism, like separatism in Novorussia, seems unique in that it seems to be a response to a central government’s total loss of legitimacy. Of course this claim is always made, but it gains a lot of weight when a coup occurs, particularly in the case of the Ukraine coup, which was really the expression of a regional split.

Crimea is an even more peculiar case because Crimea was illegally forced to join Ukraine in the first place. As I understand the history of the USSR breakup, there was a lot of raging hypocrisy involved, where a region like Ukraine declared itself independent from the USSR on one hand, but refused to recognize the right of its own subregions to do the same on the other hand. What was good for the goose was not good for the gander it seemed. Georgia had the same problem. They wanted to rewrite the map, but others were to be denied that right.

I actually think that Novorussia would be part of the Russian Federation today if the people of the region hadn’t foolishly (according to polls) continued to cling to belief in united Ukraine long after western Ukraine had made it clear that they were only interested in a united Ukraine that was ethnically cleansed. I think the song by DJ Rae expresses this, expresses the sense of disillusion the folks of Donbass seem to have ended up with.

I think that separatism is a movement that needs to come home to roost in the EU and the US, but it seems unlikely at this point. Look at Greece. Why is Greece still in the EU? Of course most human beings want unity – ultimately most if not all of us long for global unity – but the how of it matters. Banking elites married to military elites seek global dominion, seek to create a global Huxley-Orwell state, with transhumanist aspirations. Is this the kind of global unity that we human beings want? God I hope not. How can the people of Greece fail to see that the EU is ruthlessly exploiting them? Is this the kind of European unity (a good idea in itself) that they believe in?

The one country that most needs to break up is the one that seems least willing to do itself and the world that favor – the US. Take away Empire and Dominion and the US has no unifying culture. Carter spoke to this problem decades ago and was laughed out of office for it. I guess people are still laughing. The only things Americans can agree on is that Greed is Good and Might Makes Right. Sure, we cloak our fundamental brutalism in various ways. Some do it with a thin veil of religiosity. Some do it with a thin veil of progressivism. Some are pretty naked about their brutalism (neocons). Hillary Clinton’s immortal words have still not been repudiated and can stand for what the true spirit of Americanism is: (‘we came, we saw, we murdered’).

I don’t believe Russia is any better, sadly. Russia has a much deeper and much more beautiful culture, but built on bigotry Removed. Please read the Saker moderation policy. Mod

Back to the US, though. We do have in America many strands of what could become a beautiful and inspiring national culture. But instead of facing up to our incredibly violent history, we continue to replicate that history. Every problem we face meets a violent solution. Every initiative for social ‘betterment’ is called a “war”. Paddock showed us Who We Are, but we still refuse to see it. Until we take a good long hard and painful look in the mirror, we have no chance of redeeming our society. Of course I am not saying that Paddock did a good thing. What he did was no better than a reaper drone shooting up a wedding party and then double tapping it. All the mega-violence of all kinds (including the economic kind) that we indulge in is wrong and evil. Paddock was a symptom though of the evil we all Share With Him. Please stop using caps. Mod

We need to have the spiritual strength, the sheer guts, to honestly face who we have been as a nation and who we are and we need to start building a national culture based on care and reconciliation. Barring that, we should be the first nation to break up into regional chunks. Maybe that would mitigate the harm we do some.
- Robjo on October 05, 2017 · at 3:14 pm EST/EDT
  
  I agree with your points until your analysis of Russia. Russia is not build up on bigotry. Homosexuality is legal in Russia and has been longer than the US. The law that one speaks about so much in the west, is only about propaganda to minors. It is a law to protect minors from western NGOs. These western NGOs will go to lowest level to gain control of other countries for the US uber alles. They took over Ukraine with neonazis. Hatred – for all things Russia – is a thriving industry in US ukraine and not in Russia. Russia is a country of a hundred or more ethnic groups, many have their own republics, oblasts, etc. to keep their culture and language. How is that bigotry?
- Lagopus on October 05, 2017 · at 5:34 pm EST/EDT
  
  I do disagre in you assesment of Russia. I am not Russian, my wife is, but we do not live there. Yet I know enough to know that you are wrong.To say that Russia is buliding on “bigotry” simply is not true!
  
  Sure, some Russians may be bigots and there are hatered there as everywhere. But, was it bigotry that enabled the government to make a setlemebt with the separatists in Checheney? A setlement that has led to a massive flow of governmental funding to the rebellious region? Is ir bigotry that makes Russia align with the BRICS countries? Was it with hate that Russia rebuilt the relarion with Turkey, a year or so after Turkey shot down their fighterjet, an act of war?
  
  And there is only sensible laws protecting children. A lesson learned by looking at the ‘progressive” West. Laws that protect without denying anyone the oportunity to live as they please.
  
  Russia is different. The Orthodox Church has emerges as a moral foundarion. A foundation that is dissapearing in the West and being replaced with selfcentred materialism. Small wonder that signs of decay is starting to show every where. (In Norway we just have had a series of articles about children that are posting nude pictures of themselves on the web. Some as young as 11!) Russia seems to be learning of oue mistakes. Not only in legislation, but in a moral sense that is lost in the West.
  
  Let’s shut this conversation down. It is off-topic and focus on what the Saker has written. Any further comment will go to trash. Mod
- Jim of Olym on October 05, 2017 · at 8:45 pm EST/EDT
  
  Paul, I agree with your assessment of the USA. We would be better off, individually and world wide, if we were split into at least five or six different naions. I myself belong in Cascadia (northern California, Oregon and Western Washington.) We could be a great little country like Switzerland!
  - Anonymous on October 06, 2017 · at 12:58 am EST/EDT
    
    @ Paul
    
    Fully agree with you concerning the degeneracy going on in the “enlightened West” and its descent into a stinking swamp of vice, the product of an ideology of contestation on everything about society, call it identity politics, equality rights, Cultural fake-Marxism, political correctness and so on and so forth taught by the Jewish Frankfurt School during its sojourn in New York and the Trotsy gibberish garbed as Leftism. Yet, the greatest inequality driving this degeneracy is left untouched and nothing is done to bring down the abysmal political and economic inequality infecting the paragon of Western Capitalism, the USA, more than any other country one cares to name.
    
    Amongst that moral and social degeneracy is the drive for the politicalization of sexual orientation and equalization of the sexes – a purely private issue as trivial as “the size of the Chancelor’s foot”. I was born and raised in a religious and conservative society and in my street there were a number of “deviants”, among them a poofter, a hunchback, a dwarf, two madmen, petty criminals, kept women and others which we, children, jeered and made fun of for sport. But that was it. There was no mistreatment, exclusion or discrimination and each took the abuse by the children in good humour and grace as a sort of amusement. In fact the poofter was a jolly good fellow and in summer he used to delight these cruel children with water melons in summer (he was a fruit street vendor); there was no resentment. This is a lesson that in a long-established and sane society there is room to accommodate deviance within without the all-powerful state stomping in and impose laws over personal likes and dislikes.
Matthew on October 05, 2017 · at 11:46 am EST/EDT

I follow the events closely in Turkey and listen to some of the debates on Turkish TV. One needs to understand the internal dynamics of Turkey in order to be able to predict the near future and make some judgments about a future Kurdistan. Firstly, the myth of Erdogan being all-mighty and being an absolute dictator is far from truth. It is mostly a western propaganda in order to demonize him the same way what they did for Saddam of Iraq and Gaddafi of Libya. Erdogan was put into power by the US in the first place. The evidence is abundant. Just go back to his speeches and actions of a few years ago. I have just watched one recent interview with Dogu Perincek. He is an important figure in Turkish politics today. He is the leader of a small party and does not have a popular support overall. However his party is quite influential and therefore he now appears quite often (almost daily) on different Turkish channels. He and his party represents the “Kemalist” and the “Les Jeunes Turcs” (or the Young Turks) flank of politics, which has a deep historical imprint on late Ottoman history and the current republic (called Ittihat ve Terakki in old Turkish). His views are secular, modernist and he supports the concept of State Nation. He is staunchly Kemalist (Mustapha Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkish Republic) and his views are very close to Alexander Dugin and Putin in terms of Euroasia. He believes in close friendship with Russia, Iran, Syria and Iraq. His party members have quite a large amount of retired military generals and today a large portion of the military high rank seems to be supporting his ideology of Euroasian integrity. In yesterday’s interview he brought a recent publication, a recent book published by the General Staff of Turkey. He wrote a twenty page foreword in this book. In this book, it says that the military is almost one hundred percent cleaned from American influence, thirty thousand officers of all ranks have been either dismissed or imprisoned following the coup d’etat attempt in Turkey in 2016. This is a huge amount and a huge deed for any army. Judging from this, there could be two conclusions. Firstly, there is little US influence left on Turkey’s most important institution, namely the army and secondly D.Pericek is very close to military circles in Turkey. Also we can make another assumption. If the Turkish army is firmly Kemalist and secular, then there is no way that they will obey someone like Erdogan, who is a fanatical muslim extremist to say the least. Lately Perincek boldly said that Erdogan in not running Turkey anymore but Turkey is running Erdogan. This very sentence is quite important as it implies lots of things. Not to mention, that Perincek was jailed in 2008 by Erdogan and his then-buddy Fetullah Gulen (basically a CIA agent- for more info just google Sibel Edmonds). If Erdogan was a real dictator, nobody could have been able to utter such words in the open. Obviously this guy (Perincek) yields some power and quite a lot if you ask me. Also keep in mind that Perincek is the guy who is meeting personally with many leaders of the Middle East including Assad of Syria and top officials in Russia and Iran. Just listen to Alexander Dugin regarding what he says about him. Dugin endorsed him many times.
Coming back to Kurdistan, he said that Kurdistan will never be allowed by the regional powers, not only by Turkey but also by Syria, Iran and Iraq. He also mentioned that Russia is not welcoming an independent Kurdish state which is basically a second Israel. The conclusion is that the middle eastern powers will do anything including joint military operations or a direct war with the US in order to prevent a Kurdistan. A second Israel is simply an existentialist threat for all of them. Russia has no choice but to support the alliance of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey. Russia cannot afford to turn his back or look the other way, as it would be suicidal in terms of geopolitical interests. Lastly, I think Erdogan is currently just a detail of little importance and Turkey will follow its historical survivalist instincts no matter what. Perincek said that Erdogan will be out in two years (2019 presidential elections) or before. I would rather listen to him closely. Up to now, whatever he previously said came true.
- Bacchante on October 05, 2017 · at 7:01 pm EST/EDT
  
  I am Turkish and it is true that Dogu Perincek goes back a long time in Turkish politics, often changing positions in politics. The Ulusal channel and the newspaper Aydinlik are known for their closeness to Dogu Perincek’s Patriotic Party. He makes appearances on Ulusal channel and occasionaly writes in Aydinlik. I must say that he reads the internal dynamics quite right and he is very close to retired Kemalist generals, but he is not a good predictor and in my opinion his predictions are heavily shadowed by his staunch patriotic views and he holds no influence in political decisions of Turkey as his party gets no credible share of votes. His jailment was largely due to Fethullah since Perincek allowed/participated in a series of shows on Ulusal channel that exposed the inner workings of Fethullah’s organization in police, jurisdiction, military, etc. the Turkish army is in a state transition at the moment and it is difficult to say what position it will hold in the upcoming years. But I am quite sure that they will have second opinions driving their tanks out in the cities after the failed coup after seeing a major civil opposition.
  
  It is true that Turkey has been following its survivalist instinct in its true meaning. Rather than choosing patriotic elites who has caused nothing but chaos up to 2000s, this instinct is trusting in Erdogan for him trying to build a stable Turkey in the last 15 years. A great deal of people realize that the Kemalist ideas and parties have failed them miserably over the course of the years before Erdogan. This is actually why Erdogan stayed in power for almost 15 years and he accumulated more and more power as every attempt to remove him by various elites have failed (there are several of those either overtly or covertly). Bear in mind that no elections could remove Erdogan up to now and none is likely to do so, he won almost every single election (either truly or by force) he participated in – he will run Turkey for many more years to come.
Coos Palmboom on October 05, 2017 · at 12:04 pm EST/EDT

What is missing in many commentaries on the events in Catalunya, is that the police crackdown was not so much stupid as perhaps deliberate. The police could easily have prevented voting with the force they had at display. How many well-armed guys do you need in front of every door? Instead, they hit a small number of polling stations with extreme violence. So the aim was not the stop the voting from happening, it was to energize the Catalans’ negative feelings towards Madrid. Now the question is, why? Why is the Spanish government pushing Catalunya out of Spain? This is not in Spain’s interest. Who’s bidding are they doing? This all feels like a giant psy-op to me. It sometimes even seems the Spanish and Catalan leadership are in cahoots. I live in Barcelona and I support my neighbours’ desire to be treated respectfully by Madrid (which, despite all the rethoric and so-called constitutional guarantees has never been the case), but I fear for what may come next.
- Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 5:26 pm EST/EDT
  
  Coos Palmboom:
  
  A similar thought occurred to me last night. In the comment section of the first article on the Catalonian referendum I had written it down.
  
  Whilst people are distracted either by “evil” Madrid with it’s efforts to keep Spain united or by “evil” Barcelona wishing to be independent, nobody talks anymore about Podemos.
- Dolors on October 06, 2017 · at 12:54 pm EST/EDT
  
  I have long thought the same thing
- Rodenas on October 06, 2017 · at 7:40 pm EST/EDT
  
  I may agree a hundred percent with this idea, as opposite sides of some fabricated crisis are controlled by the same instigator forces, but the spanish government is really inept and short sighted. The situation is highly explosive cause the spanish political forces in general and the party in the government in particular are not prepare at all levels to confront this historical and tragic challenge.
Dolors on October 05, 2017 · at 12:24 pm EST/EDT

Like Cristián I am Catalan-speaking.
The corrupt Catalan government has acted for years out of the law, laws they do not like do not meet, because the road map they follow is that of provocation. There are many false images of the violence of the Catalan referendum.
I do not defend the government of Madrid or the government of Barcelona, I defend that the people of Spain do not separate.
I do not know if it is better for the EU to collapse, if the Global Oligarchy wants a Federal Europe from small and weak countries, they may want a controlled collapse.
- Ant. on October 05, 2017 · at 1:40 pm EST/EDT
  
  There are similar ructions in Australian State vs Federal rights.
  
  The Western Australian government is currently moaning that they pay more to the federal government in GST taxes (via mining royalties) than they receive, and this is clearly unfair. Therefore they deserve more.
  
  They don’t seem to understand this is the nature of a Commonwealth. The rich states support those that don’t have the same natural or manufacturing resources.
  
  In Australia, manufacturing has largely collapsed. We are now whores, flogging off our natural resources for the privilege of buying processed goods from overseas at an inflated rate. There is nothing sensible about that, other than our glorious governments get more mining royalties to pay fort the next set of bribes at the next election, making government more and more expensive.
  
  That’s a fail. Major fail.
  
  So now we have the states that own natural mining resources, and have no benefit of an advanced manufacturing sector, paying much of the way of a politically correct federal government. And they are wondering why.
  - Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 6:03 pm EST/EDT
    
    Ant.:
    
    It doesn’t matter from which angle you’re looking at the ongoing events (in different countries), there’s one common factor: money. Those who want to separate are accused of being selfish and greedy – keeping all their wealth for themselves. Those who want to keep unity are accused of being selfish and greedy – “exploiting” the rich regions by taxes.
    
    The saying Money makes the World go round contains more truth than people want to realize. Whenever there are elections, the majority will vote for the benefit of their wallets. Too many are worshiping money (and the “masters”, the money changers / rich) nowadays whilst religion took a back seat.
    - Serbian girl on October 05, 2017 · at 7:38 pm EST/EDT
      
      When Slovenia seceded from ex-Yugoslavia they used the same economic argument as Catalonia. They claimed they were “rich” and that the rest of the country was bringing them down. Anyone who believes this needs to read up on the economic concept of a “captive market”. When Slovenia seceded, they actually separated themselves from their clients in the former Yugoslavia to whom they sold their manufactured goods. Suddenly they were competing on the EU market against highly competitive German products. I think they managed to claw back some of their market share in the former Yugoslav republics since 1999, however their national debt has quadrupled and they were on the verge of requiring a bailout a la Greece a few years ago. Perhaps Catalonians need to ask themselves that they may be rich precisely because they are part of Spain?
    - oldnik007 on October 05, 2017 · at 8:16 pm EST/EDT
      
      i read recently somewhere a statement of one of the leading catalan ‘instigators’…
      
      ”israel will be our banker….” when we get independence.
      
      says it all for me.
      - Uncle Bob 1 on October 05, 2017 · at 8:39 pm EST/EDT
        
        Even “if” someone said that. How would that be any different than it is today. Zionist Jewish interests are in charge of world banking across Europe,right now in 2017. So what you are saying is,because “someone” said “something” that is common practice now. That “convinces” you not to like them. I fail to see any sense in that. And suspect you are only using that as a ploy to attack the Catalans. Are there “really” people that will fall for that. Sadly,there probably are. Though I’m not one of them.
  - eagle eye on October 05, 2017 · at 6:40 pm EST/EDT
    
    Ant,
    
    That low level discontent has been present in OZ for its entire history. WA has a very short memory. There have been periods when WA was a beneficiary of Federal money that kept it afloat.
    
    The reality is that in order to survive the states need each other. Climate alone drives that fact.
Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 12:34 pm EST/EDT

Unlike the USA which thrives of crises, hence the overt support for the Kurds and the covert support for the Catalans, Russia’s “political model” (in the sense of “business model”) does not need crises at all, in fact the Russians dislike them intensively (yet another reason why the notion of a Russian invasion of any country, including in the EU, is just simply ignorant and plain stupid). There is a paradox here: the USA, whose military has not had a meaningful victory since the war in the Pacific, thrives on conflict, chaos and violence, while Russia, which probably has the most formidable military on the planet, seems to consider conflicts like a plague which needs to be avoided at all costs. In reality, there is no paradox here, these are simply to dramatically civilizational models which have fundamentally different visions of the kind of world they want to live in.

There was actually a movie about a “fictional” American intervention in a Bolivian election, the title of which aptly sums up the USA: Our Brand Is Crisis.

In fact, perhaps, it would be more honest to say that America’s brand is Chaos.
twilight on October 05, 2017 · at 12:44 pm EST/EDT

All you need to know is that Tony Blair, ignoring ***two hundred*** years of united British history, and against the wishes of the scottish people themsleves, imposed an ‘independence’ referendom on Scotland. The sole idea was to teach every potential independence movement across the Earth that the ‘mother of parliaments’ considered giving selfish disaffected groups the right to ‘pick up their ball and go home’, even if that inevitably meant war and mass desruction and death for no gain, was a noble and correct expression of ‘Human freedom’.

Some will say “what about Crimea”- but that wasn’t the same thing at all. Crimea was an admin decision by the old Soviet state, which would ***never*** have lumped Crimea with Ukraine if it had predicted the consequences. Comparing Crimea with Catalonia is like comparing an apple with a moldy old sock.

Crimea ***had*** to leave when machinations of NATO had reached a deadly state for the population. Catalonia, on the other hand, is a bunch of greedy selfish idiots who want to grab all their wealth for themselves- rather as if Bill Gates and the rest of the tech billionaires procliamed that they should no longer have to pay taxes- cos sharing ‘their’ riches with the rest of Humanity could never be to their advantage.

Most of Humanity’s worst wars have been crafted on the back of independence movements- movements the people involved never asked for nor wanted. Rabble rousing was always the tactic to ‘turn’ the mob for the minutes needed to claim the mob was on the side of the rebellion. And then the hidden hand arranged for atrocities so the mob could never again stand down- see Syria, Libya etc for examples.

Putin, for all his faults, doesn’t think for one second that people like the Catalonians should be allowed to get away with their selfish destruction of a viable nation like Spain.

Look, on TV in most nations- again thanks to Blair’s new rules in the UK, and the example this set other nations- the dribbling masses are bombarded with ‘get rich quick’ schemes that involve suing everyone for anything. So people fake illness on holiday in the UK, fake being hit by a car, fake whiplash- and never care that the costs from such Blair encouraged criminality fall upon other ordinary people the social system has to serve. Thus, for example, insurance rates for the young drivers rocket to such a degree, and astonishing number of them have no choice but to drive illegally- and thus the vicious circle is completed.

Telling people in a rich city region to turn their region into a medieval city state is demonic- yet to too many people even here it seems ‘logical’. Setting neighbour against neighbour is another perfect road to war- eventually a World War. Team Tony Blair attempts to activated as many roads to war as possible- hoping ordianry people will follow at least some of them unthinking.

And the EU has ***nothing*** to do with Catalonia, save for the foolish notion some suckers in Catalonia will have that should they gain independence, they can keep out Tony Blair’s sea of migrants from Blair’s war zones. TheEU isn’t a nation but a means to manipulate people by seemingly tying the hands of their leaders. “it ain’t my fault, gov, it’s the fault of those darned EU eurocrats” sez the rulers of each member state- and the hard of thinking fall for this. And the EU is a vacuum sucking up ex-soviet states and ‘converting’ them. But as a political entity, the EU has never actually existed- just an illusion. Power never slipped by one iota from the leaders of France, Germany and the UK.

If Catalonia succeeds, then this play of Blair will continue to snowball. If Catalonia fails (as every one of us should pray happens), then Blair’s Scottish ploy will probably then fizzle out.

PS being selfish is ***not*** a Human Right- think about it.
- Carnyx on October 05, 2017 · at 7:53 pm EST/EDT
  
  All you need to know is that Tony Blair, ignoring ***two hundred*** years of united British history, and against the wishes of the scottish people themsleves, imposed an ‘independence’ referendom on Scotland.
  
  The warcriminal Tony Blair had nothing to do with the referendum, he left office in 2007 before there were any moves to hold one. The Scots elected the pro-independence SNP to the Scottish parliament and govt in both 2007 and 2011, in 2011 the SNP had promised a referendum if elected and the Scots voted for them. In 2013 the SNP made a deal with British PM David Cameron to hold a binding referendum in 2014 which the Indpendence side narrowly lost. Cameron had agreed to the referendum because he was confident the ‘No’ side would win by around 70% to 30% they were shocked that 45% voted to leave the UK. Research found most No voters didn’t vote No because they held any emotional attachment to Britishness but because they feared economic problems, they were also overwhelmingly elderly, the pro-independence side won in every age group under 50. After the referendum the pro-independence SNP won 93% of Scottish westminster seats almost wiping out the Unionist parties and were re-elected to the Scottish Parliament too. There are now moves for a second referendum to be held in the next 4 years, this will come whatever happens in Catalonia.
  - Anonymous on October 06, 2017 · at 12:02 pm EST/EDT
    
    All you need to know is the Mission Statement on Alive and Well Blair’s website :
    
    The Tony Blair Institute for Global Change aims to help make globalisation work for the many, not the few. We do this by helping countries, their people, and their governments address some of the most difficult challenges in the world today.
    - Carnyx on October 06, 2017 · at 7:04 pm EST/EDT
      
      Blair campaigned against Scottish independence, he contributed some of his personal wealth to the Better Together campaign and spoke out against independence, and again late to Scottish Labour to defeat the SNP. The Better Together campaign was stuffed with Blair’s followers. Although he didn’t do a lot of personal campaigning in Scotland because he is so massively unpopular.
      
      http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-tony-blair-joins-no-campaign-and-defends-devolution-1-2697713
      
      Twighlight is so wildly misinformed he has placed Blair in the opposite camp from that which he truly held! Below is a list of endorsments for both sides in the Indyref, as you can see Blair and his whole crew were against Independence.
      
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_endorsements_in_the_Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014
      - Anonymous on October 07, 2017 · at 7:52 am EST/EDT
        
        “The Better Together campaign was stuffed with Blair’s followers”
        
        What could possibly go wrong ?
  - ScotchedEarth on October 07, 2017 · at 7:32 pm EST/EDT
    
    Let me correct you there, Carnyx, it being a subject dear to my Scottish heart.
    ‘The Scots’ didn’t elect the SNP, a minority of our electorate did (some neither Scottish nor British):
    In the 2007 SE, the SNP won 47 of the HR seats courtesy of a mere 16.25% of the Scottish electorate.
    In 2011, they won 69, courtesy of only 22.18% of our electorate.
    The separatists’ loss in the IndyRef was not so ‘narrow’—a solid 10.6% margin (and the ‘45%’ equates to less than 38% of the electorate). A not unimpressive result given that Cameron allowed the SNP to put their thumb on the scales by allowing 16 year old schoolies and the SNP’s precious EU immigrants to vote, and despite a lacklustre BT campaign, anaemic to the point of invisibility.
    And while the Snappers did go on to win 56 of Scotland’s 59 seats in the 2015 GE, this was courtesy of barely a third of Scotland’s electorate (35.52%).
    However, the 2017 GE saw the SNP bleed votes out of everywhere. They lost almost half a million votes along with 21 MPs; even in the seats they held, their majorities were slashed.
    One prominent Snapper saw his 9,641 majority reduced to 21.
    At Glasgow East, the SNP saw a 10,387 majority reduced to 75.
    At Glasgow South West, their 9,950 majority was reduced to 60.
    At Fife North East, their previous majority of 4,344 was reduced to 2. 2! T-W-O, TWO!
    In total, SNP votes were down 32.79% from 2015. From representing barely a third of Scotland’s electorate in Westminster, the SNP now represent less than a quarter—24.51%.
    In contrast, the Conservatives saw their votes increase 74.6% making them the second party in Scotland in both votes and MPs. Maybe not in the rest of Britain but June 8 was a Tory night in Scotland—and as Ulster’s Arlene Foster (DUP) remarked, it was a ‘good night for the Union’.
    
    Separatism in Scotland is dead in the water. #GSTQ
    - Carnyx on October 11, 2017 · at 12:07 am EST/EDT
      
      Separatism in Scotland is dead in the water
      
      You wish, the decrepit UK isn’t going to get any better than it is, the indyref saw a majority of Scots born voters support Yes and that’s only going to grow. Independence is inevitable, the question is “when” not “if” and that’s exactly why the yoons are so opposed to a second indyref, hardly a sign of confidence (that and voting “No” makes then feel bad about themselves inside, they don’t like being asked the question). In the long run the Yoons opting to unite behind the tories as a unionist vehicle is a big strategic mistake, a short term gain for a long term loss because the Tories will never get a majority in Hollyrood and it associates the Union with a deeply unpopular party in Scotland which will drive the many Scots who hate the tories, but are cautious about independence into the Indy camp.
B.F. on October 05, 2017 · at 1:01 pm EST/EDT

There is little doubt that this movement for Catalan independence is foreign operated. It is just a little too well organized to be a local affair. As far as I can see, we have in motion the destruction of sovereign European states, either by a flood of false “refugees”, or by physical break ups, like in Spain. If Catalonia should indeed secede, this will give an impetus to others, (Scotland in the UK, Belgium, Italy, etc.). Europe in the 21st century is looking at destruction. As far as I can see, only the termination of the EU can save it, as the EU has brought nothing but austerity, mass immigration, curtailment of sovereign powers of sovereign states, and even demands that GMO foods be introduced. What is also remarkable is the fact that Western Europe is looking into an abyss, while Russia is on the rise. Even the King of Saudi Arabia has payed a visit to Moscow, signing trade deals, and in the process asking for the Russian S-400 missile system, which no doubt will be a nasty shock to the US Military Industrial Complex. We have a remarkable contrast between developments in Western Europe and those in Russia and, ofcourse, in China.
- ioan on October 05, 2017 · at 3:24 pm EST/EDT
  
  In my thinking, the European Union was not a bad idea at all, but as with any good newborn idea which promotes peace, security and better life for all nations in that Union, it had hit’s enemies from the beginning. Those enemies have made a very subtle infiltration in the high offices of the EU, the EU parliament and the member states leading nations. Some of them – as noted by twillight above are well known and they are doing their “job” openly, others – very influential ones – are doing their part behind the scenes. It is their “work” to discredit the whole European Union all together by creating divergences within the states members and between the state members. What does that mean : in the EU itself, there are two opposite “parties” who are at war with each other. Metaphorically, we can say the dark and the light side. One side – the dark one – has the monopoly in the media and a huge pert of the banking system. The other part has the backing of private sector of industry and a smaller part of the banking sector and the civil and military administrations. The fighting is raging already within and what we witness, are the waves. Both sides want to have a greater influence on the people, but the “dark side” still has the upper hand, mainly thanks to the low level of knowledge in the masses who still believes Mr. Candy-Dandy.
  - B.F. on October 06, 2017 · at 7:03 am EST/EDT
    
    The EU was never a good idea. As we all know, everything revolves around money. The EU Central Bank is in the hands of private bankers. Who benefits and who usually never loses ? Private bankers, who else.
    - ioan on October 06, 2017 · at 11:00 am EST/EDT
      
      I still think, the idea was good, just the way of implementing it failed in many ways : it was supposed to be something like a confederation of independent states, preserving the specificity of each country, their choice of conducting internal policy without interfering from a central EU. The EU Central Bank should have been a common state own bank, each member state having it’s contribution according to their level of economic power/capacity. Not all states are a strong economy , therefore they need support from the others more stronger, that’s why the state own Common Central Bank. Of course, this idea must have been compromised by the private bankers – the same one from Wall Street and City of London – even if they are in Frankfurt too, nothing which has to do with a resemblance of real socialism is being allowed. The question of why, is our daily task here to discuss it : the Empire.
- Euskal Tell on October 05, 2017 · at 5:38 pm EST/EDT
  
  Saying that the Catalan revolt, if that is the proper term, is a foreign-run enterprise is to be questioned. The desire for separation from Spain , at least in the case of Catalonia, goes way back. The last serious attempt was in 1934 but put down in the traditional Spanish way with the fascist army.
  I am Basque, Basque-speaking and made to speak Spanish. I can also speak Catalan. While I recognize that many people in the Basque Country and Catalonia wish to remain in Spain, they should realize that there are many who do not wish to remain in Spain. In the case of the Basques, I deeply regret the actions of ETA and took part in protests against them but many of the Spanish dismiss the severe repression of our language and culture under Franco as mere anecdotes. They often dismiss it by saying all Spaniards suffered under the Francois dictatorship.
  Spain is a basic failed state. It’s debt has skyrocketed despite the awful austerity dictated from Europe. The Basque Country and Catalonia could do well without Spain but not the other way around. We wish the Spaniards well. Nice people but lousy administrators. Nevertheless, we want a divorce. There are strong feelings here in the periphery in favor of a split. The newspaper El Pais is accusing Russia of being behind the Catalan revolt. In any case, we will eventually break away because Spain is sinking. They never invested much in education and other things while us Basques have. Bye, bye Spain.
  - Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 5:58 pm EST/EDT
    
    Euskal Tell:
    
    It’s debt has skyrocketed despite the awful austerity dictated from Europe.
    
    You nearly got it right: Euskal It’s debt has skyrocketed because of the awful austerity dictated from Europe.
  - Javier on October 06, 2017 · at 5:05 am EST/EDT
    
    ¡Venga ya! Come on txiki! Relaxatu mutil, you are as Spanish as everyone else, it’s written in your identity card. Some are Basque, some are Catalan, some are Galician, some are Castillian and so on and so forth… Spain is not Castilla. You should know better. I know Sabino Arana the xenophobe supremacist protofascist damaged many brains and continues to do so, he told you and others that the Basque are pure, good-hearted, hard-working, God-chosen and many other things. And that the other Spaniards are not… Of course, then you get Arzalluz and, on another registry, the ETA. Very short-sighted bigots. You talk about the economy and services in the Basque country, and they’re truly great, but it’s also the result of the hard-working other Spaniards who emigrated to the sparsely populated Basque valleys in the XIX and XX centuries, it’s also the result of a economic development policy adopted by… surprise!!!… Franco among others, it’s also the result of your tax advantages permitted by the rest of Spaniards (which you should never have had because of the 3 Carlist wars), etc. You always remember what fits your narrative… some Basques should try to be a bit less selfish and realize that Spain needs them as they need Spain. As it has always been historically.
    - B.F. on October 06, 2017 · at 7:07 am EST/EDT
      
      That is true. Span and Catalonia need each other. The point is that those who advocate secession know plenty about history (which they interpret as it suites them) but know almost nothing about economics and finances. If Catalonia should become independent, a time will come when they will discover that they cannot meet the expenditures of their country, becoming easy prey to private bankers and their usury methods. Then they will regret what they did.
      - Serbian girl on October 06, 2017 · at 10:22 am EST/EDT
        
        They may not regret it, BF, as long as they don’t delude themselves they will be richer.
        
        3 of the 6 former Yugoslav republics: Slovenia, Montenegro and Macedonia seceded without major incident. The other 3: Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia could not due to territorial/ border/ minority/ issues and war broke out. (I don’t include Kosovo as it was not a republic).
        
        Does Spain have territorial issues their regions? If not, why not let Catalonia and Basque country choose… ?
        
        Javier on October 06, 2017 · at 2:22 pm EST/EDT
        
        Hi Serbian Girl.
        
        Take no offense on what I will write, but you have to know that Yugoslavia and Spain are totally different cases.
        
        Yugoslavia was created in 1918 as an arragement between the slavic peoples of the Balkans after the demise of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The defeated Ottoman Empire had not a say either regarding muslim minorities in the territory of the newly created Yugoslavia which ended under the leadership of the oldest and biggest nation within the loose federation, Serbia. Many in Western Europe saw Yugoslavia as an artificial state, but viable as it was a federation. Unfortunately, playing on the antagonism (to use a soft word) between the two largest peoples (Croatia and Serbia), some in the West, especially in Germany, though that dismembering Yugoslavia accusing Serbians of all evils was a good idea. Many in the West rejected this despite the MSM brainwashing about the “evil” serbs, but couldn’t do anything to prevent it (as usual only a minority of people understand conflicts properly).
        
        Spain is a totally different story. Our state is one of the oldest in Europe, dating back at least to the end of the 15th century. The Basques have been integrated in it since the 12th century (when the Basque lordships joined Castilla) and the Catalans since the 15th century (when the Crown of Aragon, to which they belonged, joined the Kingdom of Castilla). They participated from the very beginning of modern Spain (we could also speak about Hispania or the Visigothic Spain but it would be too long for my purpose) to the development of the State. There were civil wars, as there have been in other ancient nations in Europe (France, the UK, Poland, or even Germany or Italy) when the interests of some noblemen, classes or territories clashed, but the unity of Spain was kept because it was something out of question for all parties. Modern nationalism (XIX century romantic nationalism) openly challenged this assumption for it is essentialist: nations must be ethnically (whatever this means) and culturally “pure”, economically and politically different than their neighbours. The nation is a construct which needs the construction of the absolute “other” to survive. This kind of sociopathic nationalism is the one that prevails in Spain still today, in the Basque country, in Catalonia and to a lesser degree in other regions of Spain. So, to conclude, the issue in Spain is an ideological one: the nationalist minorities of some regions want to impose their rule over the majority of non-nationalist people in their regions, and moreover, impose their will over the sovereign people of Spain to which they have always belonged.
        
        As sick as it sounds.
        
        estouxim on October 06, 2017 · at 10:32 pm EST/EDT
        
        I’m allways amazed at the effects of the state propaganda conveyed by the teaching of official History.
        
        Javier really believes that his State is one of the oldest in Europe even though the formation of the Spanish State can be dated to the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars with the loss of America, chrystalized with the yankee conquest of what was left in the caribbean and the pacific and finally set in stone with the victory of the military coup in 1939.
        Each of these events required high doses of chauvinism, a reinvention of identity, the call to a glorious past to mitigate the loss of power, territory and income, of having to conform to it’s new ranking in the european powers landscape.
        And the labor pains in the long delivery of this new creature? The liberal revolution, the Carlist wars, the 1st Republic, the class strugle and the anarchists, the constant political instability, the Rif war, Semana sangrienta, and finally the great showdown of 36, from which emerged victorious the great Generalissimo, the direct heir of Their Catholic Magesties, who instituted the state propaganda I mentioned above.
        
        The fact is, the first time someone claimed to be King of Spain was Felipe V, in the first quarter of the 18th century, who introduced absolutism to the Iberian Peninsula with the Decretos de Nova Planta.
        
        Contrary to what Javier claims, the Crown of Aragon never “joined” the Kingdom of Castilla. They were subjected to the same monarch, Juana “la Loca” and her descendents of the Habsburg dinasty, as was, 2 generations later, Portugal. But all the kingdoms and domains in the Iberian Peninsula, and in the Mediterranean kept their institutions, fueros, Cortes, and self-rule.
        
        Contrary to what Javier thinks, the unity of Spain is geographical, not political. Because, even if Felipe V claimed to be King of Spain, he was never King of Portugal and Portugal is, and obviously has always been, a part of Spain, Hispania, Hespaña. As is Gibraltar that was never a part of Felipe V domains. As a side note, the above mentioned Generalissimo graduated from the military academy with a thesis on how to invade and conquer Portugal.
        
        And even if it may come as a surprise for Javier, the History of Spain, the Iberian Peninsula has, for a little more then 2000 years, been the constant contradiction between centripetal and centrifugal forces, concentration of power followed by it’s breakdown.
        
        To sum it up, the Nation-State of Spain is a very recent contraption that reached it’s epitome in 1939, in the slaughterhouse of the civil war. It is now in the process of dissolution, of transformation into something else, even if the Generalissimo assured that “everything is tied up and well tied up” “todo esta atado y bien atado”. The contraption needed, evidently, nationals, hence the invention of the Spaniard, conceived as an older identity, legitimated by a mythical history, in opposition to the very much alive regional, linguistic, cultural identities.
        
        Javier is right in one point, a similar process of mythical legitimation occurs in the other nationalities, in different degrees, there was, after all, an era of nationalisms. But he is blinded to the reality of his own nationalistic position, which, incidentally, is much feebler, grounded at it is exclusively in mythical history, whereas Catalan, Basque, even Galician or Andalusian nationalisms are grounded on much more solid historical linguistic and cultural grounds.
        
        The best we can hope for is that the transformation occurs peacefully, but the heirs of the Generalissimo have, unfortunately, a thin veneer of civility, under which lies the barbary that made possible the slaughter of 36-45.
        
        Para Javier, unas estrofas del maestro Sabina
        
        Mil años tardó en morirse,
        pero por fin la palmó.
        Los muertos del cementerio
        están de Fiesta Mayor.
        Seguro que está en el Cielo
        a la derecha de Dios.
        
        Cautivo y desarmado
        El vaho de los cristales.
        A la hora de la zambra, en los grabieles,
        Por ventas madrugaba el pelotón,
        Al día siguiente hablaban los papeles
        De celia, de pemán y del bayón.
        
        Javier on October 07, 2017 · at 7:30 am EST/EDT
        
        Hi estouxim,
        
        I have to say I’m not realley amazed at the relative success of the strange alliance between regionalism (micro-nationalism) and federalism (micro-globalism), hiding behind the cover of critical thinking (the “good” historical revisionism).
        
        However you’re right in some of your points, especially when you write about the historical (cyclical) tension between centripede and centrifuge forces in the Iberian peninsula over the last centuries (I wouldn’t date it back to the Romans or the Visigoths anyway). As for the birth of the Spanish State, you can actually set it before the beginning of the 18th century “de facto”, but only after the Napoleonic wars “de iure”. Nevertheless, historical sources reflect how foreign nations referred to the people under the Hispanic Crown rule in the 15th, 16th and 17th as “Spaniards”, not as Basque or Aragonese or Galician. The only exception is Portugal, which is a totally different story as they made their “Reconquista” on their own after creating their own kingdom in the Middle Ages (1128), breaking away from León, not even Castilla… Therefore there is a historical continuity that dates back to the end of the Middle Ages, even though the modern Spanish State only exists since the early XIX century.
        
        The richness of this country is precisely the fact that it’s diverse and it has allowed (unlike the French) to remain diverse most of the time, but with the underlying Spanish sentiment. The emergence of modern nationalism as an ideology in the XIX century and the decline of Spanish power challenged this fragile, yet beautiful, balance.
        
        The Spanish State reacted to nationalism with the same nationalism but more power (that’s why Franco won the war…), running against the traditional political organisation of Spain, which was restored in its modern fashion in 1978 with the Spanish Constitution (unity in diversity). This fundamental law establishes the indivisible unity of Spain but provides for an extensive de-centralization of power (to greater extents than in federal states like the USA or Germany). Nowadays Spain is an asymmetrical federal state under the veneer of a unitary state, and the Monarch is just the guarantor of this unity (that’s why separatists are republican and many republicans support separatists -they need each other to achieve their political goals).
        
        To be clear, estouxim thinks that although nationalism it’s based on “mythical legitimation”, he considers that Basque or Catalan nationalism is more legitimate than Spanish one because grounded on “more solid historical, linguistic and cultural grounds”. This is his rational to despise Spanish nationalism and tolerate/like/approve Catalan, Basque, Galician or any other (regional and anti-Spanish of course) nationalism, regionalism, localism or whatever destroys the idea of Spain.
        
        First, it is false that they have “more solid grounds” as they all belong to the same civilization (hispanic world) from the very beginning, that is, since Roman Hispania times; Second, it is self-defeating to defend ethnocultural nationalism at this point in history as the nationalist narrative always needs an absolute “other” to survive and this provokes conflict and ultimately agression; Third, the different territories, languages and cultures of Spain are what make Spain as a realm. Spain is an anomaly in Western Europe, it does not fit in the traditional definition of “nation”, it is certainly a state though. In many aspects Spain is still and Empire, like Russia is, very rich in diversity but also with a strong feeling of belonging to the same Spanish soul.
        
        This idea of Spain, which is inclusive, is what Spanish nationalism and Basque, Catalan, Galician, etc. nationalisms have tried to destroy, because they’re exclusive by definition. The idea of Spain live inside most people who have really understood what Spain is about. Unfortunately, many Spaniards have tried to adopt imported models of nation-building from abroad (Western Europe, France in particular) that do not work in Spain and could end in the breaking-up of it. Nationalist education (especially in the perpherical Spain) continue to feed the beast, with the result we observe… but eventually the idea of Spain and common sense will prevail. I’m sure.
        
        estouxim on October 08, 2017 · at 12:38 am EST/EDT
        
        Again I must disagree on several points.
        I think you confuse the geographical with the political national sense. Do you know of any treaty, for instance, where a foreign power addresses the Hispanic kings as Kings of Spain, before the reign of Felipe V. Or of any document where any Habsburg monarch claims to be king of Spain? They do claim to be kings of “the Spains”, plural, not of Spain, singular. Why should that be if, as you claim, such polity already existed.
        A cording to your reasoning a Neapolitan in the 16th and 17th century would in fact be an Aragonese, since Naples was a domain of the crown of Aragon. But I guess that, at the time, he would be considered an Italian, not because there was a polity named Italy, but because Naples is in Italy, in the geographical sense.
        
        What is the difference between the “reconquista” (another myth, Ortega y Basset was absolutely right when saying that a reconquista that lasts 800 years can not be called such) of Portugal and that of Aragon? Because I can’t see any. Unless I’ve been reading revisionist history and Valencia, Murcia, the Baleares were not conquered by Jaume I de Aragon.
        Portugal and Aragon expanded in the Peninsula at about the same time, as did Castilla.
        That Portugal and Aragon expanded later one to the Atlantic and the other to the Mediterranean is another story, but there was, in the conquest-cruzade period, no difference between the 3.
        
        The Spanish State did not react against nationalism, unless you consider that a bunch of treacherous, genocidal military commanders were the Spanish State.
        It inherited the institutions of absolutism, and built on that foundation. As did the French State, by the way. Absolutism tried to kill diversity, liberal constitutionalism continued the effort. Neither really achieved it. It was, first, compulsory basic education, second, compulsory military service, and third and most important, mass media, particularly modern mass media, radio and tv, to nearly achieve homogeneity. But as things are, not even in France, where the effort was longest and possibly strongest, that aim was fully achieved, as the Breton and Occitan nationalist movements attest. How much that contributed to the regionalisation of the present French State I can only guess.
        The Spanish Republic recognized diversity and enabled it, and it was the legitimate, constitutional and lawful power.
        Should legality and legitimacy be followed all institutions of the Franco Regime, including the Monarchy, should be abolished. But that is another story.
        
        You misunderstand me. I don’t despise Spanish nationalism, I have no horse on that race, as the saying goes. I merely analyse it and my contribution to this discussion is to set the record straight regarding it’s origins, since both you, F.MAN in the other thread, and a couple of anonymous claimed the 500 years old Spanish nationality as legitimation of your/their defence of the indivisibility of Spain, and simultaneously delegitimisation of Basque and Catalan national aspirations.
        As I would set the record straight if someone, as some still do and once was official history and historiography, would claim that Portugal, my country, had any right to Angola, Mozambique, or Guinea on the ground that it had been there 500 years, “civilizing”.
        If I would despise something it would be precisely the homogenisation I mentioned above.
        Brassens sang it much better than I could ever write on his “Le Grand Pan”:
        
        “Mais se touchant le crâne, en criant ” J’ai trouvé ” La bande au professeur Nimbus est arrivée. Qui s’est mise à frapper les cieux d’alignement, Chasser les dieux du firmament”
        
        Since we seem to agree on the roots and timeline of Spanish nationalism, let’s see if we can agree on some facts of Catalan identity and history.
        I would first say that the expansion of the crown of Aragon takes place after it is integrated by the County of Barcelona, that is, Catalonia. The main driving force of the Crown of Aragon, it’s expansion south and to the Med is Catalonia, it’s harbours, it’s resources.
        Second, that by the time of Fernando el Católico, Aragon is the main power in the western Mediterranean, controlling and benefiting from it’s trade.
        Third, that the dinastic union with Castilla and later with Portugal was smooth as long as it’s self rule and institutions were respected. So was by the way the situation with Portugal. The conflict arose when Felipe IV tried to rule without the consent of the Cortes. For this he lost the Portuguese Crown. Catalonia revolted, proclaimed a Republic and seeked the protection of the French king, just as Portugal seeked the support of England. He kept the crown of Aragon by compromising and swearing to respect Catalan laws and institutions, but lost to
        the French transpyrenaic Catalonia.
        Fourth, the dinastic crisis for the succession of Carlos II. Catalonia supports the Habsburg claimant (as does Portugal) Castilla and France support the Bourbon. The victory of Felipe V will result in the introduction of absolutism in the Peninsula and the end of the Kingdom of Aragon and it’s domains, effectively by military conquest.
        Fifth, the carlist wars, it’s incidence on the Basque, Galician and former Aragon territories and the restoration of the Generalitat.
        Sixth, the proclamation of the Catalan State, within the 1st Republic
        Seventh, the proclamation of the Catalan Republic in !931
        Eighth, the proclamation of the Catalan Republic in 1934
        
        Are these events reflective of a united Spain, or of an unabated strive for self-rule and independence grounded on a unique culture, language and past achievements?
        Portugal, through it’s 1640 revolt, regained it’s overseas possessions, expelled the Dutch and the French from Brasil and from Africa, at the cost, granted, of becoming a tool and subject to the whims of England. But we could presume to again be a great power for another 160 years.
        Aragon, and particularly Catalonia, incidentally the ones that of old had some fetish in getting paired with the Holy Empire, saw the decadence of their Mediterranean power at the hands of the Habsburg. Irony of history.
        
        Russia, as much as I know, is very similar to the Spain of old, pre-absolutism. It’s the only multinational, multicultural empire that was not destroyed by the Napoleonic hurricane and subsequent liberal constitutionalism. I might be wrong I don’t know much about Russian history, but the feeling I have is that liberalism had not enough time to destroy the old russian institutions, and that these evolved to and through sovietic times. That, I think is the reason the Russian federation seems so peaceful, the respect for the institutions and traditions of it’s different nations. The conflicts, preferably frozen, lie in the periphery, most of them due to the intolerance of nationalisms.
        
        Anyway, Spain it’s not going anywhere, unless a cataclysm cleaves the Pyrenees and we go floating around the Atlantic, and even so, we will still be together, side by side if not intermingled. So if Catalonia and Euzkadi decide to quit the Kingdom of Spain, I don’t think much will change. It’s just a question of finding new arrangements.
        
        Personally I am passioned by Iberia, (I prefer to call it so, Spain having been appropriated by a state, like America was by the Yankees, is prone to confusion) it’s landscapes, cultures, cities, peoples, languages, literatures, the tremendous creativity of it’s arts, the riddles of it’s history. Not to mention the food. The only other places I would consider living in, are some of it’s offspring.
        
        Maybe one day the idea of Spain, or, better said, Las Hespañas, the old Spains and the new Spains in Europe, America, Africa and elsewhere can come together as equals, each with it’s own idiosyncrasies, without recriminations or paternalisms. As it could have been if the Habsburg didn’t try to bite more than they could chew, or if common sense had prevailed and instead of Carlos we had gotten instead his brother Fernando. I could never understand how a Dutchman that could hardly speak Spanish became King of Castilla Aragon, while a Spaniard, that could probably not speak German was sent to rule over the Austrian empire.
        
        Javier on October 08, 2017 · at 9:02 am EST/EDT
        
        Hi estouxim,
        
        Thank you for your well-informed comment. I agree in many points. You’re right when you say that the Spanish Monarchs (Habsburgs) calle themselves “Kings of the Spains”, plural, as there were different polities within their possessions. Notwithstanding, inhabitants of the Iberian peninsula under the rule of the Habsburgs are called “Spaniards” since the 16th century at least… In a geographical, but also political sense (Naples, Flanders, Burgundy weren’t really Spain ever neither geographically nor politically, and the contemporary general opinion acknowledged this clearly).
        
        Then you list a number of revolts as proof of the “unabated strive for self-rule and independence grounded on a unique culture, language and past achievements” of Catalans (we should first agree on what Catalans are… for they are an historical product extremely diverse. Forget about monolithical Catalan identity, that’d be essentialism). Those revolts existed indeed but they were motivated by very different causes (economical, political, dynastical…). In addition to that you seem to forget such revolts have always failed, that is, the Catalans have always accepted to remain in the Spanish realm, usually after negotiations that would give them priviledges they considers rightfully theirs. It has been so because Catalonia’s soul is that of a merchant, mediterranean, pragmatical people (which is ok, I don’t judge it), not that of a warrior, indomitable, resilient people. That’s why they’re relatively rich… This time around will be the *exact same*, remember my words.
        
        I’m a also in favour of an Iberian polity, whatever the form is, where everyone feels confortable. But, as you said regarding Russia, I’m afraid “conflicts […] lie in the periphery, most of them due to the intolerance of nationalisms”. And particularly so because the 1978 Spanish Constitution provides for an extensive de-centralisation that amounts to almost independence for some regions. The only competencies they dont have is national defence and foreign relations (officially, for they have some “embassies” and private lobbyists abroad anyway…). Ok, and the capital of this covert federal state is Madrid, true. That’s the distance between what they have now and full independence.
        
        Now that we went to great lenghts into the historical/legitimacy/emotional debate, let’s come back to earth and dip into the legal debate (which is intertwined with the legitimacy one, it only depends on how you define the “people” or the “sovereign”). Everyone knows the Catalan authorities (which are in power with the thinnest majority that can be, with a minority in votes -election 2015) have been breaking the law, the regional and the national one, for the last years. The 2017 referendum was illegal, as was the voting in 2014. It broke the principle of sovereignty of the Spanish people enshrined in the 1978 Spanish Constituion voted *directly* by the sovereign, the Spanish people. I must bring your attention at the fact that people living in Catalonia approved it with 90’5% of yes voting…
        
        This question is never adressed but it’s the foundation of our modern democratic, post-Francoist, coexistence. We shouldn’t turn a blind eye on it because many won’t understand and accept it, leading to violence sooner or later.
        
        I hope we find a solution. We are all brothers and share a common way of living in old Iberia. It’s time to unite, not to break-up.
    - Euskal Tell on October 06, 2017 · at 9:56 am EST/EDT
      
      As readers can see from little Javier’s pique, he prefers to resort to insult, typical of Spanish nationalists of his ilk.
      Saying that the Basque Country was built thanks to Spanish laborers is akin to saying that America was built thanks to Mexican labor. In part, it is true, in both cases, but the question is why wasn’t Deep Spain built by Spanish workers in the same way as the Basque Country or Mexico built by Mexican workers just as they have worked in the US? The simple answer is the environment, milieu, the attitude of the entrepreneurs.
      Spanish nationalists ( Franco’s side in the SpanishCivil War were called Nationalists by the way) love to poke fun at the founder of Basque nationalism, Sabina Ariana , a product of 19th Romanticism that made way for nationalism as we know it. He said incredibly outrageous things, just like Lincoln in the US or even Kipling in the British Empire. Suffice it to say that he provided a red pill to the Basques who came to realize that their culture was just as good as the Spaniards’. No great writers , of course, but a vibrant culture worthy of keeping up.
      The Basque Country is not rich because of tax advantages but because of hard work, something Spanish nationalists know nothing about. Why is Burgos or Segovia or Cuenca such poorer than Gipuzkoa? Is it just taxes? I think not. All Spanish-speaking countries in the world are basket cases, including their precious Spain. Nice people, disastrous economies or social situations. It is because of their system, way of organizing.
      Can you imagine Australia being colonized by Spaniards. It would have become several countries not unlike Argentina.
      For now, my ID card and passport are Spanish, imposed as it is, but I know the day will come when a Basque passport will become reality.
      Basque reality is different from what Javier says (Javier is a Spanish corruption of eastern Navarrese Basque Xabier, literally New House, by the way ). There are Basque patriots with Spanish surnames , Chinese faces, black Dominican blood who speak flawless Basque and who love their country (Basque Country). That is our reality, not 1895 where Javier/Xabier wishes to remain. Good bye, Spain
      - Javier on October 06, 2017 · at 5:10 pm EST/EDT
        
        Lasai hartu mutil! Que te embalas, campeón…
        
        A couple of things before I start my case: I’m not a Spanish nationalist (if he describe by that a Francoist, or an ethnocultural supremacist) + I didn’t insult the Basques as a whole, only the bigots Sabino Arana, Xabier Arzalluz and the infamous ETA.
        
        Now let’s speak about history. First, the Basque provinces (Vizcaya, Guipúzcoa and Álava) are very different, especially Álava, which is much more similar to Navarra and the North of Castilla in every single aspect, not only landscape and economy, also traditions and mentality. Also relations with neighbouring provinces. Therefore, it’s a fact that the people populating the Basques provinces are themselves very different to each other. Second, the Basque provinces had an economy ranging from average to poor compared to the rest of Spain until the end of the 17th century when iron was discovered in the mounts of Vizcaya. Bilbao was a small city until very late (in 1902 it had 85000 inhabitants). Economy only started to flourish during the 18th century (Compañía Guipuzcoana de Caracas) thanks to a trade monopoly given by the Spanish crown!!! LOL The trade money added to the fortunes that some Basque immigrants made in the Americas contributed to the establishment of a small banking industry, which was to become essential when British inverstors started pouring money and know-how in the Basque ironworks during the Industrial revolution (in Spain it came first to the Vizcaya because of the iron mines) in mid-XIX century. This means that the environment had something to do with the economic development, but that has nothing to do with the province being Basque or Spanish or Mongolian, it’s just a coincidence. Then our Basque friend says it’s “the attitude of the entrepreneurs”, the Basque ones, because of their “Basqueness” are better than the Spanish ones… no txiki. First of all because they’re as Spanish as the rest, and second because they were told what to do by the Dutch and English that put their money in their Vizcayan assets…
        
        Now your comtempt for Burgos, Segovia, Albacete and the rest of “interior” Spain. Well, the people from these and other “interior” provinces moved to the coastal provinces (not only Vizcaya) during the XIX century for many reasons, mainly economical ones, but also because of the improvement of health care which made population grow at a higher pace than economy (and therefore the surplus had to emigrate elsewhere). And that’s when Sabino Arana (not Sabina Ariana) got mad when he realized that his little catholic green world would change forever when people from the inner lands started to arrive in important numbers. Thus the xenophobic and protofascist outbursts in his writings, that put into context, we can call romantic nationalism (so you don’t get that hurt)… The problem is that this ideology has impregnated a sizeable minority of people living in the Basques provinces (mainly Vizcaya and Guipuzcoa).
        
        The big money that was made in the Basque country thanks to foreign and national investments, national labour (mostly from inner Spain), was invested wisely in many cases and contributed to the overall prosperity of the Basque provinces. Essential to that was the tax advantage given by the State during all the (imported) industrial revolution period, as was essential the fact that the heroic “gudaris” fled to Cantabria during the civil war and surrendered in 1937 (they fought less than one year) allowing the heavy industries to survive, as was essential Franco’s economic development plan which favoured the Basque provinces, especially developing the third province, Álava, which had very few industries before 1960.
        
        Since 1979 the Basque Country is a region (autonomous community) which enjoys all the self-governing competencies that you can imagine (healthcare, taxation, education, police etc.). Of course, they don’t have embassies and they don’t have an army. They have the most developed self-governance in Europe, possibly the world. It’s the result of a historical process.
        
        The “elites” of this region have used this autonomy given by the State (as the competencies the region has are “devolved” by the State, in a top-down manner) to destroy the State from within and brainwash the population in its territory. Sometimes in subtles ways and sometimes in very violent ones. The ETA was only the tip of the iceberg, as nationalists have been harassing, signaling and excluding those who wouldn’t comply with their demands or just have different political opinions. This has been going on until very recently and many people has been forced (social pressure, threats) to leave the Basque region in the last 40 years. This has a name, ethnic cleansing, but no-one talks about it anymore.
        
        Now, mutil, we’ll see what happens in the future. Maybe one day you have a Basque passport, but for that you have to continue brainwashing people about the “betterness” of being a hard-working, good-hearted, God-chosen people, only for speaking Basque. The best of all is that an overwhelming majority of the people you dream to brainwash are the very people who came from inner Spain 100 or less years ago. Arzalluz the racist wouldn’t approve.
        
        Now get a rest.
        
        Agur mutil.
        
        PS: Don’t get mad as to burn your Spanish ID because then you will have to get a new one XD
  - Iberian on October 07, 2017 · at 6:06 am EST/EDT
    
    Euskal tel ,
    
    don`t drink so much Txacoli , the basques are the iberians , who populated all the southwest of Europe : the ibero-ligur-etruscans , who were romanized by Rome . Probably the Iberians came from the middle east to southwestern Europe one thousand years before Christ , so we are oriental , hehehe .
    
    Look at the bronze of Botorrita ( Zaragoza ) of the I Century AD written in basque and in latin , it is located in the provincial Museum of Zaragoza , and it proves that they spoke Basque in Zaragoza in the times of Christ ( but do no not pretend to conquer Aragon , eh ? ) and that latin was being introduced by the romans in Zaragoza at the time . Basque was spoken in the mountains of present Huesca and Lerida till the VIII or IX Century .
    
    But it seems that present Guipuzcoa was never completely romanized , what hapenned man ?
Perimetr on October 05, 2017 · at 1:24 pm EST/EDT

Hello Saker,

Your viewpoint on the situation in Catalonia seems diametrically opposed to that of Scott Humor, as evidenced by his recent sitrep “Maidan in Spain” /maidan-in-spain-and-some-new-dog-whistles/

Humor states that a Catalonia takind orders from the US would allow “the US to close the Mediterranean Sea for the Russian fleet on its route from the Baltic Sea to its base in Syria. . . . By taking over the control of Catalonia, Washington and also, probably, Tel-Aviv and Brussels will control not only Spain, but also the North African trade and migrants and shipping routes in and out the Mediterranean Sea.”

Plus the desire to block Russian gas sales : “A strategic gas pipeline is to be built through the Catalan Pyrenees, linking the Iberian Peninsula with France and Central Europe. The Midcat project aims to reduce Europe’s dependency on Russian gas by 40%, diversifying the sources of supply. The pipeline should be operational by 2020..”

Do you disagree with Humor’s assessment? Or are you in agreement, but just reporting on what is being publicly discussed in Russia?
1 on October 05, 2017 · at 2:18 pm EST/EDT

(…) a collapse of the EU would be a good thing for the people of Europe as it would bring closer the inevitable decolonization of the European continent.

I do not really understand this point. Are there any articles (for beginners) elaborating on this topic ?
- RR on October 05, 2017 · at 6:06 pm EST/EDT
  
  EU is a US colony. It’s simple.
- Uncle Bob 1 on October 05, 2017 · at 8:33 pm EST/EDT
  
  A perfect example of “hasbara” here. Take something pretty much commonly talked about. And that a person “should” be able to think over for themselves. And then ask for “more information”,which then tries to side track discussion. A very common zionist tactic.
Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 2:27 pm EST/EDT

Catalonia is also a Zionist project. It is a dry run for other ‘independence’ votes in other countries e.g. Russia. It also serves Israel’s interest in weakening and dismembering the EU, now that the ‘migrant crisis’ scam seems to have faltered. Watch out for ‘independence’ calls in Siberia for example.
James lake on October 05, 2017 · at 2:39 pm EST/EDT

Saker,

Are you going to give an analysis of the visit of Saudi Arabia?

It makes me uneasy that Russia is rolling out the red carpet to the funders of terrorists, who have been imposing their extreme version of Islam on the Muslim world.

Their school textbooks spread Wahhabism destabilizing countries ranging from Russia to Mali

Look at what they do in Syria where Russians die.And what they are doing to Yemen.

Doesn’t this give a message to young muslims in Russia that Wahhabism is okay?

Why don’t they keep relations at a diplomatic level ? Friendly but no more?

Today I read that Russia is selling them the s-400

I give up trying to understand the kremlins thinking Is money all that matters?
- Zena on October 05, 2017 · at 7:44 pm EST/EDT
  
  James Lake
  
  “Doesn’t this give a message to young muslims in Russia that Wahhabism is okay? ”
  
  How on Earth could you infer that?
  Russia talking to countries doesn’t mean it agrees with anything they say or do.
  Russia talks to everybody. Think of the turnaround achieved with Turkey. If Russia can convert Saudi Arabia’s active support for the terrorists into a less active support and do some oil deals and sell weapons which help incentivise cooperation on the terrorist front, that is a plus for the middle east and Russia.
  
  In fact talking to potential adversaries is very important because if the mammoth Russian efforts in this area had been mishandled, Russia could have found itself facing a very major conflict with multiple NATO countries, something it has skilfully avoided whilst yet helping Syria to successfully win the war.
  Quite a feat really.
  
  “Today I read that Russia is selling them the s-400”
  
  And? Don’t you see James that now, both Turkey and Saudi Arabia have decided to buy a weapon system whose main characteristic is it’s ability to defend these countries from US air attacks. The US cannot cope with countries defying it’s diktat but the number of countries who are, is growing.
  The real question has to be – Now why might Turkey and Saudi Arabia consider air attacks by the US to be a real possibility, a possibility so real they spend billions to defend against it?
  - Павел (Paul) on October 05, 2017 · at 11:26 pm EST/EDT
    
    Zena, you are a critical thinker … thanks for your last paragraph … you have answered some of my own questions.
s.a. top on October 05, 2017 · at 3:42 pm EST/EDT

The most crazy thing is that there is nothing wrong with holding a referendum it is just freedom of speech.

This violent crackdown is a crackdown on freedom to express your opinion.

When the law gives no power to this referendum it can be declared null and void by a judge in a court.

The people expressed their opinion, the law declared it has no democratic power, end of story.

But why the violence?

The elite is in fear they imagine their power slipping out of their hands.

Ofcourse this exposes spain and the eu for being nondemocratic, a true democracy can not exist.

True democracy is the majority of the people decide always every time, the pope might be elected king or the color yellow might be banned, nazism might revive etc.

Democracy is the majority oppressing the minority.

Ofcourse this is too dangerous for the elite and sitting powers.

Therefore they have created fake democracy you vote for your politcal campaign hero and then he decides 4 years for you and breaks all the promises he made without punishment.

Stop voting in a fake democracy, voting is keeping the beast alive.

Many people fall for the propaganda that russia or north korea is less democratic then say france or usa its propaganda.

Every nation is a dictatorship in all kind of varieties, adding a voting mechanism doesnt change that fact, even in north korea they vote but always for the leader, even in the usa they vote but always for the 2 big parties and the deep state keeps the power anyway
Blue on October 05, 2017 · at 3:54 pm EST/EDT

Turkey’s “toxic” policies against Cyprus and Greece reciprocate Greece’s toxic, indeed racist, policies against Turkey and Cypriot Turks.

Samson’s attempted genocide of the Turkish Cypriot population led to Turkey’s legal and justifiable intervention in Cyprus. Turkish troops remain on the Island per the tri-partite agreement, and will remain until the two communities on the Island come to an equitable political agreement.

Personally, I believe there are only two options: a confederation of two states, or union of the north with Turkey where the TRNC becomes an autonomous province of Turkey, responsible for everything but defence and foreign policy. The latter is preferable.

Otherwise, your analysis is fine as usual.
No to EU - yes to sovereignty on October 05, 2017 · at 4:19 pm EST/EDT

A couple of important features in Russian-Turkish relationship has to be addressed as well.
Namely tourism and arms deals.
First Russian tourists are interested in Turkey and are not so easily scared off like Western tourists. Turkey is internally a volatile country and there will always be more or less terrorists threats against tourists so Russian clients have been and will be essential to Turkish tourist business.
Secondly: Even when Turkey is a NATO member, Russians are ready to sell S-400 to Turkey. I can imagine that there have been discussions of other arms deals as well.
Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 5:02 pm EST/EDT

The Saker:

The Catalonian referendum is all the Russians fault. Have a look for yourself:

http://www.nachdenkseiten.de/upload/bilder/171005_02.jpg

(Right now I’m wondering if the WaPo is able to make any money itself at all or if it’s just some pet project financed solely by Bezos.)
Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 5:44 pm EST/EDT

The Saker:

The case of Catalonia can be compared to Crimea: a local referendum, organized against the will of the central government.

Both situations seem similar, but they’re different. Whilst the government of Madrid is legitimate, the government of Kiev wasn’t. Remember? On 22 February 2014 73% of the Ukrainian government voted him out of office. The law would’ve required more than 75%. At the time of Crimean referendum no real legitimate Ukrainian government existed.
- WizOz on October 06, 2017 · at 4:26 am EST/EDT
  
  Thanks for bringing this point home.
  I was surprised that the debate over Catalonia’s independence was couched in terms of ‘Antifascist, anti imperialist Catalans’ vs. ‘Francoist Spain’.
- Shevek on October 06, 2017 · at 7:36 am EST/EDT
  
  There is a saying here in Spain: “Aquellas lluvias trajeron estos lodos”, meaning “those (past) rains brought these (present) sludges”. Its meaning is similar to the English saying “He who sows the wind (Kosovo) shall reap the storm (Crimea, Kurdistan, Catalonia, etc…)”, but in a more pessimistic, not so epic, tone.
  
  Incidentally, the (then left-winged, aka PSOE) Spanish government did not (and have not yet) recognize the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. Thus, Spain tried not to sow those winds, but is apparently reaping part of the storm, anyway.
  
  The 1999 bombing of Serbia took place during a really obscure period in Spanish politics, when Mr Aznar was Prime Minister. You probably also remember the infamous March 2003 Azores meeting, right?. The Spanish society was against the country’s active participation in both conflicts and, in general, it is against direct involvement in any armed conflict. In the 2011 intervention in Libya, For example, Spain only participated in air control and maritime surveillance missions.
  
  Regards
  - Anonymous on October 08, 2017 · at 6:05 pm EST/EDT
    
    Shevek:
    
    Thank you for providing me with the information about the Azores meeting. I didn’t remember this particular event. I’m looking at all the events from the German side. Although I’m aware that manipulation by MSM dates back a long time I hadn’t been aware of the full extent until the events in Ukraine unfolded with the Maidan.
    
    Your last paragraphs shows that Spanish citizens had been smarter than Germans – or at least not as brainwashed. Whilst the majority had been against the participation of the upcoming Iraq war, I’m not that sure about the intervention in Yugoslavia. The German press had been in full propaganda mode in 1998/1999, so that even I got fooled and thought that a “humanitarian intervention” may be the best way to stop that horrible war. With Spain and its citizens it’s noteworthy to remember that Spanish courts indicted and incarcerated some of the most criminal persons of former South American military dictatorships. This wouldn’t have happened in Germany. Some German companies (for example Daimler and VW) “allegedly” worked together with anti-union forces in Argentina and Mexico. “Allegedly” they’re responsible for union members and people close to unions to have vanished. German Journalist Gaby Weber has created some excellent documentaries (in Spanish, English and German) dealing with this topic (check her youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0vFIgkGrbmfxKVhZ2hgMeg/videos). It’s also remarkable that Spain kept to the procedure of providing other nations with fuel (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/26/spain-russian-warships-refuel-aleppo-bombing-ceuta-syria).
    
    I don’t know of the exact goals of the the independence movement and if this could be beneficial for the future. Right now I’m contemplating about divide et impera. Would Catalonia and rest-Spain still adhere to the idea of refueling Russian Military Ships? If I were some CEO of a large company in Catalonia, the first thing that I would do after the declaration of independence would be to give the finance minister a call. I would tell her/him that in order to stay competitive I would need the labor laws to be weakened and I would ask for some tax incentives, because otherwise I would ask Madrid for a better deal.
    
    My advice to everyone is to think intensely about the possible impacts (positive and negative) of independence. Sadly people forgot about Podemos.
Anonymous on October 05, 2017 · at 9:03 pm EST/EDT

Thanks Saker for your interesting take on the referendums.

However, should not the title be changed to “Sakers views on the…..” rather than the one above?

– Best Wishes.
Anonymous on October 06, 2017 · at 12:17 am EST/EDT

While there is no doubt that the US is not-so-covertly backing the Kurds, the question of Catalonia seems to have sparked a debate both in Russian media and in the Western alternative press. However, I think many commentators are ignoring the geopolitical dimensions of the Catalonia issue.

Who benefits and who loses from Spain becoming weaker by Catalonia becoming independent? I believe that the US is ultimately the loser, as Spain minus Catalonia will have less influence in the EU, which will therefore increase the power of France and Germany. Adding in Brexit — the nightmare scenario for the US that is coming true — with the UK leaving the EU and its loss as being an US instrument to control France/Germany. Washington certainly does not want or need Catalonia to become independent.
Ann on October 06, 2017 · at 12:19 am EST/EDT

Saker I liked what you said a couple of days ago – that you really didn’t like separatists – generally –

it seems an orange revolution that has taken wing –

Bullfighting is a much more evil presence in Catalonia than Spanish inclusion.
Dan Wei Cottrell on October 06, 2017 · at 4:12 am EST/EDT

Dear Saker:
From Flickering Seer;

Your insight is enlightining indeed…I follow your intrpretations with vigor and anticipation.
However, Might I suggest that one considers the projection of the Body /Ego as a false flag
in itself to defur forgiveness as the Russian People seem to be demonstrating as of late. Not
that other demographics are not displaying but that Russophobia is so intrinsic today.
Consider my input….and keep you going in the direction you feel correct as you so display
with confidence and forgiveness.

All my support
A loving brother
Dan Wei Cottrell
West of Catalonia on October 06, 2017 · at 4:40 am EST/EDT

Well, if separatism in Catalonia did not reach a overwhelming majority, surely now does. Thanks to the Rotten Party (Spanish PP), which is a true cancer destroying its own country. In fact, there is indeed a common point both for Crimea (and Novorossia) and Catalonia: the wish of their peoples not to be smashed, humiliated and savaged for para-fascist cleptocratic “governments”, there is few echelons of difference between Offshorenko and Rajoy, only that the latter is a psychopath, and I am not joking, you only need to listen him to realize that.
Down the PP and jail its corrupt and carcinogenic mafia, and see by yourself how the will of the Catalans change by 180° degrees. The problem here is that such mafia has the control of the State including its android-judges, they are ever ready for issuing any “legal” barbarity their masters request.
By the way, the referendum is NOT illegal, at least not yet. It has been suspended by the Constitutional Court, and it will be or won’t when such Court says, matter still unresolved. But, as the PP-Franquito-Government has spoken so clearly, it is less than impossible other aftermath.
Sturm on October 06, 2017 · at 4:55 am EST/EDT

The Russian view is a non-issue. For as long as Putin remain in power, Russia will conduct business according to international laws, both in politics and the economy. No one would fail to notice the years of effort he’d put into establishing his “brand” of Russia. It reflects Russian reliability (opposite to the American volatility) and dexterity to negotiate multi-staked agreements. As to whether this brand would survive after he’s gone, only time will tell. Hope he has good replacement(s).

Thus so, there won’t be any overt/strong condemnation or support over both those referendums (or any other future referendums that might pop out). The Russians don’t have to lift a finger for either, even though the Kurds referendum risks prolonging the Mid-East conflicts. Major stakeholders Turkey, Syria, Iran and Iraq simply won’t let that slide, no amount of US/Israel support will convince them otherwise.

Covertly, Russia might attempt something (if necessary), but it’s still bound by laws and won’t involve itself unless under invitation from host nations. Even then, it might (politely) refuse to take part *.

Guessing the hegemony took notice of this penchant of Russia working within a set of rules, so they threw a curve ball to exploit it. Hence the change in modus operandi.

* One just need to look back at Russian handling of Crimea and Donbass/Novorussia. Masterfully done within rules. While Crimea was a clear cut and done case, accepting the latter into the federation would weaken the Russian position, escalating the conflict vs Ukraine/hegemony.

A bit offtrack, I wouldn’t even be surprised if Russian intel (SVR?) just let Maidan happen, surmising Crimea would secede to join the federation. They should have been aware Ukraine was being heavily infiltrated (for years), it’s impossible for them to miss it since Crimea is integral to the Russian Black Sea fleet ;)
Anonymous on October 06, 2017 · at 5:19 am EST/EDT

shadows of Lenin and Wilson are still struggling one century later
Lysander on October 06, 2017 · at 5:24 am EST/EDT

Studied neutrality is exactly the correct path for Russia here. Regarding the Kurds and Syria however, it will be a hard policy to follow if the Syrian Kurds actively attack the Syrian government.

As for the EU it is definitely in the interest of Russia, Europe itself, and the entire world that it break up. It is much easier for the US to manipulate and control one single beurocratic entity than it would be 20 separate countries.
Romegas on October 06, 2017 · at 10:36 am EST/EDT

The prospective independence of Catalonia or Scotland do NOT weaken the EU as long as these ‘new states’ want to join EU (as leaders in both cases have stated). In fact they will only serve to strengthen the EU which wants nothing more than to see its constituent nation states weakened. The best thing for the EU is not strong Nation member states but a plethora of regional statelets that would require the EU. I do not support these regional independence movements because they are hypocritical – they want to gain independence from the nation they currently belong to only to forfeit their independence by handing their newly acquired sovereignty to the supra-national EU.
- cortisol on October 06, 2017 · at 3:18 pm EST/EDT
  
  I do not know whether there is foreign influence behind Catalonia or not. perhaps. However this is a matter outside Russian control and nor do they need to care. What is relevant is that the EU, a US colony, is going down the toilet. EU following US policies for destroying Europe will simply make Europe weaker. While this might increase US power within the EU, in absolute terms Europe’s power is significantly weakened and they actually lose this power.
  
  I think Saker made some suggestions already some time ago that USA is weakening Europe, as they can’t directly attack Russia. The point is to weaken Russian trade partners all around it, as there is some faint effort within Europe to seek a way out of the hegemon. Remember that these efforts happen despite of US controlling EU with an iron grip. By hurting Europe, USA is hurting more itself. Europe suffers many, many times more than Russia by losing potential trade with the EU bloc, of which some they can recoup in Asia. USA is sliding out of control in the Middle East, even admitted recently by Bloomberg propagandists. Saudis and Turks buying weapons with which have potential to fend off US air strikes. The Korea tensions might be slowly solved. They might next lose many of their colonies in South East Asia. This is the long game. Work regionally with Asian nations to put out the fake revolutionary wild fires ignited by the hegemon intelligence services.
  
  The “Eurasian fortress” theory to me seems to be correct. In the next 10 years, not least due to the Pentagon 20 year plan, there will be significant chaos in Europe and refugees running to the east. I say to Europeans – better start learning Russian now if you haven’t already. They will be “consumed” by the hegemon. Today, those (most people) blinded by the hegemon media laugh and counter this statement with ridicule, within 10 years not so much. Today, many of these people accept without criticism the insane arguments about EU democracy, the good for them intended by the hegemon and bad Russia and China. Next, they will be sacrificed on the hegemons altar without them even knowing it.
  - Jens Guld on October 06, 2017 · at 4:28 pm EST/EDT
    
    Many years ago my teachers in the Danish red brick school I went to told us why Obama’s sanctions were the greatest gift Putin and Russia could possibly get. The Book was written in the 1830’ties by a German.
    Those interested can get it gratis here as an ebook:
    Friedrich List: The National System of Political Economy
    http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/list-the-national-system-of-political-economy
    
    You can also get it from Amazon, but that costs money and the book will only be in Amazon’s MOBI format. Or you can buy a dead tree version.
    
    List was busy not just in Germany but also in the United States. But of course American politicians, economists and historians cannot be expected to know their own history.
    At least the American politicians and Wall Street people ought to have heard about Alexander Hamilton, who wrote something similar, but no.
    
    An embargo works if the embargoed goods are necessities. Luxuries just won’t do it. An embargo might have worked in Putin’s first few years but later not at all. I was in Russia a few times in those days and I saw how the Russians slowly year by year worked themselves out of the mire the oligarcs and the neocons had got them into.
    The Amaricans have always thought that Russians cand be bribed with luxuries. Go see the movie Ninotchka if you haven’t already or the cold war remake “The Iron Petticoat”. They are mistaken, embargoing luxuries just doesn’t work.
Neil on October 06, 2017 · at 7:15 pm EST/EDT

Before the Madrid goon squad visited Catalonia the vote on secession was predicted to be a no. After the goon squad had gone thru their dance routine the vote turned into a resounding yes. The end justifies the means possibly. Were there vested interests which wanted a yes vote and maybe employed violence to achieve their desired result.

“When you have eliminated all of the possibilities, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”

It just so happens that there are some very strong ties between Catalonia and Israel. Should Catalonia secede from Spain it will probably turn into another Zionist outpost for creating mischief. Some believe that an independent Zionist controlled Catalonia will become an entry point to further flood Europe with illegal immigrants thus increasing the chaos Europe will face in the future, Sweden being a good example of what Europe can look forward to. I wonder when the US Embassies around Europe will start to weaponise the jihadis who are waiting patiently and who are possibly enjoying the odd beer or two while they pass the time.

If there is indeed a movement to break down the nation states and to Balkanise Europe into smaller parts more easily dominated by the unelected officials of the EU, Catalonia may well be the beginning.
- estouxim on October 06, 2017 · at 11:09 pm EST/EDT
  
  Could you enlighten us on these ties?
  Never heard about them, would like to know more.
  
  Considering the Zionists already have quite strong outposts in Germany, France, UK, Holland, to name just a few, I wonder why they would bother with Catalonia.
  - Anonymous on October 07, 2017 · at 3:33 pm EST/EDT
    
    A Spanish production with English subtitles. Good to see conspiracy “theories” are
    alive and prospering down in Al Andalus.
    
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA10wIQXdJE
    - estouxim on October 08, 2017 · at 12:56 am EST/EDT
      
      Thanks for the link.
      
      Do you suppose they also have docs about who Juan March was financing?
Zena on October 07, 2017 · at 12:18 pm EST/EDT

Well there certainly have been a lot of opinions here both pro and anti the Catalonian independence issue.

I am neither Spanish nor European so to look at this maybe we can boil the issues down to their essence.
A huge number, maybe a big majority of Catalonian people are saying they want to be “self governing” and independent of Spain. The inverted commas are there for a reason.

The Madrid government are opposed to this vigorously.

I might have tended to sympathise with the Catalonians thinking that anything which impedes the EU and it’s one world government agenda is a positive but the we soon learn that the Catalonians are pro-EU so what is it they really want?
To me seeking “independence” from Spain only to be shackled and managed by an undemocratic elite whose mantra is the destruction of national sovereignty and cultural identity is an empty choice.

Regarding what will happen now I think it is probably fairly clear.

In claiming a mandate for “independence” the Catalonian leadership must have known that they never had the physical means to enforce it.
The Madrid government have the means to easily suppress it.
The strongly pro-EU government in Madrid will use all means at it’s disposal to quash this “revolt”

Stephen Lendman says –

” Threats by Madrid to seize control of Catalonia’s government, send thousands of national police, civil guards and soldiers to its streets, likely clashing with independence supporters, arresting pro-secession officials, and undermining freedom should be challenged by popular resistance – officials together with millions of Catalans refusing to sacrifice their rights to Madrid.”

There is seriously flawed logic in saying that “Catalans are refusing to sacrifice their rights to Madrid.” when of course they have sacrificed their entire nation’s sovereign rights including foreign and domestic policy not to mention cultural and national identity to a global financial cabal operating in total secrecy much of the time.
( Hats off to Ramin Mazaheri for his eye opener printed very appropriately at this time elsewhere on this site)

Surely it is the issues raised by Ramin which should be exercising the minds of Spaniards and Catalans alike.

However, I’d agree with the rest of the quote from Lendman –
“Threats by Madrid to seize control of Catalonia’s government, send thousands of national police, civil guards and soldiers to its streets, likely clashing with independence supporters, arresting pro-secession officials” – is probably what will happen.

However,there is just one way the Catalan situation could get serious and result in mass bloodshed and disorder and that is if it is being externally sponsored.

Who would benefit from bloodshed, social disorder and pointless violence and hatred?
- Anonymous on October 08, 2017 · at 7:15 am EST/EDT
  
  “To see who rules over you look to those you cannot criticise.” Voltaire
  
  That should explain who benefits thru constant chaos in the world of the Goyim.
passerby on October 08, 2017 · at 7:58 am EST/EDT

Catalan banks are leaving Catalonia, because banks needs access to European Central Bank funds, access that banks would lose once Catalonia becomes independent. This may be the first independence movement that fails because banks decide so. If Catalonia stays with Spain, it will not be because the Catalans feel Spanish. It will be because of business, pure and simple.
Oxandabaratz on October 08, 2017 · at 11:12 am EST/EDT

Hi!!

I agree with the Saker in the Catalonia issue. Russians might be delighted with that gift to their propaganda about “EU fake democracy” that rajoy government gave, this is a opportunity to hammer about EU hypocrisy, but I do not think that they will have an active implication in a conflict they have nothing to win and nothing to lose (both sides, pro-Spanish and separatists, are NATO-aligned).

Similar expression have Serbs had: They used the Spanish repression on Catalonia to pont the Eu hypocrisy (Vucci, Brnabic and Dodik, all of the three).

Cheers!
Shyaku on October 08, 2017 · at 3:20 pm EST/EDT

There is a slight diference from Crimea though: The Crimean ballot was not for independence.

Accuracy is important.
Dan Good on October 08, 2017 · at 4:32 pm EST/EDT

“… is Russia better off with a strong EU because a strong EU might be more capable of standing up to the US or is Russia better off with a weak EU because a weak EU weakens the Western ‘front’ against Russia?…”

The right answer to this question is: Russia, and the world, is far better off with cooperation between EU and Russia. Russia is part of Europe, like it or not. Maybe Russia would be a misfit in EU, being it is so much bigger than the rest, but it belongs to Europe, culturally, historically, racially, spiritually and many other ways, like it or not. Russia itself feels European. It stretches Europe to the Pacific. It saved Europe, more than once, it has never threatened Europe. Even the USSR was never a real threat to Europe. True it took advantage to create a buffer zone with capitalist countries, but when this ended, the troops went home. Can the US say as much?
- Anonymous on October 08, 2017 · at 6:22 pm EST/EDT
  
  Dan Good:
  
  Russia is part of Europe, like it or not. Maybe Russia would be a misfit in EU, being it is so much bigger than the rest, but it belongs to Europe, culturally, historically, racially, spiritually and many other ways, like it or not. Russia itself feels European
  
  That’s wishful thinking of some European or someone who’s trying to sow the seeds of disunity. The Russian Federation is Eurasian and it’s up to the Russians to decide what they want to be, except Russians.
Wim on October 09, 2017 · at 7:16 am EST/EDT

For my taste the Saker is a bit harsh towards Rajoy. He is confronted with mass civil disobedience and he reacts in the wrong way. But we have seen the same happening in all color revolutions. The Russian government won’t make this miscalculation. But that is because it has learned the hard way – also while advising neighboring governments – what works and what doesn’t in this kind of situation.
Zena on October 09, 2017 · at 5:40 pm EST/EDT

I posted earlier how the independence-seeking Catalonians were nevertheless strong supporters of undemocratic EU rule.

Well it seems they are also strong supporters of NATO !

“In 2015, the Financial Times in an article titled, “Catalan president steps up breakaway plan,” would quote former president Artur Mas, stating:

The most sensitive task, he added, would be to prepare “the design” for a future Catalan military. . . . .my party and I personally believe that Catalonia has to remain part of NATO. And as a member of NATO we have to pay our dues . . . It would be impossible for Catalonia not to have its own defence structure, even though it would be a light one.”

The author also notes that –
“While there are political parties within Catalonia that oppose Catalan membership both within NATO and the European Union, they seem to lack the ability to put in check pro-EU and pro-NATO leaders determined to peel away from Madrid and transform their new nation into one – more eager and effective for NATO than Spain as a whole”

http://www.thenewatlas.org/2017/10/catalan-independence-out-of-madrids.html#more

The author concludes that far from fearing Catalonian “independence”,

” . . . policy papers from Western corporate-financier sponsored think tanks indicate an eagerness – particularly by NATO – to integrate what they expect to be a robust military capability into their global wars of aggression.”

Maybe things are not what they seem in Catalonia.
- estouxim on October 10, 2017 · at 2:45 am EST/EDT
  
  Considering Catalonia voted against permanence in NATO as did the Basque Country, Valencia and Canarias, whereas all the other regions of Spain voted for I would think Artur Mas opinion on the matter is irrelevant (as he and his party increasingly are)
- ScotchedEarth on October 10, 2017 · at 8:36 am EST/EDT
  
  Zena, the Catalan separatists—like Scotland’s SNP and Wales’s Plaid Cymru— seek ersatz independence. Like an 18 year old moving out of his bedroom into a flat created above the garage: ‘I have my own flat, I’m so adult and independent now.’ No, you didn’t supply references or deposit, your rent is nominal, you’ve no local gov. taxes, your electricity bills are paid and most of your meals still eaten with your family. You’re just playing at being ‘independent’. So with Catalan, Scottish and Welsh separatists: they assure the gullible that it will be ‘Business As Usual’—there’ll be no changes except for being able to pretend to be a country, with their own flag and El Presidente Puigdemont or Sturgeon riding around in a limousine, receiving the salutes of gaudily-uniformed guards. That reduced Spain or England might not take kindly to a new republic led by people who have spent their lives insulting them; that Catalans or Scots might find themselves applying for visas to travel to Valencia or Newcastle; that London and Madrid would make policy with their populations’ interests in mind, indifferent to any negative effects on their ex-citizens; none of that enters their heads.
  
  And Secession will inevitably weaken the mother country. E.g. the British military was weakened by southern Ireland’s departure in 1921: whereas in WW1, Ireland provided (without conscription) 206,000 servicemen, in WW2 this was reduced to less than half (38,000 volunteering from NI and 43,000 from RoI). From the point of view of past and future allies: sensible Britons, in respect of collaborative military ventures, should be far more interested in what a united Spain can bring to the table than what marginal effort an independent Catalonia could. And similarly, a sensible Spaniard should prefer what Britain can bring rather than what an indy Scotland might—or what the Irish Republic actually does. (Irish Army does not have a single tracked AFV, and there are police forces with greater capability than their air and naval arms; the Global Firepower website doesn’t even bother ranking them, they’re so insignificant.)
  
  A Catalan voice is more powerful for being part of the Spanish voice, just as a Scottish voice is more powerful for having Britain’s weight behind it (could be still more powerful if Britain could regain its confidence and stop allowing itself to be pushed around—but that problem will not be resolved by hiving ourselves off into ever smaller pieces). Again, look to the example of Ireland—southern Irishmen used to be ‘movers and shakers’, and by providing some of Britain’s greatest generals and ministers, they made history. Now history makes them.
  
  Catalans who genuinely care about their fellow Catalans should make use of Spanish resources and strive to make Catalonia prosper within Spain. Back to the home analogy, they should be trying to take over the entire house, not building a treehouse with a ‘No grilz or spanyardz allowd’ sign.
CalDre on October 09, 2017 · at 11:44 pm EST/EDT

“Needless to say, the way the Madrid government handled this situation further damage the credibility of the West, the EU and the entire notion of “civilized Europe” being “democratic”.”

I don’t get why people keep conflating an independence referendum with democracy. What gives Catalonia the right to secede, any more than my family and its home, or my city, or my county, can secede? “Democracy” can have a vast multitude of definitions but please point me to a coherent one that permits any part of a nation to vote to secede (and I am not referring to some abstract notion, we are talking about a situation where the local leaders have vowed to make good on the outcome)..

“My feeling is that the way the central government handled this event alienated most Russian who are simply baffled by the utter stupidity and needless brutality of the police crackdown during the vote: what in the world were the cops trying to achieve?!”

Brutality in Spain (a few hundred interfering with lawful police action injured)? One word: Chechnya (1/3 of the entire population exterminated). Or let’s look at the head-bashing at unlawful Moscow protests. Just shows again, Russians are as imperialistic, supremacist and hypocritical as Jews, Americans, Turks or any other group.

CalDre: could you please send me your email? I would like to get in touch with you. Thanks a lot,
The Saker
Anonymous on October 11, 2017 · at 7:18 pm EST/EDT

The Kurds are so-called allied with Isreal only because they cannot turn to the other neighboring states like Iraq, Iran, Turkey which seems to have an obsession about obliteratring the Kurdish people, who I understand do have a non-Arabic and non-Iranian and non-Turkish culture, language, etc. of their own and also seem to be remarkably immune to jihadist extremism though they are mostly Sunni Muslim.—So why should not the Kurds have a country of their own? And what did they ever do to anyone to deserve the almost universal hostility? At one time the Turks were trying to wipe out the Kurdish language, as I understand,—-it keeps happening, imperial bully-nations want to show off their superiority and ram things down the throat of others,—like British did to the Irish,—like USSR and tsarist Russians did it to Ukrainians,—and other things like that happening throughout Asia.—What are they really trying to prove?
Ken Underwood on October 12, 2017 · at 12:24 pm EST/EDT

The brutal action of Madrid against separatism is to fan the flames. A balkanised Europe willl be easy to rule.