I write as a British national, born in Madrid to a Spanish mother and British father, educated in the UK, bit who since 1953 has spent is life straddling two cultures, personally, professionally, and politically.
So from this hybrid position , let me attempt to formulate some personal thoughts on Mrs May’s speech, and what it might auger for the future of UK-Spanish relations.
As an exercise in political speech making and delivery, May’s rhetoric and poise appealed to a British sense of identity rooted in history with a disarming sense of self-confidence.
To listen to her was to hear echoes of Churchill ‘blood . sweat and tears’ and ‘WE shall Never Surrender’ speech when Britain stood up to defend Europe on its own terms, and later Mrs Thatcher making of her form of governance and her ‘one foot in and one foot’ out relationship with Europe others were forced to tolerate, and in the case of her economic policies- emulate them but for her and her successors to enter the Eurozone..
But in trying to make sense of it, I draw on the wisdom of the British essayist George Orwell who in trying to explain the emotions generated by the Second World War 2 , wrote thus in his notes on nationalism published in 1945 :
‘Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.’
Mrs May speech , her enthusiasts will argue, was infused with patriotic values of decency, fair play, and openness to the world, imbedded in that concept personified by James Bond 007- that nobody does it better.
Certainly a at no point did she claim that was she was laying out for Britain was a recipe to be emulated by the rest of the EU . On the contrary declaring herself open to an ongoing cooperation with Europe and the world working towards a consensual agreement that would be good for Britain and work in the interest of Europe..
At same time underlying Mrs May’s speech was a sense that Britain political culture has never been in debt to the EU as say that of other EU countries do because it does not owe its democracy to it- and therefore it can do without some of the binding rules and regulations , that conditions national sovereignty elsewhere, but prevents us from controlling immigration.
The problem is her convincing European counties that feel committed for political and economic reasons to being full-fledged members of the EU that Britain is a necessary ally that nevertheless because of history, geography, and temperament deserves to be treated as a special case.
Which bring me to the example of the editorial in Spain’s El Pais today arguing that that Mrs May’s declared aim of leaving the Single Market and her speech in general reflected a “shameful xenophobic nationalism”.
This is indeed harsh criticism and one which I would like to believe is unfair and premature even if Nigel Farage of UKIP claimed that Mrs May owed her script to him.
Let us not forget this was a speech made before the start of negotiations not a final position , arguably more conciliatory than defiant , and one that kept important matters of detail affecting trade in goods, services and people between the UK and the EU and how they might affect bilateral relations unaddressed, not east the issue of the status of EU nationals.
Here I make special mention of Spaniards living and working in the UK, and British living and working in Spain, not to speak of trade, tourism , and business links which have developed thanks to the EU not in spite of it.
That Mrs May offered certainly to EU citizens resident in the UK as long as the EU27 reciprocate on British citizens was positive but barely conclusive.
I voted against Brexit. Now I just hope that all sides involved in the negotiations will reach a consensus that benefits the EU and holds Britain together as an outward-looking country, governed by democrats not extreme nationalists.
As the FT, who also opposed Brexit, put it in its editorial today, the most daunting political challenge in a generation “will involve blood, sweat and a dose of good luck”. ENDS
