8114 Pro e contro dell'indipendenza della Scozia

(english / deutsch / italiano)

Pro e contro dell'indipendenza della Scozia

1) Repubblica di Crimea esprime il suo caloroso sostegno al popolo scozzese (12.9.2014)
2) La scelta della Scozia (The New Worker, 29/08/2014)
3) Das schottische Referendum (GFP, 17.09.2014)
4) The rise of separatist agitation in Europe (GFP, 30 October 2012)
5) FLASHBACK: Borderland Networks (GFP, 2010/03/19)


Also to read:

Vote No in the Scottish referendum: Fight for a Socialist Britain! (Socialist Equality Party - UK, 18 September 2014)

FLASHBACK: Separatist parties dominate Catalan election results (By Paul Mitchell / WSWS. 27 November 2012)

FLASHBACK: Catalan separatism. The Federal State - A Loss-Making Business (II - GFP, 2012/10/17)
Europa: Unione e disgregazione (DOSSIER)


=== 1 ===


DICHIARAZIONE DEL PRESIDIUM DEL CONSIGLIO STATO DELLA REPUBBLICA DI CRIMEA



Il Presidium del Consiglio statale della Repubblica di Crimea esprime il suo caloroso sostegno al popolo scozzese alla vigilia del referendum sull'indipendenza. Si tratta di un evento significativo nella vita della Scozia da molti secoli in lotta per un proprio Stato.
 
Il 18 settembre 2014 gli scozzesi determineranno il loro destino. A poco più di un mese dall'inizio di agosto di quest'anno, secondo i sondaggi, il numero di sostenitori dell'indipendenza della Scozia è aumentato dal 35% al 51%.
 
I crimeani sostengono il diritto degli scozzesi di decidere del proprio destino, di stabilire le priorità per lo sviluppo economico e sociale del paese, a condurre una propria politica estera, ad essere un'entità indipendente sulla mappa del mondo.
 
Il referendum chiesto dai cittadini della Scozia è un diritto incontestabile della democrazia, l'unico modo legale di autodeterminazione che nessuno ha il diritto di mettere in discussione.
 
A tutt'oggi oggi ascoltiamo dai politici affermazioni irresponsabili sul separatismo della Crimea. Anche gli scozzesi hanno familiarità con questo termine - la loro strada verso il referendum vengono definite da singole personalità politiche britanniche "nazionalismo e separatismo scozzese".
 
I crimeani hanno ben compreso le parole del Primo Ministro del governo autonomo della Scozia, Alex Salmond, "Nessuno, assolutamente nessuno può governare la Scozia meglio del suo popolo che vive e lavora nella Scozia stessa".
 
Oggi nel mondo sono in atto processi di autodeterminazione da parte di molti popoli che non sono d'accordo con la politica del centro nei confronti delle regioni. La "Parata delle sovranità" in un tempo molto breve in grado di ammantare l'Europa. Questo si riferisce alla Catalogna e ai Paesi Baschi in Spagna, alla Corsica e alla Bretagna in Francia, all'Alto Adige in Italia, alla Vallonia e alle Fiandre in Belgio, alle Isole Fær Øer in Danimarca, al Cantone Giura in Svizzera, alla Transilvania in Romania.
 
Certamente la legittimità del referendum organizzato in Scozia non può essere messa in discussione. Il popolo esprimerà le loro opinioni che saranno cruciali per il futuro del Paese.
 
Il Presidium del Consiglio di Stato della Repubblica di Crimea 
 
Città di Simferopol'  
12 settembre 2014 
№ 57-6/14–ПГС


=== 2 ===

www.resistenze.org - popoli resistenti - gran bretagna - 09-09-14 - n. 510

La scelta della Scozia

The New Worker | newworker.org 
Traduzione per Resistenze.org a cura del Centro di Cultura e Documentazione Popolare

29/08/2014

La prima fase del referendum per l'indipendenza scozzese è iniziata. Chiunque viva in Scozia con 16 anni e oltre, iscritto nei registri elettorali, il 18 settembre potrà prendere parte alla votazione. Circa 700.000 scozzesi hanno ricevuto le loro schede elettorali per posta questa settimana. Il resto andrà ai seggi il 18 settembre per esprimersi sulla questione dell'indipendenza della Scozia. Se vinceranno i sì, allora si svolgeranno i colloqui per il trasferimento dei poteri da Westminster a Holyrood, il 24 marzo 2016 indicato come Giorno dell'Indipendenza scozzese.

Il dibattito ha dominato la politica interna. La campagna favorevole all'indipendenza è naturalmente guidata dal Partito nazionale scozzese che governa l'amministrazione decentrata e detiene la maggioranza nel Parlamento scozzese, mentre la piattaforma dell'opposizione Better Together, è guidata dal partito laburista che ha governato la Scozia in coalizione con liberal-democratici fino alla sconfitta nel 2007.

I nazionalisti non chiedono la fine della monarchia. I nazionalisti vogliono semplicemente riconquistare l'indipendenza che la Scozia possedeva quando divenne con l'Inghilterra, una duplice monarchia nel 17° secolo. All'epoca Scozia e Inghilterra erano governate dallo stesso monarca, con una sola unione doganale, un solo esercito unito alla fedeltà alla Corona, seguivano la stessa politica estera, ma con parlamenti separati con proprie leggi per i due regni. Ciò è continuato fino a quando la classe dirigente scozzese ha optato per un parlamento unificato e una sola Gran Bretagna nel 1707.

Nessuna delle due parti contesta il fatto che la Scozia sia una nazione e la questione concreta se gli scozzesi staranno economicamente meglio o peggio con un parlamento sovrano a Edimburgo. Anche se c'è stato un grosso dibattito, nessuna delle due parti è stata completamente aperta circa le loro motivazioni. La campagna laburista contraria all'indipendenza ha giocato sull'incertezza economica che sostengono conseguirebbe alla vittoria dei sì, ma pochi hanno pubblicamente espresso il reale timore che la perdita di circa una sessantina di seggi scozzesi potrebbe mettere a repentaglio la possibilità dei laburisti di vincere le elezioni generali nel resto della Gran Bretagna.

I nazionalisti dal canto loro presentano il quadro roseo di una terra di opportunità in un futuro indipendente, mantenendo un basso profilo sulla questione reale posta dalle sezioni della borghesia scozzese che li sostengono in quanto vedono nel Parlamento di Westminster un ostacolo ad una maggiore integrazione all'interno dell'Unione europea.

Tuttavia l'indipendenza della Scozia libererebbe la classe operaia scozzese da un governo sempre più oppressivo e invadente. Certo non significherebbe raggiungere il socialismo, ma affrancarsi da Westminster potrebbe portare alcuni benefici reali per i lavoratori scozzesi. Salmond non è un socialista: propone ulteriori riduzioni di imposta a favore delle imprese a beneficio dei capitalisti in Scozia e a spese dei lavoratori.

L'indipendenza, di per sé, non preserverà le tradizioni e la cultura nazionali, né rafforzerà il potere della classe operaia. Nell'Isola di Man e nelle Isole del Canale, le amministrazioni autonome composte da sfruttatori locali hanno presieduto la scomparsa virtuale di tutto il loro patrimonio e della cultura, mentre introducevano leggi e pratiche in materia di lavoro persino peggiori di quelle attuate dai Tories di terraferma dal 1979.

Ma l'indipendenza scozzese aprirebbe la prospettiva a un governo laburista scozzese genuinamente di sinistra. Anche in questo caso, non equivarrebbe a raggiungere il socialismo ma aumeterebbero le possibilità di riforme favorevoli alla classe operaia.

I lavoratori organizzati in Scozia - le organizzazioni sindacali - dovrebbero ancora lottare per ottenere tali riforme, ma dovrebbe essere più facile vincere che non strappare delle riforme a Westminster.

Quindi l'indipendenza non porterebbe alcun paradiso immediato in Scozia. Ma collocherebbe i lavoratori scozzesi in un posto molto migliore per lottare per reali miglioramenti e sarebbe un grave colpo per la classe dirigente britannica, per l'imperialismo britannico e per la Nato.

Il New Communist Party da tempo riconosce i diritti della nazione scozzese alla piena autodeterminazione nazionale. Sosteniamo le rivendicazioni scozzesi per il diritto di conservare e sviluppare la cultura e l'identità nazionale. Sosteniamo il diritto del popolo scozzese di possedere e controllare tutte le risorse, materiali e no, presenti sulla loro terra e nelle acque territoriali. Il New Communist Party invita tutti i suoi sostenitori scozzesi a votare affermativamente al referendum scozzese


=== 3 ===


Das schottische Referendum
 
17.09.2014
BERLIN/LONDON
 
(Eigener Bericht) - Vor dem morgigen Referendum über eine Abspaltung Schottlands debattieren Experten über eine womöglich dramatische Schwächung Großbritanniens und über einen bevorstehenden deutschen Machtzuwachs. Sollte die schottische Bevölkerung die Sezession beschließen, stünde London vor einem erheblichen Positionsverlust, heißt es beim britischen Think-Tank Chatham House. Bevölkerung und Wirtschaftsleistung würden deutlich schrumpfen; auch werde Großbritannien sowohl innerhalb der EU wie in der Weltpolitik spürbar zurückgestuft. Es könne sogar seine bisherige Bedeutung für die USA als ebenso loyaler wie schlagkräftiger Verbündeter verlieren. Französische Beobachter weisen darauf hin, dass auch die Achse Paris-London nicht mehr im bisherigen Umfang in der Lage sein werde, sich gegen die deutsche Dominanz zu behaupten. In Berlin wird dies sorgsam registriert. Großbritannien werde "nicht mehr ... zu den großen vier" in der EU gehören, sondern "weit hinter Italien" zurückfallen, heißt es in aktuellen Kommentaren; mit einem weiteren Aufstieg Berlins sei zu rechnen. Unklar ist dabei, wie stark eine schottische Sezession andere europäische Separatismen befeuern könnte, von denen eine ganze Reihe von Deutschland aktiv gefördert worden ist.
Ausgang offen
Am morgigen Donnerstag stimmt die schottische Bevölkerung über die mögliche Abspaltung des Landesteils von Großbritannien ab. Das Referendum ist in Übereinstimmung mit der britischen Regierung beschlossen worden; London hat zugesagt, die Entscheidung anzuerkennen. Lange Zeit waren die Gegner der Abspaltung klar in der Mehrheit; erst in den letzten Wochen haben ihre Befürworter aufgeholt und vor wenigen Tagen erstmals einen Umfragesieg erzielt. Seither geht ihr Stimmenanteil allerdings wieder leicht zurück; der Ausgang des morgigen Referendums gilt als vollkommen offen. Sollten die schottischen Separatisten die Abstimmung gewinnen, werden Verhandlungen über die Sezession eingeleitet; spätestens im März 2016 will die schottische Autonomieregierung dann die Eigenstaatlichkeit erklären. Selbst grundlegende Fragen darüber, unter welchen Bedingungen dies geschehen soll - welche Währung in Schottland gelten würde, ob es EU-Mitglied bleiben könnte, wie mit der Abschottung der neuen Staatsgrenze zu verfahren sei -, sind gänzlich ungeklärt.
Die deutsche Ethno-Politik
Die Bundesregierung hat bislang konsequent jegliche Stellungnahme zu dem Sezessionsreferendum verweigert und darauf hingewiesen, dass es sich um eine innere Angelegenheit Großbritanniens handelt. In der Vergangenheit hat die Bundesrepublik allerdings zahlreiche Separatismen (nicht nur) in Europa unterstützt und gefördert, was wiederum der schottischen Abspaltungsbewegung Auftrieb verliehen haben mag. Bekannte Beispiele sind die deutsche Unterstützung für die Sezessionisten im ehemaligen Jugoslawien sowie die systematische Förderung sogenannter Volksgruppen-Organisationen, die ihrerseits Ethno-Minderheiten in fast allen europäischen Staaten vertreten und als Sprachrohr für deren Streben nach Eigenständigkeit fungieren (german-foreign-policy.com berichtete [1]). Konkret unterstützt haben bundesdeutsche Organisationen etwa die Absetzbewegung der deutschsprachigen Minderheit Norditaliens [2] oder das Sezessionsstreben Kataloniens [3]; selbst die ungarischsprachigen Minoritäten Rumäniens und der Slowakei berufen sich bei ihren Bemühungen, mehr Autonomierechte zu erlangen oder gar ihren jetzigen Staat zu verlassen, auf zentrale Prinzipien der deutschen Politik [4]. Die Scottish National Party (SNP), die das aktuelle Referendum mit Macht vorantreibt, gehört einer Fraktion im Europaparlament an, die von den europäischen "Grünen" geführt wird und zahlreiche autonomistische und separatistische Kräfte umfasst; die deutsche Partei Bündnis 90/Die Grünen hat starken Einfluss in ihr.[5]
Großbritannien geschwächt
Sollte die Bevölkerung Schottlands für die Abspaltung stimmen, wird mit Großbritannien eine der drei stärksten Mächte der EU auf einen Schlag erheblich an Einfluss verlieren. Zentrale Faktoren hat soeben der britische Think-Tank Chatham House skizziert. Demnach ist damit zu rechnen, dass schon kurzfristig in London umfangreiche Kräfte gebunden sein werden, um die Trennung von Schottland zu bewerkstelligen. Wegen des Verlusts von Bevölkerung, Territorium und Wirtschaftskraft sei ganz allgemein mit einem raschen Rückgang des britischen Ansehens weltweit zu rechnen. Da die britische Wirtschaftsleistung um ein Zwölftel fallen werde, müsse vermutlich auch der Militärhaushalt in ähnlicher Größenordnung gesenkt werden; Großbritannien werde seine kriegerische Schlagkraft nicht halten können.[6] Wie es bei Chatham House heißt, wird damit wohl ein spürbarer Einflussverlust in der EU-Militärpolitik einhergehen. In einer Art Kettenreaktion sei damit zu rechnen, dass auch die britische Stellung in der Weltpolitik schwächer werde. Selbst die Vereinigten Staaten könnten erheblich an Interesse verlieren, mit Großbritannien zu kooperieren, wenn der Verbündete seine bisherige Stärke nicht halten könne, heißt es.[7]
Schlechte Nachricht für Frankreich
Großbritanniens Schwächung träfe auch Frankreich. Eine Expertin vom Institut français des relations internationales (Ifri) weist darauf hin, dass Paris und London ungeachtet allen Streits immer wieder eng kooperiert haben - nicht zuletzt, um die deutsche Dominanz in Europa einzudämmen. Tatsächlich haben Großbritannien und Frankreich etwa am 2. November 2010 weitreichende militärpolitische Vereinbarungen getroffen, die es ihnen ermöglichen, auch künftig eigenständig Kriege zu führen - ohne Zustimmung aus der Bundesrepublik. Deutsche Regierungsberater haben die Vereinbarungen entsprechend als eine Art "neue Entente Cordiale" eingestuft und Berlin dringend empfohlen, Gegenmaßnahmen zu ergreifen (german-foreign-policy.com berichtete [8]). Verliert London nun an Einfluss, dann verliert auch sein Bündnis mit Paris an Kraft. "Trotz aller Uneinigkeiten in zahlreichen Fragen sind Frankreich und Großbritannien enge strategische Partner, besonders bei Sicherheits- und Verteidigungsfragen", heißt es beim Ifri: "Ein Vereinigtes Königreich ohne Schottland wäre eine schlechte Nachricht für Frankreich, das spüren würde, dass die Bedeutung dieser Partnerschaft beschädigt ist."[9]
Washingtons Blick nach Berlin
Ganz anders stellen sich die Dinge aus Sicht Berlins dar. Zwar ist die militärische Schwächung des Vereinigten Königreichs auch für Deutschland in mancherlei Hinsicht nachteilig, da sie die Militärpolitik der EU untergräbt. Zudem ist unklar, ob sich die Befeuerung weiterer Separatismen in Europa, die von einer schottischen Sezession zu erwarten wäre, ohne allzu starke Erschütterung steuern ließe. Gelingt es aber, derlei Risiken aufzufangen, dann besäße die Bundesrepublik in der EU eine noch weitaus dominantere Stellung als zuvor. London "könnte nicht damit rechnen, dass sein Einfluss und seine Stellung weiterhin ausreichend groß wären, um den eigenen europapolitischen Vorstellungen und Sonderwünschen Geltung zu verschaffen", heißt es in einer führenden deutschen Tageszeitung; Großbritannien "gehörte nicht mehr wie selbstverständlich zu den großen vier" in der EU, sondern fiele zumindest hinsichtlich seiner Bevölkerungsgröße "weit hinter Italien zurück". Selbst die USA würden ihre Beziehungen zum Vereinigten Königreich wohl abschwächen: "Es stünde zu erwarten, dass die Vereinigten Staaten ihr Sonderverhältnis zu Britannien dann überwiegend aus der Erinnerungsperspektive betrachten ... Und noch mehr als bisher würde Washington nach Berlin blicken, wenn es auf der Suche nach einem leistungsstarken Verbündeten wäre, der in weltpolitisch bewegten Zeiten die Europäer beisammenhält und der Amerika Lasten abnimmt."[10]
So oder so
Dabei heißt es bei Chatham House, ein Machtverlust Londons werde wohl selbst dann eintreten, wenn das Referendum scheitere und Schottland bei Großbritannien verbleibe. "Ein Nein, bei dem 45 oder mehr Prozent der schottischen Bevölkerung für Unabhängigkeit stimmen, würde immer noch die langfristige Zukunft der Union schwer in Frage stellen", schreibt der Think-Tank.[11] Auch in diesem Falle könnte Berlin also mit einer weiteren Stärkung seiner Stellung rechnen - in der EU, aber auch im Verhältnis zu den USA und womöglich auch in der Weltpolitik.

[1] S. dazu Hintergrundbericht: Die Föderalistische Union Europäischer Volksgruppen,Hintergrundbericht: Das Europäische Zentrum für Minderheitenfragen und Schwelende Konflikte.
[2] S. dazu Das deutsche Blutsmodell (III), Der Zentralstaat als Minusgeschäft und Wie es der Zufall will.
[3] S. dazu Der Zentralstaat als Minusgeschäft (II) und Spaniens Zypern-Szenario.
[4] S. dazu Das deutsche Blutsmodell (I), Tragsäulen der Zukunft (IV) und Vom Glauben an völkische Selbstbestimmung.
[5] S. dazu Europa driftet (II) und Die neuen Grenzen Europas.
[6] Chatham House: Disunited Kingdom? Six Foreign Policy Implications of the Scottish Referendum. London, September 2014.
[7] Richard G. Whitman: The Costs of Dis-Union for a UK Without Scotland. www.chathamhouse.org 12.09.2014.
[8] S. dazu Die neue Entente Cordiale.
[9] Tim Oliver, Nicolai von Ondarza, Vivien Pertusot, Nathan Dufour: Scotland: Out of the UK and Into the EU? Part I. ip-journal.dgap.org 08.08.2014.
[10] Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger, Peter Sturm: Geht von Edinburgh ein "Fieberschub" aus? Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 15.09.2014.
[11] Chatham House: Disunited Kingdom? Six Foreign Policy Implications of the Scottish Referendum. London, September 2014.


=== 4 ===


The rise of separatist agitation in Europe

30 October 2012


Recent months have seen one example after another of gains for parties advocating the creation of new, small states in Spain, Belgium, Italy, Scotland and elsewhere in Europe.

The growth in support for such tendencies has been fuelled by the savage cuts and austerity measures being imposed by central governments on the instructions of the troika—the European Union, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund—at the behest of the banks and global speculators. But the exploitation of legitimate social grievances does not mean that the political beneficiaries represent the interests of the broad masses who are being exploited.

All of the parties championing separatism speak for bourgeois and upper-middle class layers that have concluded the relative wealth of their regions will allow them a more privileged existence—provided they too seek membership in the European Union and faithfully do the bidding of the banks and corporations in waging attacks on the working class.

The most prominent separatist movements have all emerged within their respective countries’ more prosperous regions. All call for an end to the subsidisation of poorer regions through central taxation and advocate local control of valuable assets. None of this is altered by fairly transparent efforts to project a left face in the case of some of the larger nationalist organisations and a plethora of pseudo-left tendencies that trail in their wake.

In Spain, the two most powerful movements are centered in the Basque and Catalan regions. The first is one of Spain’s richest regions in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, and the second is the richest region overall.

Last month, 1.5 million Catalans marched in Barcelona to call for a separate state under the banner of “a new nation in Europe”. The regional government has dutifully implemented every demand for austerity made for the past two years, but still finds itself with a record debt of 44 billion euros and a credit rating reduced to junk status.

The leader of the dominant Convergència i Unió (Convergence and Union), Artur Mas, is advancing a referendum on independence by calling the distribution of burdens within Spain “unfair and disloyal”. He openly speaks for the more well-off, comparing the “fatigue” in Catalonia with the complaints of Germany, France and other major states that they are subsidising southern Europe’s poorer states, such as Greece, Portugal and Spain.

The role played by Berlin and Paris in imposing crushing austerity on these countries is glossed over, because Mas wants entry into the EU. It is proof that an “independent” Catalonia will carry out precisely the same attacks on workers as it has already done as an “autonomous region.”

In Belgium, the same message comes from the New Flemish Alliance (N-VA), headed by Bart De Wever, which won decisively in local elections earlier this month by complaining of the Dutch-speaking north subsidising the poorer south of the country. De Wever, who became mayor of Antwerp, has declared, “The Flemish have had enough of being treated like cows only good for their milk.” He described Belgium as “a transfer union” dependent upon “checkbook federalism”. Like his Catalan counterpart, he pursues a pro-EU agenda.

In Italy, the Lega Nord (Northern League) is an openly right-wing formation, opposing subsidies to the less prosperous south under the slogan “Roma ladrona” (Rome Big Thief). But Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti’s demands for cuts in regional spending have also sparked protests calling for a Venetian republic. In South Tyrol, separatists are demanding that 90 percent of tax revenue collected in the wealthy province be returned to the region.

The Scottish National Party (SNP), run by Alex Salmond, a former oil adviser to the Royal Bank of Scotland, has secured agreement for an independence referendum in 2014. The SNP has long posed as a defender of limited welfare measures against central government cuts by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition and the preceding Labour Party government. But its real agenda is to establish a low corporate tax location for the European market that will serve the interests of the financial elite and its hangers-on.

Edinburgh is the second largest financial centre in the UK after the City of London and the fourth largest in Europe, measured by equity assets. It sustained a growth rate of over 30 percent between 2000 and 2005. It ranks ahead of Qatar, Oslo, Glasgow, Dublin, Abu Dhabi, Brussels, Milan, Madrid and Moscow in the Global Financial Centres Index.

The SNP claims Scotland ranks fifth within the EU in GDP per capita, if account is taken of Scotland’s economic share of the UK’s national air space, territorial waters and oil and gas reserves in the North Sea continental shelf, which it says should be controlled by Edinburgh. Scotland has been wealthier than the rest of the UK every single year since 1980, it insists.

The various pseudo-left groups seek to dress up these movements as progressive because their “objective role” is to break apart imperialist nations and this will somehow, at some ill-defined future point, open the way to a socialist development. They are carrying out a political fraud, designed to conceal their orientation to the bourgeoisie and a desire to share in the spoils of this new round of “nation-building”.

All these movements advance a perspective that is antithetical to the fundamental interests of the working class. The growth of separatist movements throughout Europe is a retrograde development that cuts across the critical struggle to unite the working class in opposition to the social counterrevolution being carried out under the auspices of the European Union.

The perspective of these movements is a recipe for the Balkanisation of Europe and its transformation into a madhouse of competing mini-states. These capitalist enclaves would all implement policies dictated to them by the troika and the banks and corporations, resulting in the ever more horrific immiseration of the broad mass of working people.

Left unchallenged, they will pit workers against one another in a race to the bottom in terms of jobs, wages and conditions. Worse still, as is proved by the experience of Yugoslavia, bourgeois nationalism and separatism fuel fratricidal conflict ending in war.

Trotsky once described the state system of Europe as akin to the cages within an impoverished provincial zoo. It is not the task of the working class to build still smaller cages, but to liberate the continent from all such archaic national divisions and build a harmonious and planned economy, based upon production for need and not profit.

This means waging an irreconcilable struggle against the EU and all its constituent governments—independently of all factions of the bourgeoisie and their petty-bourgeois accomplices—for the creation of workers’ governments and the United Socialist States of Europe.

Chris Marsden



=== 5 ===


Borderland Networks
 

2010/03/19

STRASBOURG/GERONA/BOLZANO
 
(Own report) - Several German federal states and municipalities are using a new EU legal instrument to promote a fusion with German-speaking regions of neighboring western nations. That instrument (the European cross-border cooperation groupings - EGCC) allows regional authorities of various nations to consolidate into common administrative structures, enjoying a large measure of autonomy. With the help of such an EGCC, the greater Strasbourg urban community fused a few weeks ago with a German county. Saarland would like to fuse with Luxemburg to form an EGCC, North Rhine-Westphalia is courting the German-speaking regions of Belgium. An internet journal of EGCC Strasbourg-Ortenau proponents declared that at the Spanish-French border the "reunification of Catalonia" has been achieved in an EGCC after being "separated" for 350 years. Other EGCCs are fusing Hungarian-speaking Slovak residential areas that Budapest would like to influence, to Hungarian municipalities. This is how numerous EGCCs are promoting ethnic structures and in the long run, an ethnic oriented Europe.

From Eurodistrict to EGCC

The creation of the European Cross Border Coordination Grouping (EGCC) with German participation was completed last month. The French greater Strasbourg urban community (Communauté Urbaine de Strasbourg - CUS) and the German Ortenau County seek to strengthen their cooperation using this new instrument. The larger framework is the already existent Eurodistrict Strasbourg-Ortenau, which had been announced in a German-French government declaration at the beginning of 2003 and established in 2005. Even the eurodistrict had already set the objective on initiating close French-German cross-border cooperation between the regional administrations and thereby phasing out the function of borders. Legal problems have proved an obstacle to the systematic development of this project.

Legal and Contractual Competence

Those involved hope to make progress through the new EGCC, an instrument that allows, for the first time, regional administrations of various nations - for example the greater Strasbourg urban community of France and the German county of Ortenau - to create cooperation structures with their own independent legal personalities. These cooperation structures have a legal and contractual competence and can acquire and sell assets as well as hire personnel. They can, for example, administer establishments in the transportation or health service sectors and even become competitors of the national administrations. Concerned about a loss of competence and supervisory powers, that accompany the establishment of EGCCs, German regional governments for awhile had resisted the creation of this new instrument, which had been approved by the EU Council and the Parliament in June 2006 and took effect with a model cross-border French-Belgian project in January 2008. After being given assurances that, in the Strasbourg-Ortenau EGCC project,[1] the German side would be amply taken into consideration a German regional administration is for the first time participating in the new cooperation.

"Catalans of all Nations, Unite!"

But this cross-border fusion of regional administrations, claiming to overcome the insistence on borders and old nationalisms, opens a gateway to new ethnic nationalisms. An internet article in support of the founding of the Strasbourg-Ortenau EGCC and vigorously supporting cross-border cooperation provides a vivid example. The article, which appeared at the end of 2009, under the title "Catalans of all nations, Unite!" deals with the "Catalan borderland" eurodistrict,[2] linking Spain's Catalan-speaking region (the Gerona area) to France's in the vicinity of Perpignan. The article also deals with the wider, Pyrénées-Mediteranée euroregion. The EGCC that had been established there, facilitated the consolidation of the "Catalan borderlands" within the eurodistrict, for example to permit a "harmonization of taxation" for "Catalans on both sides of the national borders" or even the standardization of the administrations.[3]

"Catalonia's Reunification"

The full significance of these statements can be seen when considering the reinforcement of Catalan nationalism. In Northeastern Spain, where the Catalan-speaking population enjoys special rights, Spanish-speaking inhabitants, who do not have a command of the Catalan dialect, have been discriminated against for some time - in some cases, even seriously. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[4]) Efforts toward the secession of Catalan-speaking regions of Spain and the formation - together with the Catalan-speaking regions of France - of a Catalan-speaking nation are intensifying and drawing international attention.[5] This new nationalism, which threatens to destroy the existing nations, as can be seen in the case of Yugoslavia, has received a boost with the new EGCC. According to the article from the EGCC Strasbourg-Ortenau supporters, in the "Catalan Borderland" eurodistrict and the EGCC that is part of it, entities are "growing together that belong together". They write that "northern Catalonia was separated from the south by the Pyrenees Peace Accord in 1659." At last in 2009, it "came to a reunification, at least at the regional local level."[6]

Greater Hungary, Greater Flanders

In fact, the majority of the currently existing and some of the planned EGCCs are directly connected to various ethnic nationalisms. One of the first EGCCs fused the Hungarian city of Esztergom to the Slovakian city Štúrovo. Štúrovo is in the region of Slovakia that had been part of Hungary before the Paris Peace Treaties and to which Hungarian nationalists are staking claims today. Approximately two-thirds of Štúrovo's population speak Hungarian, as their mother language, and are counted as among the "Hungarians abroad," in whose behalf Budapest claims a special "protective role."[7] Two other EGCCs unite parts of Belgium's Flanders region with areas of France ("French Flanders"), to which some Flemish nationalists, are still laying claim.[8]

One Tirol

The Austrian state of Tirol ("North"/"East Tirol") seeks to found an EGCC with the Italian provinces Bolzano-Alto Adige ("South Tirol") and Trento (Welschtirol). As in other cases, the EGCC cooperation, agreed on in October 2009, by the Austrian regional state and the two Italian provinces is based on already existing cooperation models, while enhancing the authority to take action. For the first time since 1918, the former Habsburg Crown Tirol has, with the founding of the local EGCC, regained its own legal personality. Already in the regional parliaments of the participating entities, there is talk of forming their own "government".[9]

Alsace, Luxemburg, German-Speaking Belgium

Following the founding of the EGCC Strasbourg-Ortenau, uniting a portion of Alsace to a German county, the German Saarland and North Rhine-Westphalia regions are also pushing the foundation of EGCCs. Saarland is seeking to form cooperation with Luxemburg; North Rhine-Westphalia is supporting the Aachen "city region" in its efforts to cooperate with Parkstad Limburg in the Netherlands. The German-speaking community of Belgium, with about 70,000 German-speaking Belgians is also to be involved. The name has already been chosen for this northernmost EGCC on the western border of Germany, which would link Alsace, Luxemburg, as well as the German-speaking areas of Belgium to German regional administrations. The EGCC that would stretch out from Aachen would have the name "EGCC Charlemagne," which draws upon the traditional image of German imperial propaganda.[10]

[1] Therefore the EGCC, which is being founded along the lines of French law, will have an administration in Kehl, Germany.
[2] As was the German translation used in the Article. Officially the eurodistrict is the "Eurodistrict de l'Espace Catalan Transfrontalier".
[3] Katalanen aller Länder, vereinigt euch! 2-ufer.com 22.12.2009. The internet journal "2-Ufer - 2 Rives" claims to enjoy support also from a parliamentarian of the German national parliament and the director of the German-French Institute.
[4] see also Wie ein Staat and The German Ethnic Model (IV)
[5] see also Zukunft als Volk, Language Struggle, Ethnic Europe and The German Ethnic Model (IV)
[6] Katalanen aller Länder, vereinigt euch! 2-ufer.com 22.12.2009
[7] see also The German Ethnic Model (I), Ethnic Loyalty and Lebensraum Karpatenbecken
[8] Tens of thousands of the inhabitants of the French Département du Nord in the region of Pas de Calais, speak a Flemish dialect. Their area of residence is claimed by Flemish (and greater Netherlands) nationalists as part of Flanders (or the Greater Netherlands).
[9] Dreier-Landtag - eine Regierung für die Euregio; www.provinz.bz.it 29.10.2009. See also The German Ethnic Model (III)
[10] see also Bauhaus Europa and Hintergrundbericht: Der Aachener Karlspreis