LEADER PUSHES SPAIN TO LEFT, REJECTING
CALLS TO SLOW DOWN
Artículo de Renwick Mclean en “The
New York Times” del 10-Dec-06
Por su interés y relevancia he seleccionado el artículo que
sigue para incluirlo en este sitio web.
Con un breve comentario al final:
RADICALISMO PROVOCATIVO Y
SUPERFICIAL, JUNTO A DESESTABILIZACION SECTARIA Y ANACRONICA
Luis Bouza-Brey, (13-12-06, 23:30)
Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, who earned
great popularity by withdrawing Spanish troops from Iraq in 2004, has used his
political capital to broadly reshape life here, pushing Spain to the left both
socially and politically. One result is the opening of deep rifts in a country
long dominated by religious conservatism.
Dispensing
with the moderation that previous Socialist governments deemed crucial to
stability, Mr. Zapatero has eliminated all legal
distinctions between same-sex and heterosexual unions and diluted longstanding
ties between the state and the Roman Catholic Church.
He has also expanded women’s rights and access to power in a society that
traditionally restricted them.
Many
here are worried that he has moved too far too fast.
“Zapatero takes for granted issues that many people,
particularly the older generations, still worry about,” said Emilio Lamo de Espinosa, a founder of the Elcano
Royal Institute, a public policy research organization in Madrid, who added
that the prime minister “is governing with half of Spain, but against almost
the entire other half. That is risky.”
Mr.
Zapatero rejects suggestions that he should temper
his approach.
“When
people say he’s going too fast, he says, ‘Go ask gay couples or other groups
who have been denied their rights if I’m going too fast,’ ” said Fernando Moraleda, Mr. Zapatero’s
communications director.
Public
opinion in Spain seems to back him up. It leans decidedly left of center, more
so than in any other country in Europe, according to surveys.
But
Spain is still grappling with the divisive legacy of a dictatorship that ended
30 years ago and it has a history of splitting into hostile ideological camps
that threaten the country’s political stability.
In
such a climate, Mr. Zapatero’s critics argue that he
has an obligation to avoid polarizing agendas and to govern less from the left
than public opinion might warrant.
“It’s
probably the great mistake of Zapatero that will go
down in the history books,” said Ignacio Astarloa,
one of the most influential members of the center-right Popular Party, the main
opposition group in Parliament. “He’s destroying the consensus that we have
created during the democracy.”
Previous
Socialist Party governments tended to adopt moderate agendas to preserve the
social cohesion that was painstakingly cultivated during the transition to
democracy after Franco’s death in 1975.
Mr.
Zapatero has gambled that Spanish society is now stable
enough and its democracy advanced enough that such moderation is no longer
necessary.
It
is a significant wager, according to many. Mr. Lamo
de Espinosa, the researcher, said Mr. Zapatero, 46,
acquired political maturity when democracy was already established in Spain.
“He takes democracy for granted, and he takes social and political stability in
Spain for granted,” Mr. Lamo de Espinosa said.
Mr.
Zapatero has therefore been willing to openly defy
the Catholic Church with his policies legalizing gay marriage and making
divorce easier. He has also presented a legislative package condemning Franco’s
dictatorship and honoring its opponents, taking sides in a conflict long
considered too divisive for the government to address.
And
he has dismissed concerns he is flirting with the disintegration of Spain with
his openness to greater autonomy for the regions of Catalonia and the Basque
Provinces, whose separatist leanings — and the debate over how to contain them
— have roiled national politics since democracy began here.
Mr.
Zapatero’s philosophy, rooted in what he calls
citizen socialism, is based on near-pacifism in foreign policy, expanding civil
rights and a preference for following rather than guiding the will of the
people.
“He
is not a leftist,” said one friend, who spoke about him on condition of
anonymity. “He is a radical democrat.”
Whatever
risks there are, Mr. Zapatero’s commitment to “soft
power” seems to have led to advances on some of Spain’s most intractable issues,
including a pledge in March from the militant Basque separatist group ETA to
honor a permanent cease-fire in exchange for dialogue with the government.
The
problem, however, is that ETA has so far refused to disarm or disband, raising
questions about its commitment.
That
has fueled criticism that Mr. Zapatero bent to
terrorists by offering talks with ETA to procure the cease-fire. Critics also
say he yielded too much early this year in negotiations over greater autonomy
for Catalonia.
“It
is a very efficient way of governing,” said Antonio Elorza,
a political science professor at the Complutense
University of Madrid. But on serious matters of state, he said, such as the
quest for more self-government from Spain’s regions, concessions must be
constrained by clearly stated principles.
“Zapatero has offered no vision,” he said. “We are reforming
the state without any idea of where we are going.”
But
Mr. Zapatero’s aides say that critics are confusing
his flexibility and openness to dialogue with weakness, and that his record of
achievement since taking office testifies to the power of his philosophy.
Even
if the peace process with ETA proceeds, Mr. Zapatero
must still address the Basque regional government’s demands for more autonomy
from Madrid, a process that he has agreed to undertake but that could be even
more perilous than this year’s negotiations with Catalonia.
He
also faces growing public unease over illegal immigration from Africa, and the prospect that Spain’s economy could finally cool
after a decade of solid growth, throwing current problems into sharper relief.
Yet
recent history suggests that Spanish governments are hard to dislodge from
power in the absence of major crises or scandals, particularly governments that
lean to the left.
“Even
if Spaniards are unhappy with the policies of Zapatero,”
said Mr. Lamo de Espinosa of the Elcano
Institute, “it doesn’t mean they will prefer the opposition.”
Breve comentario final:
RADICALISMO PROVOCATIVO Y
SUPERFICIAL, JUNTO A DESESTABILIZACION SECTARIA Y ANACRONICA
Luis Bouza-Brey, (13-12-06, 23:30)
Los homosexuales tenían garantizadas sus libertades desde comienzos
de la democracia sin que nadie se escandalizara por ello, en un país mucho más
abierto de lo que este artículo da a entender. Pero en lugar de regular
jurídicamente uniones de hecho que completasen la actualización del ordenamiento
jurídico, el Gobierno de Largo Zapatero mezcla y confunde el matrimonio
heterosexual con el homosexual sin necesidad ,
realismo ni prudencia.
A las mujeres se las ha discriminado positivamente, obligando a
proporcionarles cuotas en diversas posiciones sociales con independencia del
mérito y cualidades de las candidatas. ¿Es esto una prueba de modernidad y de
progreso? Más bien de atraso y de ataque radical al principio de igualdad ante
la ley proclamado por la Constitución.
Ambas políticas, que se pretende que constituyan el símbolo
del progresismo del Gobierno, constituyen necedades propias de un infantilismo
ideológico radical impropio de la madurez general del país.
Pero esto no es lo más importante, sino que el aspecto más grave y
atentatorio contra la estabilidad de España lo constituye el cambio impulsado
por el Gobierno en lo referente a la memoria histórica y resultante de sus
alianzas con las minorías comunistas e independentistas, que rechazan el modelo
democrático y la descentralización compatible con la unidad del Estado
instaurados desde la transición, reivindicando el régimen republicano de los
años treinta, marginando a la derecha democrática mediante pactos impropios de
un régimen de estas características, e impulsando un confederalismo
precontemporáneo que destruye en el medio plazo la
unidad y el funcionamiento viable del Estado.
Eso es lo más grave, la aceptación de las políticas anacrónicas y
sectarias de grupos políticos minoritarios, con el fin de apuntalarse en el
poder y marginar a la mitad del país, mediante la apertura de un boquete en la
línea de flotación del sistema y la ruptura del pacto básico sobre el que se
sustentaba la Constitución del 78. La consecuencia de ello es que el país se
mueve a la deriva, sin rumbo ni objetivos claros y aceptados democráticamente
por la mayoría, dividido por una brecha estructural grave y debilitado
frente al terrorismo y el separatismo. Debilidad incrementada por la
inconsciencia de un liderazgo irresponsable apoyado en fuerzas destructivas,
aupadas al poder como muletas para afianzarse en su disfrute, por un partido
que ha traicionado sus valores básicos de socialismo, igualdad, democracia y
progreso.