Posted on 08/03/2004 6:01:52 PM PDT by quidnunc
The Spanish world seems to have a talent for diplomatic grievance, prolonged beyond the point where even well-wishers lose patience. Argentina's obsession with possession of the Falklands is a case in point. Motherland Spain's refusal to accept Britain's rights over Gibraltar is another.
The Spanish have recently been at it again, protesting about celebrations of the 300th anniversary of the British capture of the Rock, at the Princess Royal's visit and at a British frigate firing an 18-gun salute.
Diplomatically, there is no doubt about Britain's right to Gibraltar. It was captured in a fair fight in 1704 during the War of the Spanish Succession and ceded by Spain to Britain as one of the terms of the Treaty of Utrecht that ended the war in 1713. Spain made several attempts to recapture the Rock, particularly during the Great Siege of 1779-82, but all failed.
Gibraltar became the most important outpost of British naval power in the Mediterranean at the end of the 18th century, the base from which Nelson launched his campaign to defeat the French at the Nile in 1798 and to overwhelm the Franco-Spanish fleet at Trafalgar in 1805. And 22 years ago it was a vital staging post for parts of the task force on the way to the Falklands.
During the 19th century, the Rock, originally barren and uninhabited, acquired a population, now 30,000-strong, which was not Spanish at all. Though most Gibraltarians speak a dialect of Spanish, as well as colloquial English, they are of very varied origin, descending from North African Sephardic Jews and the offspring of British soldiers and sailors. Gibraltar town is as British as Portsmouth. The shops sell British newspapers and British confectionery, the policemen dress like British bobbies, the taxi drivers banter in British catchphrases.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Mexico lost Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California about 160 years ago and Mexico ain't over it yet!
Despite the determination of the Gibraltarians to remain British, successive Westminster governments have made determined efforts to placate Spanish resentments over Gibraltar. Even during the Franco years, when there were serious constitutional objections over the transfer of sovereignty from a local democracy to a foreign dictatorship, Britain proposed the idea of joint sovereignty. It also used its good offices to smooth the path for Spain's entry both into Nato and the then EEC.
Those favours have been forgotten. Spain's new socialist government is now advancing familiar claims and uttering ancient objections. It seems unlikely that it could be placated even by the arrangement of joint sovereignty. Spain wants Gibraltar back, as part of the national territory, however much the Gibraltarians object.
There are good reasons why the British Government is unwilling to agree. The most important are the wishes of the Gibraltarians themselves. They convincingly deny that they are Spanish and insist that they wish to preserve the status they currently enjoy.
In 2002, in an unofficial referendum, which both Britain and Spain refused - shamefully - to recognise, 98 per cent of voters rejected a proposal for joint sovereignty on an 88 per cent turnout. This echoed the official 1967 referendum, in which 12,138 voted against becoming part of Spain, and 44 voted in favour.
Beyond the democratic argument, however, there are vital strategic considerations. Gibraltar commands one of the most important waterways in the world, the entry into and exit from the Mediterranean. It is policed by the Royal Navy and effectively so, despite recent and projected reductions in British naval strength. Yet there is a manifest threat to safe passage through the Gibraltar Strait levelled by Islamic terrorists based in Morocco.
The Kingdom of Morocco is stalwartly anti-terrorist, but that is no guarantee against terrorists operating by clandestine means from remote bases, as recent attacks on American and French ships in Arabian waters demonstrate. The British naval presence is far more reassuring.
Spain's military capacity to police the western Mediterranean against Islamic attacks is questionable. The new socialist government's firmity of purpose has been called into question by its withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq following the al-Qa'eda attack on the Madrid railway station earlier this year. Both the Spanish navy and air force are deficient in effective operational units, even if the government's political will to act with determination was evident, which it is not.
The new Spanish prime minister has shown that he believes Spain is better protected by appeasement of terrorist enemies than by an offensive response. Britain, and the Gibraltarians, have good reason to fear that appeasement merely encourages organisations such as al-Qa'eda to redouble their efforts.
No doubt it irritates the Spanish, that a part, however small, of its contiguous territory is not under the control of its national government. The situation, however, is not unique, and other countries seem able to live equably with similar anomalies.
Sweden, for example, accepts Finnish sovereignty over the off-shore Aland Islands, though their population is only Swedish. Denmark, after several wars with Germany, today accepts German sovereignty over Schleswig-Holstein, where much of the population is Danish-speaking.
Perhaps most pertinently, Spain itself regards the enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla, both in North Africa and claimed by Morocco, as an integral part of its own territory. Closer to home, France, the most nationalistic of nations, makes no claim at all to the Anglo-Norman Islands known to the British as the Channel Islands, though they lie almost within French territorial waters.
Rational argument has little part to play where deep nationalist emotions operate. Nevertheless, the Spanish ought to accept that, while their non- Spanish neighbours in Gibraltar refuse to join the Spanish kingdom, there is no point in persisting with their traditional claims.
The War of the Spanish Succession was over 300 years ago. There is no reason to revive it.
That's the first thing that came to my mind: Mexifornia.
Our minister is Gibraltarian. Can confirm most of the above, adding an intense desire of the people to remain with Britain. He also reports, though, that some Brits regard Gibraltarians as being, somehow, "lesser."
Of course, who are we Americans to talk... afterall we gave away the Panama Canal - and we BUILT that sucker.
Having joined their cheese-eating-surrender-monkey neighbors to the north by bugging out of Iraq, they can just suck lemons as far as I'm concerned. But I hope they come to their senses before the Islamofascists recover "Andalusia" for Islam by terrifying their pansy government into further rounds of surrender.
Spain demonstrated on March 14, 2004 why they should not have control of Gibralter.
Nations can have long memories. Especially when the nation loses respect for the nation giving cause for the memories.
"Perhaps most pertinently, Spain itself regards the enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla, both in North Africa and claimed by Morocco, as an integral part of its own territory. Closer to home, France, the most nationalistic of nations, makes no claim at all to the Anglo-Norman Islands known to the British as the Channel Islands, though they lie almost within French territorial waters."
What's the worry? One bomb in a train station will have the Spanish rolling over like a well-trained puppy. Just make sure you lay some paper down for when they pee themselves.
The author would probably do better writing ads for underwear manufacturers.
Spain had its best shot at recovering Gibraltar in 1940. All Franco had to do was give his OK, and the Germans would have done the work.
TS
300 years is only pifling time to hold a grudge.
Look at us Irish? We are holding a grudge against the Brits for nearly a millenium now! ;-)
We also "created" the country of Panama.
Should I give my house and land "back' to the Indians, then ?
Spain's a weak, cowardly nation; they don't deserve squat. Eff you, Spain.
Actually, the first thought in my mnd was that this parrallels the Israeli situation from the 1967 war. They were ceded land by Egypt and Jordan. The only difference is that there were already people in the areas ceded.
If I understand correctly Israel even tried to return the West Bank to Jordan, but was turned down. Jordan seemed to understand the trouble associated with holding the area.
If I have my history incorrect, please tell me.
Consistent? Or contrary? *LOL*
How true, and yet while Mexico can't even run itself properly, she dreams of expansion. Migration, invasion, remittance money, maybe mix in a little terrorist smuggling...so far the plan's working like a charm.
If the Gibraltarians don't want to become part of Spain and the British are willing and able to defend their territory against any Spanish invasion, Gibraltar will remain British. As it should.
That little bit of altruism has earned us the moniker 'stupid' around the world.
Considering how Spanish voters cast their votes to please the Muslim maniac's after the train bombing. It is a miracle that there is a still a place upon the map of planet earth, called Spain.
I wouldn't.
Maybe the idea of calling it the "De Gaulle Stone" will pass!
It is working like a charm. However, the part that raises my wrath is the so called 'American Leadership' is even helping with the invasion. Turning against their own people if you please!
"Of course, who are we Americans to talk... afterall we gave away the Panama Canal - and we BUILT that sucker."
Why did we give it back when we stole it fair and square?
...But I'm not giving Louisiana back to the French!
ping
"DeGaulle Stone"
You are the king!!
Whoa! If we give Manhattan back to ANYBODY, it goes back to the Dutch.
"We also "created" the country of Panama.
"
While the US certainly instigated/approved and supported the 1903 insurrection, Panama had a long history separate from colombia, and even after it became part of colombia for some time had special status.
OKOKOK, then. We up the ante and let the Brits burn D.C. to the ground again. Could it hurt?
Spain first lost it to Geb-el-Tarq In the 7th century.
Educate yourself.
Look up John Keegan, historian on Google and then still see if you feel the same way. You will find that he lectures at some US schools/universities.
I am presuming that you are in fact a conservative and your handle is just a play. Or maybe just Anti-Brit?
I was simply pointing out that peoples had long memories and didn't easily renounce ancient claims. The author's assertion that Britain won Gibraltar in a "fair" fight and therefore had a right to it forever was monumentally stupid.
You're right. My handle is just a provocative play. But I consider myself to be a Teddy Roosevelt liberal. I don't know how I'd be characterized in modern terms - a classical liberal, an imperialist?
LOL!
But the Spaniards are very sore about the whole deal. If you're driving to Gibraltar, good luck finding it. There are NO signs on the freeway system telling you how to get there -- because Spain doesn't want you to go there.
Once you find it, getting into Gibraltar is easy. Getting OUT and back to Spain takes you FOREVER. It took us 2 hours. At the Spanish entry point, they purposely cut it down to ONE lane to inspect vehicles. You have to shut off your car, exit your vehicle and one person inspects it (the other one holds a machine gun). Each inspection takes 3-5 minutes. The Spanish purposely make getting in and out of Gibraltar as PAINFUL as possible to tourists.
And don't forget your passport. The Spanish will NOT allow you to leave Gibraltar. Lore has it that if you don't have a passport, you must FLY out of the little bitty airstrip they have on the Gibraltar side, and go all the way to England. Don't know it that parts true, but I wouldn't want to take the chance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.