Spain's Basque terrorist group ETA, whose 1998 “indefinite” cease-fire broke down a year later, has now declared a “permanent” cease-fire. Nevertheless, hopes that this really does mark an end to 40 years of violence that has claimed more than 800 lives must be tinged with caution. Informed sources expected this announcement several weeks ago. The delay until this week suggests a row among the 300 or so active terrorists. The parallels with Northern Ireland’s IRA, with whom the ETA has long had close links, are disturbing. In 1969 the original IRA split into Official and Provisional wings, the former largely withdrawing from violence. It was the Provisional IRA that maintained the terror campaign in the province and on the British mainland until the suspension of its murderous campaign with the 1998 signing of the Good Friday Agreement. Thereafter two smaller splinter groups, the Real IRA and the Irish National Liberation Army have remained committed to terror activities. It is therefore still possible that dissident ETA thugs may seek to keep the conflict going.
The second reason for caution is that it is hard to see where the negotiations to which the ETA killers say they are now committed can go. The Basque region has already obtained the highest level of autonomy possible under the Spanish Constitution. Few people in Spain, not even among the Basques themselves, could contemplate the possibility of a truly independent Basque state — the cause for which ETA has claimed to be fighting. The creation of a new country runs counter to the European Union’s long-term federalist agenda. Even if it were acceptable to Spaniards, it simply no longer makes sense in the era of European unification.
On the other hand, the fact that ETA has followed its Provisional IRA allies to the negotiating table is hugely significant for every society in the world currently facing terrorist violence. Though it does not do to emphasize it, the truth is that when a terror organization stops killing and starts talking, it should be recognized by all sides that violence has failed. Some may argue that the negotiations would never have started without the preceding campaign of murder and mayhem; that the violence forced the authorities to address an issue. There has unfortunately to be some truth in this. Nevertheless, what is significant in Northern Ireland and now the Basque region is the clear demonstration that in the end, no modern, civilized society is going to be bombed and terrorized into surrender, whatever the terrorists’ cause — legitimate or otherwise. Ultimately, both sides are going to face each other across the negotiating table. The terrorists must therefore ask themselves if all the butchery and bloodshed they caused was really necessary, while the authorities must reflect that perhaps they could have headed off the violence before it set in, by addressing the disputed issues.
This is not, however, to suggest that there is an equitable worth between governmental and terrorist positions. In the end, whatever the cause, noble or otherwise, terrorists will always be murderers.
