Spanish republic

On April 14, 1931, King Alfonso XIII went into exile and the Second Republic was proclaimed in Spain. With this, a new chapter was inaugurated in the history of the European country and also in its relations with Latin America.

The Second Republic had in Mexico one of its greatest allies, since its proclamation, during the civil war (1936-1939) started following the coup d’état of General Francisco Franco, and even after the victory of the rebel camp which imposed a military regime that would last 40 years.

In fact, the North American country was one of the main recipients of Republican exiles after the war.

But in the region, not all countries had the same degree of relations with the Spanish Republic.

Unequal reception

For historian Clara Lida, Latin America’s relationship with the Second Republic depends on three factors: the country in question, the citizenship of that country and, third, the Spanish communities in each country.

Lida, born in Buenos Aires and researcher at El Colegio de México (Colmex), where she heads the Mexico-Spain Chair, gives two opposite examples.

“In the case of Mexico, the Republic is very welcome, and very well received by the government of the moment, a government after the Revolution of 1910, and by citizenship in general, ”he explains.

“They are both republican countries, and the idea that there is a republic in Spain is something very close to the Latin American world to begin with, and especially to the Mexican world,” he continues.

However, he underlines, “the Spanish community of Mexico, rather well-off, more traditional and closer to the monarchy, was not so favorable to the Republic”.

In place, in Argentina, there was a government resulting from a military coup (1930), and that “did not receive much sympathy from the Republic”, says Lida.

Although in this case “the general population was very receptive and much of the Spanish colony in Argentina, a significant Spanish immigration closely linked to the world of work, greeted the Republic with great enthusiasm”.

Influence of American republicanism

A less well-known aspect of relations between Latin America in general, and Mexico in particular, with the Second Republic is the influence it had on the new Spanish Republican Constitution.

“Those who participated in the shaping of the Spanish Constitution They were very aware of Mexican constitutionalism, and many of their ideas were applied to Spain as well.», Explains historian Lida.

Indeed, with the exception of the ephemeral antecedent of the First Republic (1873-1874), in Spain there was no republican antecedents, “so that looking towards the American republics and towards American constitutionalism had a certain logic, although there was also the German Weimar Republic ”.

“In the case of 20th century Mexico, born of an early revolution with a Constitution which in 1917 was very advanced and very progressive, this Constitution had a very direct influence on the Republican Constitution of 1931.”

The Constitution of Mexico established a clear division between church and state, a clear inclination and vocation for free and secular education, a defense of the nationalization of the wealth of the subsoil and also had an article in favor of land reform.

“There were many articles which the Second Republic considered not only sympathetically, but some were adapted to its own Constitution. “

In the page of the Spanish Congress, the influence of the Mexican Constitution on the Spanish of 1931 is recognized, in which “it already constitutionalizes the so-called fundamental rights of the third generation or the social and economic rights.

And the agrarian and educational reforms they would be one of the priorities of the Republican government.

So, for example, secularism This is one of the political principles which inspire the Republican Constitution, which also establishes that “wealth is subordinated to the interests of the national economy, constitutionalizing the intervening and social state which could expropriate on the basis of a social interest. supreme ”.

For the defense of the Republic

With the military uprising of July 1936 and the ensuing civil war, positions in Latin America again varied considerably.

Mexico fiercely defended the government of the Republic, while other countries in the region, such as Argentina and Brazil, quickly sided with the rebels.

“Mexico had a very clear and simple attitude towards the Republican government in 1936: to defend the Republic because it was a democratically constituted state,” Alberto Enríquez, professor at the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, told BBC. ‘National Autonomous University. . of Mexico, for another report on the figure of Manuel Azaña, the last president of the Spanish Republic.

When the conflict broke out in 1936, Western democracies opted within the League of Nations (ancestor of the UN) for the Non-Intervention Pact, which in practice amounts to turning its back on the Republic, which Mexico refuse.

“Mexico manifests itself in favor of the Republic in all the international forums in which it has participated, from the League of Nations to others in Latin America, (where) it has also been a staunch defender of legitimately constituted governments and (a took a stand) against military coups, ”Lida also said.

This support that started in diplomatic terms, it also happened in material terms.

“Within the limits of the limited possibilities of a Mexico which did not have great resources”, the country sent food, medicine and the few weapons it had available to the Republican side, explains the historian.

As an anecdote of the support of the Mexican government to the Republic, during the commemoration of the Independence in the Zócalo in 1936, the president of the time Lázaro Cárdenas, during the traditional cry which is normally “Long live Mexico! “, Added a” Long live Mexico! the Spanish Republic! “.

Mexico, moreover, was the only country in the region that never recognized the legitimacy of the Franco government.

The legacy of the Republic in Mexico

One of the main consequences for Latin America of the rebels’ victory in the civil war was the arrival of Republican exiles.

Mexico, with 20,000,was the country in the region that hosted the most Republican refugees. Chile, Cuba, Venezuela, Colombia and Argentina received around 2,000 each.

The exiles reached other countries, notably France, but also the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom.

But Mexico has granted special protection to Spanish refugees.

Indeed, the Mexican Ambassador to France, Luis I. Rodríguez, was responsible for protecting Manuel Azana, who crossed the French border on foot in 1939.

The last President of the Spanish Republic died of his health problems on November 3, 1940 in a room at the Hôtel du Midi in the town of Montauban, in southwestern France.

The room, having been rented by the Mexican Embassy, ​​was considered Mexican territory.

And at his funeral, his coffin was covered with the Mexican flag.

“He will be proudly covered with the flag of Mexico. It will be for us a privilege, for the Republicans, a hope and for you, a painful lesson ”, answered the ambassador Rodríguez to the prefect of Montauban, as he told it in his newspapers of the time, edited by the Colegio de México in 2000..

Some steamboats are also said to leave France for Mexico with thousands of Spanish refugees on board.

“Mexico has made a big effort to support Republicans displaced and threatened by the military coup,” explains Lida. “A clear policy of openness to Spanish exile has been generated.”

On Argentina there was no official support like in Mexico, although there was also a university intellectual exile that in the early years it was also inserted in Argentine universities.

But in the case of Mexico, the country had emerged from a revolution and that meant that it was gradually rebuilding itself on several levels.

One of the levels was academic and educational, and in this sense the North American country benefited from the arrival of Spanish intellectuals.

Mexican universities, such as the National Polytechnic Institute and the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), were nurtured by these intellectuals.

“There were many Spanish intellectuals and artists in exile who were able to fit into the Mexican work world, university, university… and they left a trace of what they knew, of what they brought with them intellectual and professional baggage, ”explains Lida.

Some of them founded prestigious institutions like the Casa de México in Spain, which is currently the Colegio de México and the Ateneo Español de México.

The exiles also founded schools, some of which continue to function, such as the famous Colegio Madrid and the Instituto Luis Vives.

With all this, and in a way, the Republic continued to live in Mexico.

You can now receive notifications from BBC Mundo. Download the new version of our app and activate it so you don’t miss our best content.

The crucial moment in any debate is when it must translate into a political decision. And there was a time when we had to make a political decision on this issue.

That moment has come with the 2018 no-confidence motion [against right-wing premier Mariano Rajoy]. It happened after we already brought in a token no-confidence motion in 2017, when we were tied with the PSOE in the polls or even ahead of it.

I had a debate with a small group of comrades, during which we came to this conclusion: we would support a motion of censure that would give the government function to the PSOE alone. [so as to halt the Right’s advance at the height of the standoff around Catalan independence]. We might be the biggest progressive force in the next election because we were doing better in opposition [but the polls suggested the Right would win an outright majority].

But if we let the PSOE rule alone, or a PSOE government with us in a much reduced position – as it ultimately happened – it would be difficult for us to achieve a hegemonic position in the short term. We were aware that we would give Pedro Sánchez enormous electoral weight, for a long time, if we did this.

The key to the discussion was that, at a time when we were the main political force in the left camp, we had to assume that we would not rule for decades, even if we won the elections, because it was impossible that, given the current balance of power, they would allow us to govern. The only possibility for us to be a government force would be to go with the PSOE – with the greatest weight. It’s full of risk, because they can try to hurt you anyway – as they do – and because it is much more difficult to obtain electoral gains when you are the minority partner. . But at least it offers new possibilities.

It allows us to be part of the state leadership, it allows us to train government executives that we didn’t have, it allows us an understanding and praxis in the state that you don’t get from local governments or regional. It allows us to participate, however small, in critical decisions about where the country should go. We will always have to fight with one hand tied behind the back while all our opponents have a free hand, still have to face a media ecosystem weighed against us. We will have very powerful enemies. But again, we need to take a historian’s point of view and understand how political conditions have been in the past. People who think like us have always had to work hard.

We made the most difficult decision – it’s much more comfortable, even electorally, to be a permanent left opposition. What has been, historically, the main channel through which the left forces of social democracy have acquired electoral weight? Basically criticizing him from the left.

But I believe we have done something immensely important. We are the only strength of – dare I say it – our political tradition which is in the government of an EU country, in fact in the fourth largest economy in the euro area. In those nine months of government, we have already achieved things that would suffice for an entire Parliament. We would always have liked to go further, we always have criticism from the left, as is normal.

But above all, we train state officials. When I look at my team and how they got here, I see that even after only nine months we have more and more people who are always better prepared to rule this country. And we are young – a political force that reached government after having existed for only six years. When you compare the average age of ministers, secretaries of state, directors general and chiefs of staff of Unidas Podemos to those of the PSOE, there is a difference of fifteen or twenty years. I think in historical terms we have done the right thing. It is full of risks, dangers; there is no guarantee that this will turn out well. But even if the other option had worked out well, even if it got us past the PSOE, I think we would have ended up in a situation where they would never have allowed us to rule.

On April 14, we celebrated the 89th anniversary of the Second Spanish Republic.

It is a commemoration of the time when the Spanish working class fought for brotherhood and justice and opposed the rise of fascism with the heroic help of the International Brigades.

The year is 1930 and Spain is torn by a huge inequality gap between the rich landowners and the nearly starving workers.

Primo de Rivera’s dictatorship left a huge budget deficit, rising unemployment and poverty at a time of global economic depression.

King Alfonso XIII, who had supported the dictatorship, agrees to hold the first democratic elections in nearly 60 years.

To his disgust, however, these are taken as a plebiscite on the legitimacy of his monarchy.

On Thursday April 12, 1931, the municipal elections gave a large victory to the Republican parties and the now former king went into exile.

Only two days later, the new republic was born and workers filled the streets and squares of celebrating Spain.

Indeed, the new “democratic republic of workers of all classes” and its constitution recognized freedoms of association and expression as well as civil rights such as divorce and women’s suffrage.

The division of state powers was established in the newly secular state, and for the first time in the country’s history a significant degree of autonomy was agreed with its regions – although only Catalonia (1932 ) and the Basque Country (1936) were able to manage to obtain this status before the civil war.

The first biennium was led by Socialist-influenced Republicans who launched a number of important and necessary reforms: an attempt to democratize the military, a sweeping educational reform with the construction of nearly 7,000 schools, social laws improving working conditions and strengthening labor unions and an attempt to redistribute land ownership, among others.

While these reforms failed to live up to the hopes of the working class, they still drew a reaction from economic elites who saw them as a direct attack on their interests.

A premonitory military coup led by General José Sanjurjo failed to seize state power in 1932, and in 1933, amid an economic crisis and explosive interclass tensions, the Catholic and conservative parties won the election, overturning all previous reforms.

The formation of a government with the fascist Ceda coalition (Confederacion Espanola de Derechas Autonomas / Spanish Confederation of Autonomous Rights) intensified tensions which led to a general strike in 1934 against the government.

This initiative failed in most parts of the country, but in Asturias the miners fought fiercely, until the government called in the army under the command of General Francisco Franco to quell the rebellion.

After various corruption scandals, the government called for another election in February 1936.

This time, the left republican parties joined the Popular Front with a program summarized in three fundamental points: to provide statutes of autonomy for the different regions of Spain, agrarian reforms and amnesty and compensation for all political prisoners.

The Popular Front won a narrow victory over the opposing right-wing coalition, and as the new government tried to revive the reformist agenda, polarization inexorable.

The workers of the left had taken a more revolutionary turn and the right was ultimately more concerned with destroying the republic than winning it electorally.

The Spanish Civil War began on July 17, 1936 with a coup d’état.

Although the war ended with the defeat of the republic and strong repression, it remains in our memory as a fine example of international solidarity.

Under the banner of the International Brigades, workers around the world have come to the aid of the Spanish Republic to defend it against fascism – regardless of the blockade caused by the Non-Intervention Agreement, promoted by the British and French governments.

Over 2,300 volunteers came from Great Britain, Ireland and the Commonwealth. About 500 of them never returned home.

Even more encouraging, we continue to see acts of solidarity in our world today. We see them when volunteers save the lives of migrants crossing the Mediterranean Sea, even though they face prison terms.

We see it when workers help refugees in camps, even under threat from organized fascist groups on the Greek and Turkish border.

And more recently, we see the solidarity of countries like China and Cuba, sending medical aid and doctors to any country in need, regardless of their previous political connections, in order to fight Covid-19.

Sadly, the same cannot be said of those who now hypocritically praise the health care system.

Those who not only dismantled it and made cuts to it for decades, but allowed corruption to run rampant and rampant.

The current Spanish state is inherited from the dictatorship and it is anchored in the corruption which reaches its highest institution.

The monarchy is now under scrutiny after it was revealed that former King Juan Carlos I had € 100million (£ 88million) in an offshore account. Some € 65million is earmarked for the legacy of the current king, Felipe VI, who only recently renounced it publicly after knowing about it for over a year.

This only represents a declaration of intention, a facade to try to improve the damaged image of the Spanish royal family since he will not be able to renounce this heritage until the death of his father.

This adds to a long list of “mistakes” that ended with the abdication of Juan Carlos in 2014.

People showed their contempt for the monarchy on March 18 when Felipe VI was on national television; people came out on their balconies making noise with pots and pans during his speech.

There has also been popular demand for the Royal Family to donate this money to the healthcare system, but there has been no response so far and frankly we weren’t expecting any.

For us, the monarchy is anachronistic and an institution based on inequality that must be overthrown.

We fight for Spain to become a federal republican state, with democratic control of all state institutions, including the judiciary, and legal protection of fundamental social rights such as housing, employment and public services such as transport, energy or health.

For that, it would be necessary to recover the sovereignty of the State, in particular economic, which means going against the current treaties with NATO, the EU and especially the euro (main obstacle to the takeover of our natural resources, strategic economic sectors and debt restructuring).

The new state should take the form of a federal state, recognizing the national, historical, cultural and linguistic rights of the various nations that are part of Spain as a result of the stages of the second republic.

It is no mystery that the current Spanish state has a problem with its multinational reality, a problem which until now has only been addressed by repression, Spanish nationalism and incitement to hatred between peoples, the monarchy approving this way of acting.

We would not like to end without once again showing our gratitude to those who fought alongside the Spanish people against fascism, in defense of workers’ rights and justice.

We will never forget them, they will remain forever in our memories and as they said, we still say today: No pasaran!

The roots of Clapton CFC make it one of England’s oldest football clubs. Previously Clapton FC, which was founded in 1877 in London, the club’s new incarnation was recast in 2017 after issues in the boardroom and beyond (read their full story here). On the 80th anniversary of the end of the Spanish Civil War, it was announced that their second strip was inspired by the flag of the Spanish Republic with a “NO PASARAN” print inside the jersey. The slogan was adopted by those fighting Franco’s Nationalist Army during the Civil War in the 1930s and means “they will not pass” as the Nationalists besieged Madrid.

The club announced on social media that it had sold 2,500 jerseys and thanked its new fans for their support. After a recent turbulent history, the club announced that “Tons of supporters, known to be some of the most fervent in the non-league, will once again be able to decide how their club is run.” and fans spoke up when it came to voting for their second shirt along with 15 other contenders. The decision turned out to be a resounding success.

Their recent success won’t hurt the club’s enthusiasm either. They were forced to send a message in English and Spanish on their Twitter account as the demand for shirts from Spain was the same. “The last 48 hours have been amazing: over £ 60,000 in orders for our shirts, mostly from Spain. We do our best to answer (and often translate first) everyone’s questions, please wait – our organizing committees will get back to you as soon as possible,“ he read.

On their website they said “Commemorate the 80th anniversary of the end of the Spanish Civil War, it is inspired by the flag of the Spanish Republic and is adorned with the three-pointed star of the International Brigades, which traveled to Spain in an attempt to hold back the fascist tide of General Franco. “

The announcement of the abdication of King Juan Carlos immediately sparked a heated debate in Spain about the advantages of the monarchy and the need to change the political system. Tens of thousands of young people for the most part took to the streets with the red, yellow and purple flags of “La Republica”, demanding a referendum on the state system: republic or monarchy.

As a young Dutch journalist in Spain covering “La Transicion” – the transition from Franco’s fascist dictatorship to an emerging European-style democracy – I remember similar discussions in the mid-1970s. Juan Carlos was proclaimed king on the 22nd. November 1975, two days after Franco’s death. He was supposed to guarantee Franco’s legacy and continue the dictatorship with a young and monarchical face. The democratic opposition of the time called for free elections. The opposition forces were initially not convinced that a true democracy would be possible with Juan Carlos on the throne. Pro-democracy protesters in the 1970s often carried Republican flags because a democratic, monarchist Spain was unimaginable to them.

I remember writing a column about the futility of the monarchy-republic discussion in establishing a true democratic system. What does it matter if the colors of the flag are red-yellow-red or red-yellow-purple? Theoretically, it may be more democratic to elect your head of state every five or six years and not have a king or queen. But the crucial question regarding the political system is whether it is truly democratic, whether the voice of the people is heard and whether popular aspirations are met.

Strong emotions

I received scathing reactions to my column on the Spanish flag and some readers doubted my democratic credentials. The question of the Spanish state system still arouses strong emotions. Spain has already had a republican system twice: in 1873-1874 and from 1931 to 1939. In fact, Juan Carlos’ grandfather, King Alfonso XIII, went into exile in 1931 during the establishment of the Second Republic.

The Second Republic was a progressive if not revolutionary state. It suppressed the privileges of the nobility and the powerful Catholic clergy and defended freedom of expression and association, women’s rights and better conditions for workers and farmers. Generalissimo Francisco Franco defeated the Republic after a bloody civil war in 1936-1939, which claimed the lives of half a million people.

Franco’s heir-designate Juan Carlos did not turn out to be exactly what friends and foes expected. In fact, he understood Spain’s need for change and modernization and, once king, he played an extremely important role in the difficult transition from an authoritarian and backward system, a holdover from the past, to a parliamentary democracy. future and European. Spain was no longer different, as it had been under Franco, but became a “normal” European democratic country.

During these years of transition, it was not at all clear that democracy would prevail. Part of the army, military intelligence and diehard nostalgic for the Franco era conspired to thwart the democracy project. After having published a detailed article on certain military intelligence operations and the extreme right which undermined the nascent democracy, I was expelled from Spain in May 1979. My crime: “Offense of the Spanish armed forces”. I had the dubious honor of being the last foreign journalist to be expelled from Spain by the military, in one of the convulsions of the old regime.

In February 1981, one of the soldiers whom I mentioned in my article almost two years earlier, Lieutenant-Colonel Antonio Tejero, attempted to take control of Spain by force and block the road to democracy. The image of the Guardia Civil or the Civil Guard. wielding a pistol in the Cortes, the Spanish parliament, became world famous. The coup failed, mainly because the king refused to cooperate with the putchists and stood firmly in defense of democracy. This event became a turning point in Juan Carlos’ career. If anyone still doubted the importance of the king in the establishment of democracy, he would now be convinced. With rare exceptions, the king has definitely conquered the Transicion generation.

However, 33 years after the failed coup, it is the turn of another generation to take the lead. And there is a deep sense of unease, political mistrust and a sincere desire to make a fresh start among young people. It is no coincidence that the new Spanish political party, which was very successful in the European elections, is called “Podemos: We can! Many activists say Spain needs a new political system after 40 years of Franco’s dictatorship and 39 years of King Juan Carlos. A king who has recently lost much of his former popularity and credibility due to several scandals within the royal family.

A third republic?

So why not have a Third Republic as a new start?

Traditional politicians and political parties are discredited in the eyes of many Spaniards. In the recent European elections, Spain’s two main parties, the ruling right-wing Partido Popular and the center-left opposition party PSOE, failed to even collect half the votes. This blow to the traditional bipartisanship, existing since the Transicion, is explained by allegations of corruption and incompetence of traditional politicians. The social-democratic PSOE has more or less imploded (it has gone from 39% to 23% in five years) and the leader of the PSOE Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba had to resign last week due to poor results in the European elections.

Juan Carlos’ successor, Felipe, will not only have to deal with the change of generation, the call of many Spaniards for political renewal and the loss of political credibility of the old guard, but also two other burning issues: aspirations separatists from the Basques and Catalans. November 9 is the proposed date for a referendum on the independence of Catalonia. The monarch as a symbol of the unity of Spain will have a crucial but difficult role in facilitating a reasonable compromise and, ultimately, in keeping the country together.

The call for a referendum on the future of the monarchy cannot be easily dismissed, even if such a plebiscite is not permitted by the current Spanish constitution. One could argue that the question of the colors of the flag or the architecture of the state, monarchy or republic, is a dilemma of form, not of democratic content. In the final analysis, most Democrats would rather live in monarchical Sweden than in Republican Syria.

But with the abdication of Juan Carlos, fundamental questions arise: how to improve democratic practice and restore confidence, how to respond to the aspirations of Catalans, Basques and other groups, how to create a common discourse on the future of Spain and create a political system that the majority of people can believe in.

Jan Keulen is a Dutch journalist and media development consultant. He taught journalism at Rijks Universiteit Groningen and was Managing Director of the Doha Center for Media Freedom.

SPain in the 1930s greeted the first violent clash between conflicting ideologies of the century. Writers such as George Orwell, Ernest Hemingway, André Malraux and Arthur Koestler became passionate witnesses to a complex civil war that pitted totalitarianism against democracy, while Stalinist communism and fascism fought a proxy battle and that anarchism, Trotskyism, nationalism and Catholic fundamentalism have thrown gasoline on the blaze.

Often, however, writers obscured the country. This was not the case with Henry Buckley, whose Life and death of the Spanish Republic (1940) exudes not only authority, empathy and real knowledge, but also humility. Buckley was a simple journalist – above all, but not only, the The telegraph of the daycorrespondent of, who knew Spain better than any of them.

He arrived in 1929, just as the gentle dictatorship of Miguel Primo de Rivera was coming to an end, and lived through the extraordinary eight years of the Second Spanish Republic. As a practicing Roman Catholic, he was immune to the “dark legends” spread by Protestants over Spain. But he was so appalled by the reactionary church in the country, which joined with the military and landowners to fight democracy, that he was unable to attend mass.

Christ, he knew, would have supported the poor and oppressed majority who saw republican democracy as their savior. Worse yet, when the war came he saw Hitler and Mussolini pour in as Britain and France hid behind false hands off and let Spanish democracy die. “Our supreme ego in the face of need,” he said, “is something that we will pay for terribly and with our own blood.”

Buckley wrote this book, the best of all contemporary tales, as the world braced for a larger war that would prove him right. Unfortunately, the warehouse with many copies was soon bombed. This new edition offers an honest reminder of a shameful past, when Britain and other democracies failed Spain and fueled Hitler’s terrible ambition.