Iñaki Arteta: "If to negotiate with the Government you have to put dead on the table, everything is to start"

For Iñaki Arteta (Bilbao, 1959) the "chronic disease" suffered by the Basque Country does not have much choice. "That we all die," he says, for exaggerating. But yes. That a generation arrives capable of looking back without the closeness of the present and discerns, without hesitation, where the evil has been: "There is no ideology that makes murder good." The treatment, long, requires small history pills and many doses of pain that Arteta, via celluloid, is responsible for providing. And he does it like (almost) every filmmaker, "looking for money under the stones." He believes that his films make more sense if they are supported by civil society that shares their concern about the treatment given to ETA victims and their terror . That is why crowfunding , financial support provided by associations such as the Villacisneros Foundation, or cycles such as Terrorism of ETA on the big screen organized these days by the Institute of Security and Culture "increase the value of our films." Social cinema. But ... are there still things to tell about ETA? "Fear has meant that for too many years those who should be in charge of narrating what has happened have dodged the matter, so there are many gaps." Of course, he understands that today few already attend the "cancer" of the Basque Country because citizens are more concerned with another, "mimetic", which has spread through the body to another organ: Catalonia .

Is the documentary filmmaker a historian? No, the historian is an academic who manages sources that do not have to handle the documentary filmmaker, who is an author who interprets reality. The documentary filmmaker can be more or less rigorous, but interprets through his personal filter. Is documentary objectivity an illusion? The documentary is subjective. Those who seek maximum objectivity should know that it is impossible to achieve it , because from the moment in which you pronounce or write three words you are already spreading an opinion, you have already placed yourself in one part. From the first moment I have placed myself in a place on the court to observe what has happened in the Basque Country: in that of the citizen, against murder, against nationalist abuse, in favor of human rights and freedom, of Don't kill anyone for an ideology. And from this position I have approached the victims, intellectuals, etc., but always from my perspective. What leads a victim like Ortega Lara to find shelter in Vox and not in one of the parties with which the end of ETA violence - Almost until 2000, the victims did not even have a presence in the political life of this country. People were murdered and their families were left helpless to the point that they thought they had done something wrong and nobody made them feel that they were unjustly murdered citizens, that they were innocent. In 1980, after a terrorist murder there was practically no popular demonization, however, 100% of those killed in the terrorist band had a social response. No party lived up to the need generated by the victims, although for a time the right has been more sensitive towards the victims or the associations of victims. What was the problem, politically speaking, of course, of protecting and helping the victims? I don't know. But those who have encountered difficulties in approaching them, such as cases of nationalism or the left, should reflect. Even today the most extreme faction of the Spanish left believes that this was not bad at all or that terrorism was justified "because it was anti-Franco." Of course, he was anti-Franco eight or nine years and for four decades he attacked democracy. Why did ETA create social support that other groups, such as GRAPO, did not get? The terrorist ideology had a direct connection with nationalism and in the country Basque there is much nationalist. Not everyone would have been in favor of violence as a way to achieve independence, not everyone would want the guns, but they contemplated with sympathy or tremendous compression what they were doing to that country that they claimed to defend based on murders, extortions and expulsions. " Basque society has ended up rewarding those who killed and killed. " Does it refer to Bildu? And to the nationalists, but above all to Bildu, yes. Doesn't it seem exaggerated? Neither Bildu nor the PNV are terrorist gangs and are legitimate electoral options. Hitler also won an election and at first killed no one. There are democratic processes that end up degenerating, or they end up defending non-legitimate ideas through democratic means. I believe that any ideology of the supremacist court should not enter the democratic game. Well, in the last regional elections almost 60% of the voters voted nationalism or those defined as political heirs of terrorism, what happens to Basque society? Basque society is still as sick as before. The fact that terrorism has ended in sociological terms has not changed the minds of Basque citizens. Why do people vote for Bildu or vote for Herri Batasuna? Why? Because it doesn't seem bad that he killed himself in his name. That means that it is a society that is not healthy. What has gained independence from terrorism that it could not have achieved with politics? To begin with, the expulsion of tens of thousands of families. Between 100 and 150 thousand people escaped for years, which meant an alteration of the electoral roll . Milosevic knew it: a third of those killed, another of expatriates and you take over the country because the remaining third is yours. Such an alteration of the census is enough to modify the history of the Basque Country: this is how society is molded in nationalist terms and it is taught that, in the end, the useful vote is the nationalist one because nationalism goes to Madrid and always brings a check. Are we overfunded? Let Extremadura be annoyed. We live better than anywhere thanks to it and that silences many mouths. That the PSOE negotiates with Bildu is to participate in the democratic game or, to understand voices like Rogelio Alonso, is to humiliate the victims? I am with Rogelio Alonso. It seems to me that it is a contempt for history and it makes me sad, because I know many socialists. It is true that they have also suffered persecutions and murders. One can understand that the junctures accumulate, that the passage of time takes us away from the past, that we have to be pragmatic ... But I cannot share that we have to be ambiguous when it comes to terrorism. Who are you talking to? With some drug addicts who have quit drugs or with a pedophile who does not regret and who will leave your house with your children? When the PSOE deals with Bildu, who does it do it with? With people other than those who have endured the terrorist action? No. And they have neither regretted nor shown signs of denying their past. What is legitimated with these agreements? The PSOE thus adopts an absolutely healthy stance. Pragmatic, yes, it is possible to govern, but in exchange for legitimizing the terrorists. We are facing politicians who believe that their history has been an immaculate history according to which they had to kill themselves. Now they continue fighting without killing for what they defended before. "And then they want us to be Spaniards, not even for the lining!" Andoni Ortuzar said on Game Day. The PNV advances in a statute to dialogue between equals with the central government. Where is what was called moderate nationalism? No nationalism is moderate because it has a supremacist character. That statute will not see the light because it does not congregate enough majorities; In addition, the break with Spain does not suit nationalism. Nationalists are not willing to lose over-financing in exchange for a border, that does not enter the mind of any sensible nationalist. They have in their power deputations, town halls ... they have the power. And any alternative scenario is much more uncertain. But I understand that they maintain the rupturist discourse, essential for theirs to remain in tension. Nationalism needs to be attached to Spain, but always with a tension that will reap benefits and serve to feed its bases, confident that they will lead them to the promised land. Is the rest of Spain able to understand what happened in the Basque Country ? [Long pause] The correct word is empathy. I think that there has been great empathy, but it is true that when one goes away the disease, they forget about you. The society has forgotten the cancer of the Basques and is now more concerned about the one who has left Catalonia. Independence is demanded, a future amnesty, the expulsion of the Civil Guard from the Parliament is demanded, the radicals are stopped ... Can the current situation in Catalonia be compared with the past in the Basque Country? The situation is mimetic. I have seen that all, from that blind defense to terrorists, even with demonstrations ...... In today's Catalonia there are no convicts of terrorism. Well, ETA also started like this: ten years with sabotage, robbing banks .. until he started killing people. You should not be naive and believe that this is over because they have been arrested. Notice: there are always those who support these small groups, which makes them feel protected. This was the case in Euskadi. And for someone who decides to use violence to feel that there is a part of society that supports him, that encourages him, who will defend him if he ends up in jail ... That, that armor the terrorist. There are already those who say, as a certain intellectual in La Vanguardia a few days ago, that there is no other way but violence, that the dialogue is over! ... and that is food for the most exalted. The keys to everything are given by the Basque case. For example, if the price of pacifying a conflictive situation is to minimize the presence of the State, the State, unfortunately, accepts. And what does a nationalist think ?: "Well, as in Euskadi: the Civil Guard, financing ... And independence, then later". Limiting funding would be a cure for the disease, a weapon to combat nationalism? It could even be worse. It would give wings to Espanya ens roba. If the nationalists believe they have the justification that Spain is going to rob them they would have an excuse to be more belligerent. It clashes with my conception of country, of solidarity, but that has nothing to do with the disease. In Euskadi, because of terrorism, an inbred society has been built economically, without investment, without tourism until now ... An aging society, nothing prosperous. If it weren't for the concert ... Why does Quim Torra not condemn what happened with the CDR and criticize the police operation? The nationalists live in a supremacist fantasy that makes them believe they will get what they want and that the people demand it . That fantasy requires that someone, as with ETA or the CDR, intervene, press the state and negotiate and even the terrorists be received. Let's see: how much does it cost, unfortunately, for a government to send you a negotiating delegation? Put dead on the table, because everything is to start. Violence, given an unfortunate attitude of the State, is very useful. ETA negotiated with all the presidents of Spain and Torra protects the radicals because he trusts his contribution in favor of the process . He does not like to take the gun, but, when participating, enters a very dangerous game. Once again, we have the key in the Basque past: I connect ideologically with them and their objectives suit me. The CDR and Torra commune, they want an identical country. People feel that they are the ones who take the initiative, that the process goes from bottom to top when it is from top to bottom ... But people believe it and get angry, and those from above take them to the street and they are pressing more, and they are pressing the State ... Can the next step be violence? Well yes, I hope it is not, but it can be, because there are always more warming people who believe that if it is not by force it is not advanced. And they verify that the force works. And history repeats itself. It is unfortunate. What does the condemnation of the ETA legal front imply? The condemnation ... The agreement in which they admit their membership in ETA. It is the verification of what Garzón or Aznar maintained in their day that everything is ETA. On the one hand it is anecdotal, on the other, perverse. Because these people say "yes, I'm from ETA, what's up" and avoid the jail. On another hand, if you were from ETA, all these years that you have been maintaining that no one was from ETA, not even those who were from ETA ... this, for history, for those who know how to decipher it, is fine. But I would have preferred them to confess that they were from ETA and go to jail. He is late in the sense that in Euskadi we all knew it and the nationalist side does not care. Just as late as the resolution of the hundreds of cases still unsolved? Everything will come with a huge delay and with some effects ... A family that lost its father in the 80s and has to wait until 2019 to reopen the case loses its confidence in Justice. But what less to clarify the murders and analyze what was done wrong not to repeat it. Although looking at Catalonia you can only disappoint: we have not learned anything.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

• ETA
• Basque Country
• Bildu
• Spain
• Catalonia
• CDR
• PSOE
• Civil Guard
• PNV
• Quim Torra
• Vox
• Madrid
• Jose Maria Aznar
• Andoni Ortuzar
• Adolf Hitler

Thoroughly the last front: the lawyers of ETA

Turn of the page The thousand and one faces of Sánchezstein

EditorialThe coup is reactivated in Catalonia