Colonialism's gifts and beneficence

I remember Uruguayan historian, thinker and writer Eduardo Galeano joking that when the Spanish galleons arrived to what we now call and know as America, the natives living there were absolutely relieved to learn that they and their land were discovered. 

From that perspective that Native Americans could now begin to exist, their history could begin to unfold as the Spanish conquistadors bestowed them with the gifts of expropriation, theft, slavery and genocide. They could begin to be civilised as their identity, language and culture were suppressed in order to Christianise them.

There was no previous history, no previous identity or existence before empire, colonialism and genocide. The Spanish empire bestowed all these gifts on them and they should eternally be grateful.  

I was reminded of this again with the recent news of colonialist countries moving towards recognition of Palestine, as if Palestine and Palestinians do not exist, or did not exist, until the colonialist powers of the developed world in their generosity and beneficence suddenly turned the switch on and brought them to existence, mimicking god and giving them life with their breath. 

Nasser Mashni, president of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, put it nicely when he said: 

Palestinian rights are not to be gifted by western states. They are not dependent on negotiation with or behaviour or approval of their colonial oppressors. What I want today is for Palestinians not to be slaughtered. What I want as an Australian is our government not to be complicit in that slaughter. What happens after that will be upon the Palestinian people when they have their agency to determine their self determination. It’s not my job or Anthony Albanese’s to determine how Palestinians might seek this opportunity.

The absolute and utter mess of the Middle East was manufactured by the UK, France and, to a lesser extent, Russia. In summary, as they fought the Ottoman Empire in WWI promises of freedom and independence were made to Arab countries to rally their support. When the Ottoman Empire was defeated, the UK and France argued that the Arabs were not ready to govern themselves(typical colonialist, racist belief) and they draw the borders in straight lines. Their existence, their identity, lives and independence were denied in the by the colonial powers with the excuse of not being ready for self-government, so they could exploit their natural resources. Others have written about this better and in more detail. Here's a pretty decent summary by the BBC. But here we are, more than a century later and nothing has changed.

Geography of the Sykes-Picot (UK-France) agreement.
By Ian Pitchford at English Wikipedia here. 
Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons by Sumerophile using CommonsHelper.

January 1919 British Foreign Office memorandum summarizing the wartime agreements between Britain, France, Italy and Russia regarding Ottoman territory.
By Stanfords Geographical Establishment London, Public Domain here.

This is something that I thought about during the misguided and deeply hurtful campaign for an Indigenous voice to parliament in Australia. A question I discussed with several people was my view that the way the government was going about it was totally wrong. It seemed wrong to me that the government was going to a referendum asking Australians if they would be willing to give a voice to Indigenous Australians, the original inhabitants of this continent. That was wrong and hurtful in itself but there was more to it than that.

The bigger issue to me was that the government was imposing a process and a recognition to the First Nations of Australia. It was, once again, a colonial-settler power intending to give recognition, to allow their voice, to bring First Nations people to some sort of existence within the colonial forms of power. 

Instead, I thought, shouldn't there be a process of truth telling first? Lay it all out on the table, hear from everyone and establish what really happened here. Then, once that is all out and settled, to sit at the table as equals to work out a treaty. To work out, as equals, how they should proceed to living together as one. And, finally, after all that work was done and a treaty was signed, to change the constitution or legislation to conform with the treaty.

This would be a far more respectful process. One that truly recognises the history, identity and sovereignty of Australia's First Nations. Instead, what we had was a process that was hurtful and disrespectful to the core. A process that allowed racists to run a campaign of disinformation, hate and division. A process that, I can understand why lots of Indigenous Australians supported but also had misgivings about.

It was fascinating to me that a lot of people I talked to couldn't see or understand this and saw it as good, positive and natural that the Australian government would follow such a process. Essentially, imposing their power and law to Indigenous Australians.

I think, perhaps, I could see this because of my background. I come from Europe, I live in Australia. From that perspective, I'm a white settler. But I live another reality too. I was born in the Basque Country. I'm Basque. Neither Spanish, nor French. 

My whole life, I have seen how the French government refuses to recognise to even recognise the Basque language as co-official within the Basque region. How it refuses to teach Basque in public schools while it imposes what we now know as French - a language that when France formed as a republic was only spoken by about 14% of the population and was not even the most spoken language in France.

My whole life, I have seen Spanish governments continue to try to divide and drive a wedge between the Basque Autonomous Community and Navarre, when to us our Basque language and culture are inherently linked to Navarre, where the Basque king resided.

And then, there's the Statute of Gernika, which was established after Spanish dictator Franco's death. The Statute of Gernika was approved in a referendum. Ostensibly it was meant to give the Basque region autonomy and independence through the transfer of various powers and competencies back from the Spanish government in Madrid.

Front page of theBasque newspaper
Deia announcing the results 
of the referendum. 

The similarities to other processes where a colonial power imposes a process are clear to me. That referendum was carried out after 40 years of fascist dictatorship in an environment where democracy was only just restored and the new Spanish constitution established. While the referendum was approved by the majority of voters (90% voted yes, out of a total of 58% of the population who voted), it's important to bear in mind that Basque citizens had very limited options. If the statute, however inadequate, was not approved. Then what would happen with them and their aspirations for independence? 

The majority of Basque people voted yes but the Statute of Gernika was not what they wanted. Nowhere near. Regardless, the referendum passed. The Statute of Gernika was approved and nearly 45 years later most of the competencies and powers still have not been transferred to the Basque Country.

This is what happens when colonial powers are allowed to dominate and run the process. But sovereignty was never ceded and the right of self determination is in the United Nations Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as a right of all peoples.

Palestinians will not be given the right to live in peace and with dignity when their inalienable right to exist and be free was taken away from them by the same powers who now pretend to care by giving them recognition. 

Palestine will not come to existence when recognition is given by the UK, France, Canada and Australia. 

What Palestine needs is for these countries to stop supporting the genocidal aggressor and then, to make amends with reparations and support for a free and independent Palestine.