Debates with nine participants are a considerable mess. Too many people and too many interventions by the moderator talking about the time left for each participant. In Thursday’s two and a quarter hour debate on TVE, at least it can be said that Europe was talked about. It does not sound striking as it is a debate about the European elections, but anything could happen when Dolors Montserrat, from the PP, started his first intervention by mentioning Begoña Gómez, Bildu and the “fugitive from justice.” The socialist Teresa Ribera responded by saying that at European summits she is asked about the extreme right. That was one of the messages she brought to insist on the debate.
The left-wing candidates insisted time and again on the threat from the extreme right and called Jorge Buxadé racist for his attempt to put immigration and crime on the same level. They did not let that false accusation go unanswered. Estrella Galán, from Sumar, and Irene Montero, from Podemos, denounced the migration pact supported in the EU by socialists and conservatives. “It has been proven since the 1990s that these policies have failed,” said Galán.
Ribera did not accept the mention and did not defend the pact, beyond relating it to “solidarity with southern Europe.” That is not the issue that has been highlighted in the press coverage of an agreement whose priority is to put up higher walls to immigration at European borders.
What Ribera did do was highlight the advantages of immigration, although succinctly. “We are benefiting from the arrival of those people,” he explained. It would have been important for him to detail it in terms of employment, pensions and health. He demanded that the PP apologize for “its xenophobic and racist speeches” in the Catalan elections and in this campaign. Montserrat did not answer and limited herself to accusing the PSOE for “its attacks on the judges.” For the most part, she stayed out of the immigration discussion during the hottest moments.
Irene Montero, wearing a Palestinian scarf over her shoulder, spoke about the wars in Gaza and Ukraine even before the foreign policy and defense bloc began. She criticized Minister Albares for not supporting the South African accusation against Israel in the International Court of Justice and limiting himself to appearing in the proceedings opened in that court in order to support its judges. “Why the hell are we going to the International Court?” she asked herself. Galán demanded an arms embargo on Israel and the breaking of diplomatic relations.
Ribera affirmed that the decision has value as support for the Palestinian people and also confirms that “we are on the right side of history.” Montero insisted on the question and Ribera did not want to answer him.
Like her party in recent weeks, Montserrat did not dare to criticize Israel for the massacre taking place in Gaza and disdained the Spanish recognition of the Palestinian State for not having waited for a consensual decision in the EU, which Otherwise it is impossible for it to occur.
What the PP candidate did do was boast about her party’s contribution in the European Parliament. In a case of non-cultural appropriation, she gave as an example of that relevance the veto on the importation of rice from Asia. Jordi Cañas, from Ciudadanos, laughed to highlight Montserrat’s audacity: “The rice speaker (in the parliamentary debate) was me, not you.”
The war in Ukraine was the one that caused the greatest disagreements. Left-wing candidates opposed increased military spending. Montero was the most energetic. She demanded that “the war consensus” be broken and raised fear about the risk of nuclear war. “With war inequality grows. With the war, mortgages and food prices increase.” She went so far as to say that with the war “fiscal rules are going to return,” that is, austerity and cutting public spending, although that is politically impossible if defense spending is increased. No one can win an election in Europe if they have to reduce social spending and increase military spending at the same time.
Montero said that this war must be stopped with diplomatic negotiations, a letter ignored by European governments, among other things because neither of the two contenders has shown themselves favorable to negotiations. His minimal claims are incompatible.
Jordi Cañas, the only one who was rude to some of his interlocutors, reproached him for not highlighting Vladimir Putin’s responsibility in the decision to invade Ukraine. “It’s all like magic. Who caused the war? Putin. Say it”. When he began to speak, Montero intervened to say: “Make me a mansplaining.”
In his turn, Ribera could have defended the decisions of the Government of which he is a part in relation to the shipment of weapons to Ukraine to defend itself from Russian aggression. He did not do it. The vice president had the tendency to mention the issues that she had in her papers and not enter into hand-to-hand combat with anyone other than the PP or Vox. That caused her to leave several questions unanswered.
In a way, the debate was an oasis within a campaign marked by the central duel between the PSOE and the PP, which has been settled on issues of national policy. At least, for one night they talked about Europe. It should not be taken as a habit, as will be seen on Friday at the closing of the campaign.
Add Comment