Many of you have heard about the conflict in the vasque region and the crimes of the cowards assassins of ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna / Vasque Country and Freedom) that had killed a number of people close to 1.000, including kids, babies, women, and elders; so here you can read a kind of FAQ to clarify some things

SPAIN AND THE VASQUE REGION HAD BEEN SEPARATED AND ANTAGONISTIC ENTITIES TROUGH THE HISTORY?

The Vascones were a tribe of the pre-roman Hispania, that with the várdulos, caristios and autrigones conformed the ancient base of what today is known as vasque people. To this we have to add the population of the preroman Hispania (Iberos, Ligures and Celts) and the Visigoths, united to the continuous movements of population, produced by the muslim invasion and the Christian reconquest, finally configured not only the vasque people, but all the peoples of Spain.
After the fall of the Visigoth state, all the Spanish peoples without any exception, took part of the common project of restoration of the 'lost Spain' and fight against Islam. As the rest of the Spanish, the Vasques, always linked with Castilla, make of the fight for his religion and for the hispanic project their foundation of his own identity.
The same origin of Castilla has an essential vasque component. The most significant medievalist of the XX century, and president of the Republic in the exile, Claudio Sánchez Albornoz, resumed it like that " Castilla and the Castilians were the product of the racial and cultural symbiosis of the cantabrian, the vasque and the goth"
During eras the vasques died for the reconquest of Spain, participate in their government and flow in masses to repopulate. In the Modern Era the vasques discovered, conquered and expand by the whole world, as the spaniards they were. In 1808, during Napoleon's invasion, the vasques fight and died for Spain, his King and his Religion, combating with enthusiasm against their enemy, as well as did many of the vasque-frenchs, like the general Harispe.
As Miguel de Unamuno wrote "We the vasques don't have any feat, any historic labour of universal value, made with the abstention of Spain or against Spain". The vasques has always been part of what is know as Spain, and have constructed these reality from his ancient origins with the collaboration of the rest of the Spanish

ARE THE VASQUES A DIFFERENT NATION FROM THE SPANISH NATION?

The existence of nationalism doesn't prove that the nation exists. We mean, the existence of a Nation is not a necessary condition for the spout of a nationalist feeling that claim it, because this feeling could be artificially created trough the falsification and invention of a history and a national personality inexistent in the realty.
The 'national vasque identity' is simply and invention.
Although for someone could be hard to accept, his perception and feeling of belonging to a Vasque Nation is based in huge lies, falsifications and hidings.
They have invented all: the history, the celebrities; even the flag and the same word 'Euskadi' (the term used , as well as Euskal Herria, by separatism to name his dreamed 'nation') All is artificial.
The very vasque writer Pio Baroja laugh about the incongruence of the nationalist " The Vizkaitarra (Vizcaya is one of the provinces of the vasque region, the other ones are Guipuzcoa and Alava) say : were are traditionalist and we respect the tradition. and the first thing they made is to falsify the history and change the spelling of the vasque idiom"
We challenge you to inform yourself, read and consult with honesty and intelligence, and you'll see how many  apparently immovable ideas are still standing.

IT'S THE EUSKERA (VASQUE IDIOM) THE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF A DIFFERENT NATION ?

The separatist say: we have other idiom, so we are a nation.
But idiom is not equal to nation.
The existence of an idiom doesn't proofs the existence of a nation.
If a language were equal to nation, Switzerland will not exist, because there are spoken four languages. France - model of unitary and centralized state - will also not exist, because there is spoken Breton, italian, vasque, Alsatian and diverse variants of French  (f.ex: the language d’Oc and the language d’Oil).
In the other hand, if language is equal to nation, an english, a north american, a nigerian, an australian and a jamaican are connationals.
Or a Spaniard, a Bolivian, a Filipino and a Colombian, while an habitant from Aragon, Valladolid, Galicia or Valencia (regions of Spain) are perfect strangers, because some of them, apart from the spanish, speak a second idiom.
If a language were equal to nation, the walonian and the flamencos will not be be belgians, but french the first ones and dutch the second ones, and the Austrian will not be Austrian, but Germans. Following this rule we 'll have to start the segregation of territories of Cataluña, because in the 'Valley of Aran' they don't speak catalan, the speak aranes, so are they another nation?
And maybe the vasque region should be divided in as many pieces as dialects exists, as different that are not understanding between them, why provoked the necessity of creating the 'batua' (a unified version of vasque idioms made without considering the richness of this ancient idiom) fro giving some order and artificial unity to the natural diversity.
Parallely, there are some vasque territories where the vasque has never been spoken, like large zones of Alava, and the 'Encartaciones' in Vizcaya. If a language were equal to nation, shouldn't we consider them as non-vasques?
And do not forget that the separatists should also declare non-vasques to the vasques that are spanish speakers, the majority of the vasques. And finally, remember that the spanish is a language as vasque as the 'euskera', that has been spoken in the vasque region since his self origin, and that is the maternal language of the immense majority of the vasques

ARE THE 'FUEROS' (SPECIAL LAWS FOR THIS REGION) THE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF AN DIFFERENTS STATE AND NATION ?

The maintenance of the fueros till the XIX century has been presented by the nationalist as the proof of the existence of a Vasque state separated from the Spanish one, that had 'annexationed' it in 1839
The fueros are a manifestation, of medieval origin, of the juridical plurality that characterize the 'Ancient Regime'. This special laws exited all over Europe during centuries, not being Spain, or the vasque region an exception.
The unique difference consisted in while in the rest of Europe was made a unification of the laws during the XIX century, as a consequence of the industrialization, the liberalism, and the codifying movement, in Spain this was not made in a complete way, due to the political agreements/arbitrations forced by the 'Carlistas Wars'.
There were fueros in all Europe, and they could be territorial, corporational, or 'estamental' (only for one estate of the the different ones that composed the society) About this subject we should mention that the 'Old Fuero of Vizcaya' was an 'estamental' one, not applicative to the hole population, but exclusively for the nobles of  the 'Seignior of Vizcaya'
To make the existence of a nation dependent of the existence of interior customs - that existed in all the Europeans countries till the French Revolution - is a foolish remark, as well as it would be to say that as the different social estates ( noblemans, clergy, merchants, common people, militaries) had different jurisdictions, this means that each estate conformed a different nation

THE VASQUE REGION IS IN CONFLICT WITH SPAIN SINCE 160 YEARS AGO?

The local governor of the vasque region, member of the PNV party (a democratic separatist party) said recently that there was a conflict between 'Euskadi' and Spain, since 160 years ago, continuing the so repeated dogma of the nationalism of what the 'Carlistas Wars' were the first manifestation of the secualr fight of the vasques for his 'national liberation'.
Although it would be no necessary to comment such a foolish remark, we should talk a little bit about that for a better comprehension of our readers. The 'Carlists Wars' were confrontation of half of the Spanish against the other half, divided by ideological and dynastical. There were not confrontations of one regions against others, but in in both factions fight spaniards of all the regions. The 'Carlist' faction was not the faction of the vasques against the state, but it was the faction that in the ideological defended the institutions of the 'Ancient Regime', and in the dynastic defend the person of Carlos Maria Isidro de Borbon (this is the reason why they were called 'Carlists' [Charlests]) and his descendants as legitimate kings of Spain. All this started with a conflict about the modification of a law that prohibited the women to be heiress of the crown, so Isabel II become the queen instead of Carlos Maria Isidro, the legitimate heir of the crown with the old law.
The 'Carlistas' didn't have as aim any secessionist revindication. If someone has suggested something like that he/she would have considered a mad person. What the 'Carlistas' wanted, as his him sung was: "Whatever the cost we must achive that the King of Spain came to the Court of Madrid" (“Cueste lo que cueste se ha de conseguir que venga el rey de España a la Corte de Madrid” )
There were Vasques and Navarres fighting in both bands, as well as Castilians, Gallegos, Andalusians or Catalonians. In the rural zones of the vasque region, stubborns to the liberalism and to the liquidation of the institutions of the 'Ancient Regime', preponderated the Carlismo, but a very important part of the vasques were hostile to the 'Carlismo', manily the habitants of the cities. We just have to mention that Bilbao, had to suffered two sieges by the hands of 'Charlests' troops.
The nationalist/separatist historiography has tried to present the 'Carlistas Wars' as confrontations, that under the aim of the defence of the 'foral regime', concealed the fight of the vasques for his 'national liberation'. In first place, the foral question was not the main reason to the enlisting in the Carlist said, but it was just another factor more, of secondary importance and it come upon when the Carlist pretender comprobated that, among other prerevolutionary institutions, the foral regime was one more argument to get the sympathies of certain part of the population.
In second place, not even were the Vasque provinces or Navarra the regions that started the revolt - it was in Castilla - neither where more support get the Carlism, even though really were there where, thanks to the orography, the connexion with France and another facts, the Carlism had a temporal dominion of certain parts of the territory. For example two regions were the Carlist cause was massively supported were Castilla La Mancha and Valencia

THE VASQUES HAS BEEN  OPPRESSED BY THE CASTILIANS ?

The Chancellors, Councillors, Ministries, Prime Minister / Presidents of the Governor, Admirals, Generals, General Captains, Viceroys of vasque origin could be counted in hundreds trough the centuries. In case that we have to consider something to the vasques, was to be privileged citizens. With the Hasburg dynasty, for example, the Vasques constituted a bureaucratic and governmental privileged 'caste'. And they legitimated this situation presuming of being more Spanish than anybody, of being the native Spanish, of pure and unpolluted spanish blood.
Have we to remember to so and so many illustrious vasques in the history of Spain, like Diego López de Haro,
( the Lordship of Vizcaya, vanguard of the Castilian army in the battle of the Navas the Tolosa against muslims)
Pedro López de Ayala (the chancellor of Castilla), Juan Sebastian Elcano (the marine of Guetaria that succeeded in giving to Spain the honour of making the first to take a walk around the globe ), Legazpi (marine of Zumárraga, conqueror of the Filipines), Urdaneta, Ignacio de Loyola, the Oquendo (the stock of vasque marines that was distinguished in so many battles in the XVI and XVII centuries), Blas de Lezo (the Admiral of Pasajes, victorious of the english in Cartagena de Indias; the one that threaten to reduce Genoa to ashes if the Genoeses didn't pay their debts to the crown and didn't salute in the correct manner the flag of Spain ), Churruca (the marine of Motrico, hero of Trafalgar), Arriaga (the spoiled “ Spanish Mozart”), Zumalacárregui (the Carlist general that declared his sorrow because 'Spanish people have been armed against other Spanish' ), Miguel de Unamuno, Ramiro de Maeztu, Pio Baroja ( three brilliant writers, enemies of the vasque nationalists ) Zuloaga or Zubiri ?

IS THE VASQUE REGION THE 'SPANISH ULSTER' ?

1- The Irish nationalists want to reunify a separated community; the vasques nationalists want to separate a community that has always been part of Spain
2- The Irish nationalists try to merge a territory, the Ulster, with a pre-existent state, the Republic of Ireland. The vasques nationalists try to separate a territory, the Vasque region, of a state with many centuries of existence, to form another state of the nonentity
3- In the XII century the English military conquered Ireland. In the XII century, the vasques, next to the rest of northern christians, had been military conquering Spain during centuries
4- The English imposed in Ireland the dominion of a foreign country. The vasques, next to other habitants of the north, above all the Cantabrians, originated the Kingdom of Castilla
5- The Irish were 'colonized' by the English. The Vasques has been privileged colonist of half world, like any other Castilian habitant.
6- Ireland was repopulated mainly with English protestants and Scottish. As the reconquest advanced, the Vasques, next to other habitants of the north of the peninsula, repopulated Castilla and the rest of Spain, a good proof of this are the toponymy.
7- In Ireland there are two religious communities confronted. The Irish had suffered prosecution due to his religion. What communities confronted by religion have we here? Who has ever prosecuted the vasques for his religion or for any other thing?
8- The Irish had been economical, social, juridical and politically marginated during centuries, for the fact of being Irish. The Vasques had enjoyed of important privileges, and have been part of the spanish directing 'casts', for the fact of being vasques
9- The Irish had been cannon fodder in the British Armies. The Vasques were during centuries a privileged in the spanish army, till the creation in the XIX century of the obligatory military service
10- How many Irish have governed the United Kingdom? none. How many Vasques had governed Spain? innumerable
11- The Irish had enlarged the ranks of the proletarians in a country dominated by the english economy 'exploitation'. In the Vasque region not only there is not a foreign 'exploitation' of the local proletarians, but in any case, of we could have talk in determinate periods is of the opposite situation. Even more, the Vasque capital has been inverting in Spain during some centuries.
12- How many Irish died of hunger and illness in the XIX century? Many hundreds of thousands
And how many Vasques suffered the same? None
13- How many Irish have had to emigrate along the history for not dying of hunger in his fatherland? Millions
And how many Vasques had to make the same? None. On the contrary, the Vasque region has been a traditional receptor of immigration due to his prosperity
14- Ireland has been maintained during centuries as a poor and subdevelopment land in the British Empire
The Vasque provinces had enjoyed always of a notable richness and welfare. Even during the 'Franquismo' they were in the top of Spain in 'rent per capita'
15- The Irish were not very well considerate in Great Britain, and in the Middle Age thousands of them were enslaved, and in the modern age hundreds of them were deported to the Caribbean english colonies . How many Vasques had been enslaved or deported? None
16- The Irish conflict is a phenomenon of popular origin that was born many centuries ago, as much as last the british occupation. The Vasque 'conflict' was born one century ago, in the imagination of Sabino Arana, the father of the vasque separatism.
17- There are not different religions in the Vasque region and the rest of Spain

Could you find two more different cases?
Why during decades they have tried to 'wash the brain' of the vasques so they consider themselves conquered, colonized, oppressed and marginated like the Irish?
Why the 'Irish paralelism' is used as propaganda of the Vasque separatism in the foreign countries?
Why the Vasque nationalist want to copy the pacification process of the Ulster to apply it here?
How can they pretend to apply the same model of actuation to two cases that had no similarities?

THE CIVIL WAR OF 1936 - 1939 WAS A WAR OF THE SPANISH FASCISM AGAINST THE VASQUES?

When the war finished, the local governor Aguirre said it was the subdue and outrage of a race, like if the Civil War had been another war of Spanish against Vasques, as they say about the Carlists Wars, and the Franquist victory have had as consequence the occupation of the Vasque region for a foreign power. This monumental falsification, of an evidence propagandistic motive following his eternal victimism strategy, has been imposed during the next decades among the nationalists, reaching the category of undeniable truth, and being taught to the kids in the school, with the following hate sowing of where is collected the violent harvest
The civil War of 1936 - 39 was a war that confronted half Spain against the other half for ideological reasons, being the vasques divided with equality, one in the Republican side and other in the Franquist side. Furthermore, there were more Vasques and Navarres fighting in the Franquist side than in the Republican side. and when the war finished the minister, ambassadors and high posts of vasque origin could be counted in dozens

THE NON NATIONALISTS ARE RENEGATED VASQUES ?

Since the vasque nationalist/separatism exists, the most notable vasques had been antinationalists.
Just read some examples of the most powerful vasque brains of the XX century:
The Guipuzcoan Pìo Baraoja, in one of the many texts that he dedicated to scoff of the vasque nationalists, he said that "for his egoism and niggardliness it would be only attractive for low people" He considerated that the vasque nationalist " for a real vasque, is a farce". and he considerated as ridiculous the historical and of all kinds falsifications with which they wanted to build a 'vasque identity' different from the Spanish one.
The Vizcayan Miguel de Unamuno, considerated that "the vasque nationalism is the inculture" , he despised their publications "full of foolishness and fakes", and considerated the nationalist militants as "rudimentary brains, dull-witted, animated by the hate to the intellectuality and the intelligence"
" The bad vasques - wrote Unamono- are the wretched that divulge veritable unwisdoms, that talk bad about Spain with lack of justice and truth, that publish weekly publications which translation to the Spanish is 'neigh' although it must be 'braying of an ass', full of vulgar comments, and that give air to all the ridiculous fictions and pseudoscientific blunders referring to linguistics, ethnology and history, that the only thing they make is to expose us to ridicule and expand a belief that harm us"

THE VASQUE NATIONALISM HAS DISTINGUISHED ITSELF FOR HIS COMPROMISE WITH THE 'FREEDOM OF THE NATIONS' ?

Although sometimes the vasque nationalism appears as a generous defending of the 'right of self-determination of the nations', and sometimes uses the Kurds or other 'nations' without state for assemble his propagandistically set designs, this question has not cared the vasque nationalism.
When it suits him he declares to be eternal friend of the Irish cause. But when what suited them was to 'cultivate' the British support, the PNV had no trouble in condemning the Irish rising, or in congratulete the English King for the victory over the boers desiring that " the English sovereignty will be for them, protection before than domination, like other equally fortunate" ( Was talking Sabino Arana about the fortunate Irish?)
The father of the Vasque separatism/nationalism had so much adoration for all the English, that even for the design of the 'ikurriña' (the flag of his dreamed vasque country) he was inspired in the Union Jack.
When it seemed opportune to him to request the help of the USA, Arana requested it, without considering that  this imperialist power was only interested in the independence of Cuba, Philippines, Puerto Rico or any other country as long as the USA could get a benefit of it. During the First World War, the vasque nationalist, with his chief Sir Ramón de la Sota carried trough an active labour of support of England, the 'oppressors' of Ireland.
Soon after, during the Second World War, the PNV moved without modesty his pawns as in London and in New York as in Berlin and Rome, so that they will be in good situation with independence of the winner. When the war finished the PNV returned to beg support for his aspirations to the English government, offering his support for a possible 'dismemberation' of Spain.
The Irish friends of the vasque nationalists should have this present

THE VASQUE NATIONALISM IS NOT RESPONSIBLE OF THE TERRORISM OF ETA ?

Although the PNV and his partner EA appears also as the guarantee and most firm defender of the peace and the freedom in the vasque region, the truth is that:
- ETA was born of the PNV
- Most of the leaders of ETA come from the PNV
- The separatist/nationalist ideology of ETA was created by the PNV
- The PNV when it suited him, supported and expressly justified  the crimes of ETA during many years, like if the life has not the same value in different circumstances
- ETA survives and regenerates itself thanks to the social and cultural 'broth' created and maintained for two decades of govern of the PNV in the vasque region
- The 'Ertzaintza' (local police of the vasque region) under the orders of the PNV unfulfilled his function of prosecuting ETA and the 'kale borroka' (urban terrorism made by the youths of ETA)
- As it's periodically proved, the PNV maintain continuous contacts with ETA, with which have a common strategy to long-term
- How many votes will loose all the separatists parties if the coercion that, above all in the small locations, makes ETA and his 'world' wont exist?
- The actual activists of the 'kale borroka', and future members of ETA, where the sons of the PNV governor. Don't tell us that they are the result of the repression the lack of the liberty o any dictatorship (the Vasque region, with the competencies in economy, taxes, education, law, security... that the Spanish governor had give to it, is one of the most autonoumus/independent region of all Europe). All them have born many years after Franco's dead; they are the product of the PNV governor, of his 'ikastolas' (public schools financed by the nationalist governor where is practised a policy of 'vasque only' and it's spread the hate against Spain'), his Euskal Telebista (the regional tv, manipulated by the nationalists), his policy of acculturation and ideological intoxication.
Without the vasque nationalist, would have been ETA?

WHAT IS THE IDEOLOGY OF ETA?

Since his foundation in 1958, ETA has had his main ideological reference in the marxist - leninism, also with maoist and troskist internal sides, that leave the organization after some conflicts. His ideal model state is the Albany of Hoxa, yes, as you are reading, the same regime that made Albany one of the poorest region of Europe and leave the population in the most terrible hunger