Simon Johnson is, of course, neither a reporter nor a political correspondent. He is a propagandist for British nationalism. Had that been in any doubt previously then these doubts have surely been dispelled by this article. Lets be clear about one thing from the outset. There is absolutely nothing new here. The Spanish governments position is very well known. But it is not as Johnson portrays it. And neither is it severely damaging for Mr Salmond. Even if it were, that damage would have been done on one of the countless other occasions when the British media has breathlessly misreported precisely the same story. Yet there is no sign of this damage. Salmond remains more trusted than all the politicians of the British parties and their pals in the media rolled into one. Then we get the first straightforward lie. The Spanish government is NOT hostile to Scottish independence, as Johnson asserts. The Spanish government is hostile to Catalonias independence movement. In fact, hostile may be too tame a word. Spains reactionary imperialists make even rabid Britnats like Ian Davidson look like thoughtful individuals. But here is the point. Rajoys remarks were not directed at Scotland. They were directed at Catalonia. Spains official position in relation to Scotlands independence does not involve hostility in any way. The stance Spain takes is that there is no parallel between Scotland and Catalonia and that, therefore, Scotlands independence has no implications for Catalonia. The constitutional starting points for the two are completely different. One might have expected a political correspondent to be aware of this. Although one would not necessarily expect a propagandist to mention a truth so inconvenient to their deceitful purpose. It is also entirely to be anticipated that a British nationalist fanatic would deny Scotlands nationhood. And Johnson certainly implies that he falls into that category when he takes Rajoys references to regions as applying to Scotland. In this respect, the fanatical wing of British nationalism is at odds with its political leadership. Because David Cameron has already acknowledged that Scotland is a nation with full rights of self-determination by putting his signature on the Edinburgh Agreement. Again, this contrasts starkly with Spain, where the central government vehemently rejects the idea of Catalonia being a nation. So, once again, we see how Rajoys comments are not applicable to Scotland at all. We can be sure that Rajoy himself is aware of this even if a blinkered servant of the British state such as Simon Johnson isnt. A serious political correspondent would also have noted the significance of what the Spanish Prime Minister DID NOT say. He did not say that Spain would veto Scotlands membership of the EU. He didnt even say that Spain would oppose Scotlands membership of the EU. He did not say this in the same way that the British government does not state categorically that it will abolish the currency union between Scotland and the rest of the UK (rUK) should Scotland vote to restore its rightful constitutional status. Both the Spanish and the British governments avoid such concrete statements for the simple reason that they do not want to be bound by them. The purpose is sabre-rattling only. The last thing either government wants is that future policy should be defined by the inflamed and inflammatory rhetoric of their respective campaigns to preserve the structures of power and privilege which define their respective states. It is clear that Simon Johnson cannot be trusted to present a reasonable and informed picture of what is happening in Scotlands referendum debate. This, like Rajoys remarks, is nothing new and nothing we were not already aware of. But as if to flaunt his prejudice even more, Johnson cannot resist a rehashing of the old canards about the Scottish governments legal advice regarding membership of the EU. To be clear, Alex Salmond at no time claimed to have unpublished legal advice. As on so many other occasions, he was completely exonerated by an independent inquiry. And the Scottish government did not go to court to conceal anything. It went to court to defend the principle of the confidentiality of legal advice to ministers. A principle adhered to by every government in the UK. In short, they did precisely what their responsibilities required them to do and what any other government, of whatever hue, would have done in the same circumstances. If Simon Johnson is prepared to lie about something like that and blatantly misrepresent the position of the Spanish government, why should we afford him any credibility at all?
Posted on: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:33:01 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015