Consensus and democratic maturity

Dialogue and agreement - which are undoubtedly the most effective tools available to societies living in freedom to resolve their difficulties and disagreements - once again proved to be the ideal lever for overcoming the profound economic crisis of the 1970s that threatened the process towards democracy.

The magnitude of this crisis was perfectly captured in the famous phrase of Fuentes Quintana, economic vice-president, when he stated that: "Either we democrats put an end to the economic crisis or the crisis puts an end to democracy" -an assertion shared by the political parties- the business organisations and by the trade unions UGT and CCOO -which, although recently emerged from the catacombs of clandestinity-, showed an astonishing maturity forged in the conviction that overcoming the economic crisis, and its serious social consequences, was essential to ensure the welfare of workers, defending the system of freedoms necessary to achieve a legal framework of labour relations and rights similar to those existing in democratic countries.

The responsible predisposition of all the actors to reach an agreement made it possible to draw up and sign the famous Moncloa Pacts.

These pacts were signed by the leaders of the democratic political parties at state and regional level with a true vocation for statesmanship, who, as Disraeli and later Churchill said, "are the politicians who are concerned with the welfare of the next generations and not with the next elections".

This initiative was another of President Suárez's great successes in the face of the bleak economic situation. It is worth remembering that it was a rigid and intervened economy, inherited from Franco's dictatorship, in which the business sector was made up of a series of monopolies linked to the big banks or controlled by the government.

It was, therefore, an economy incapable of facing the challenges of a world crisis caused by the rise in oil prices.

Inflation reached 30% and the government was forced to devalue the currency by 20% in an increasingly tense social environment, in which discontent in a large part of society was growing.

The main agreements were based on wage containment, the introduction of a modern tax system based on a progressive income tax that would allow the necessary revenue to be raised to boost the education and health systems, as well as the control of monetary liquidity and the reform of the financial system and Social Security. 

Those pacts led to the readjustment of the economic structure that would later make integration into Europe and the enjoyment of a long period of prosperity possible.

They were unique and unrepeatable -I repeat, unrepeatable- pacts, due to the nature of the crisis Spain was suffering and the political situation it was going through.

Once again, the revolutionary force that dialogue and agreement have in civilised countries as instruments for smoothing out problems and difficulties was clearly demonstrated. 

It is appropriate to recall that these instruments are now more necessary than ever and should be resorted to with a determined will by political leaders to solve problems, instead of being used as a simple electoral gimmick.

This is a tribute to those political, trade union and business leaders (although the latter two did not sign them, since ratification was the responsibility of the representatives of national sovereignty) who did not hesitate to place themselves at the disposal of the Spanish people to solve their anguish and hardship.

This spirit of collaboration presided over the entire constituent period that would give birth to an exemplary Constitution, the current Spanish Constitution, which offers a legally advanced and valid framework, protecting all sensibilities, except those who now want to change the "regime".

Since this Constitution has allowed us to enjoy one of the most advanced democracies in the world, ahead of Belgium, France, Italy..., according to the 'Democracy Index' of the Intelligence Unit of The Economist, I pose these disturbing questions to those who seek to dynamite it: 

What regime do you want to impose on us? A Venezuelan "Chavist" regime? A Stalinist-style republic? What kind of republic? 

It is not enough to champion this form of government as a qualitative achievement, because although it is a truism to repeat it, it is not always synonymous with freedom.

The negotiating capacity shown by Spanish democrats and the important agreements reached between the main political parties earned us the respect, not without admiration, of the international community, which saw how a country, Spain, overcame decades of confrontation in a consensual manner.

The so-called Spanish Transition Process was the model followed by many countries to establish democracy.

Despite the civic efforts of the vast majority of Spanish society, which promoted a coexistence based on respect - a concept, in my opinion, much more accurate than tolerance, since tolerance always entails, for those who proclaim it, the acceptance of the opposite from the superiority of their convictions -, the excesses of the criminals and the nostalgic guardians of Franco's essences and interests covered our lives and our future with darkness. 

It is necessary to emphasise the just benevolence of the Cortes Generales, which, seeking the reconciliation of the Spanish people, approved the Amnesty Law of October 1977. This law, clearly necessary, was responded to by the terrorist groups ETA and Grapo with cold-blooded murder, extortion and kidnapping. The Francoist nostalgics, for their part, took refuge in destabilising the new democracy by preparing the coup d'état of 23 February 1981.

The attempted coup d'état of 23 February was truly the saddest moment of the democratic transition. For those of us who were held hostage by the factious military, it was a bitter, distressing, painful and disappointing moment.

They perpetrated an inexcusable betrayal by turning their weapons against the representatives of national sovereignty and, therefore, against Spanish society; against those of us who had placed those weapons in their hands to defend our freedom and coexistence.

It was an act of cowardice, aggravated by opening fire on the deputies in the temple of speech, which sullied their uniform and the prestige of Spain throughout the free world.

There are three moments that I would like to highlight for their importance and significance:

The first, staged in the artful attempt by the seditious Lieutenant Colonel Tejero to knock the Honourable Lieutenant General Gutiérrez Mellado to the ground by attacking him from behind, a dastardly act that did not achieve its objective due to the firmness shown by the Lieutenant General. That moment marked the defeat of an outdated Army, represented by the coup plotters, and the birth of a new Armed Forces that today are one of the institutions most highly valued by Spanish society; an Armed Forces whose prestige has been earned by their eagerness to serve, their defence of freedom and their willingness and good work in the many missions entrusted to them by the United Nations and other international organisations in favour of peace.

The second moment is the pitiful and humiliating image of people in uniform jumping out of the windows of Congress in terror when they realised that their cowardly objectives had failed, when hours earlier they had used their weapons against everyone in the Chamber of Congress, in the press tribunes and in the guest galleries.

The third was the thunderous applause that the Congress of Deputies gave unanimous tribute to Lieutenant General Gutiérrez Mellado, who, with his gallantry, had defended the honour of the new armies, showing them what their role was in the nascent democracy: the defence of freedom and coexistence.