The Basque Government is seeking a new treaty with the State. Is it not contradictory to change the framework from the same political-legal framework promoted for 30 years?

No, I don't. There are inconveniences rather than contradictions. During the transition (1977-1980), the failure of all political actors now seeking to change the framework to adopt a common position against it has been the main obstacle. One sector of this country wanted to develop the experience of the Statute of Autonomy within the framework of the State, and another sector - I include myself in this - did not support this idea. However, after 30 years, the two sectors converge on one point: The Statute does not serve to advance the path of sovereignty. This democracy does not serve to solve the problem of peace or to adapt the economic change that has taken place in the Basque Country. First after the failure of the Treaty of Ajuria Eneko and then with the Lizarra-Garazi Agreement, there was a desire to make a second transition.

Is there a second transition?

I'd call it a sequential transition from the transition that didn't end. As long as the agreement is not concluded, this transition is a kind of suspicion.

How have you seen the transition that could lead to the new framework in recent years?

The main obstacle is the weak relations between the two sectors that did not agree on the transition. The Lizarra-Garazi Agreement ended in crisis. When the new Political Statute of Autonomy of the Government was paralysed by the Spanish Courts, the Basque citizens did not respond adequately. Thirty years of conflict have caused fatigue and social fluctuations. The situation looks like the teeth of a saw. Loyola’s conversations have reflected the high and good moment of the sawtooth. This session was the last opportunity for political normalization, which could lead to the realization of the second transition. Political actors were on the verge of closing the transition and reaching an agreement in September 2006.

The nationalist left, in order to channel the dialogues of Loyola, adopted the concept of autonomy. What happened to not go any further?

The draft text of the Union that I was familiar with was worthy of guiding the conflict and provoking interesting political processes. It was said to have caused some sort of pressure, which we will never know for sure. Apparently, more was subsequently requested than originally stated in the text. The Basque Parliament and the Parliament of Navarre are said to have called for a hara-kiruna. The disappearance of the two institutions and the transformation of their legislative power into a unified body, represented by 50% of each.

Can this be confirmed?

I have read the document that contained these expressions. And that is, of course, to overturn the basis of representative sovereignty.

Do you think there is a way to overcome the blockade?

It is the two Parliaments that can take the necessary steps to give way to the transition and to implement a new framework. The model envisaged for progress in this direction was appropriate: the coordinating body. This joint body had the power to make legislative proposals, not to decide. Representative democracy continued to be based on both the Parliament of Navarre and the Basque Parliament. Of course, the Navarrese would not accept anything else to continue violating this kind of second transition. Alta, the experience was vital to overcome this political historical moment. The Nationalist Left did not see this possibility, it had little sense of the future and that is why we are in the situation in which we find ourselves.

The nationalist left often reproaches the PNV that its electoral interests are an obstacle to the negotiation or transition process.

This criticism is unfair. The efforts of the parties to position themselves in the new political dissertation transcend all electoral interests. The Lizarra-Garazi Agreement resulted in more losses to the PNV than benefits. Elections are held every four years and the process goes very far. The underlying reason is not the election or the fear of losing the government. Of course, if you lose the election while such a process is developing, the catastrophe can be huge for the evolution of the process. What is at stake in the process is much more important than what the parties lose in the elections. I think it's more fair to see it that way.

The nationalist left also accuses the PNV of taking advantage of the illegal situation.

The PSOE has made the most use of the situation of the Patriotic Left. It allowed the EHA to present itself in the previous elections, allowing it to obstruct the patriotic majority of Parliament and to be a key element for this party. Now it's the other way around. Then the wishes of the State and those of the nationalist left were adapted, whereas now that the political game is different, it does not interest him. The PSE is not interested in having a key EHAK. The state uses the situation of the patriotic left for its own benefit and against it. Addressing the illegal situation of the nationalist left is not in the hands of the PNV.

How do you see the Spanish State in the resolution of the Basque conflict, analyzing the experiences of other peoples, as seen from the Scottish process.

The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada is appropriate in our case. It reads as follows: “We don’t know if we have the right to self-determination, but we have the right to have the right of a collectivity respected and the state negotiate with us.” The same process is taking place in Scotland. They have no right to hold a referendum on self-determination, but Britain’s last prime ministers – Thatcher, Major or Blair – have said: “Who are we to say no to the Scottish Parliament if they want to question it? We won't be the obstacle. Of course, we will not campaign for secession.” In these countries they are talking about secession and the authorities are acting in this way. Secession in our country is not a game or a matter of litigation, in our country we want to consult to know if the citizens want asymmetric federalism, confederalism, consionalism or partnership. Consultation is a form of permission for this historic community to ask itself. People are asked if they want to negotiate with the state. But at this point, we will not have to ask ourselves if we have the power to decide, but if this state is democratic. The problem is the poor democratic quality of the State.

We are in a lockdown situation again.

Oh, yeah, yeah. The PSOE rejects the Loyola pre-agreements. It wants to subordinate any political negotiation to the peace process. It considers that the recognition of the right of Basque citizens to decide is a kind of compensation to ETA, a right to exchange for the end of violence. The PSOE does not want to go back to the Loyola pre-agreements, it has declared the agreement of the past unusable and that is a terrible mistake. The document is useful in the medium term. It is a good way for political actors to sit back and negotiate in a state of peace.

Will the next plenary session of the Basque Parliament unblock the political situation?

If the HKSAR says yes to the consultation, an interesting route can be opened. The National Court can stop it by appeal, but in five months the possibility of progress will be maintained. Saying yes to the Government ' s proposal was a way of expanding the closed process. If the HKSAR refuses, the blockade will be extended for at least four years. This country can no longer tolerate this situation.

Do you see Patxi Lopez as president in this situation?

It seems difficult, but not impossible. Anyway, I don't see any strong leadership from Patxi Lopez. I don’t see the PSOE as a peace or cultural or economic project for the Basque Country. The PSOE does not have the political project to carry out the change demanded by the majority of the population.

The elections will have to unblock the current situation.

At the end of the legislature, each party will present its project to build this country. A number of citizen petitions have established party projects off-site. Welfare projects will be important and discussed. The time has come to rethink the Basque Country. The discussions will have to go to the heart of the problem. This obligation will require renewed vigour on all sides.

Including the options of the Patriotic Left.

The ideal situation would be for the Nationalist Left to present itself. I attach enormous importance to these elections, which will indicate whether we will go along the path of the right to decide or whether we will enter another long cycle of unbearable violence. The Nationalist Left is Incognite. They've taken a lot of their people out of the way. We do not know how his attitude will materialize and in what direction he will go. It is not easy to see what they are going to do in the parliamentary vote. I don't see it clearly. We are not in the situation where the proposal for a New Statute of the Government was voted on.