It is well known that the motto guiding Pedro Sanchez’s political career is “Caesar or nothing”. Under his inspiration, he re-conquered his party’s leadership, ousted Mariano Rajoy with a censure motion, was invested with a Frankenstein coalition and managed to approve two budgets that guaranteed him power until 2023. give. And like his model Julius Caesar, his star was also on the verge of extinction on the Eid of March, when a combination of several related crises (Ukraine, inflation, energy, transport strikes and the “turn” of the Sahara) led to the destruction of the Sahara by Tyrion and the Trojans. Threatened to throw him down after being captured. Which bothered him right and left. But, nonetheless, he has managed to survive, alone after undertaking two unreliable and risky undertakings: his petition to Brussels seeking an “Iberian exception” and his letter to the Moroccan king acknowledging his sovereignty over Western Sahara. doing.
Such a display of audacity stunned everyone, as he exercised his power a year earlier after being left alone in the face of danger due to the defection of his vice president, Pablo Iglesias, who had by then pulled his chestnut out of the fire. has gone. Characterized by being lazy with extreme caution, according to a co-governance plan that delegates the riskiest decisions to autonomous communities. And so it began to happen now on the Eid of March, as he was overwhelmed by the impotence of delaying the adoption of the most urgent answers. But in the end the blanket was thrown over his head and, without assigning himself to anyone in ranger mode alone, he decided to take the bull by the horns, asking Rabat and Brussels for help.
And if he initiates his bet alone, without consulting rivals or allies, he too is left alone to face the consequences, as virtually no one has approved his turn against Rabat. A Copernican twist that Sánchez justified by pure practical realism, defending the idea that the lesser of evils, however immoral it may seem, is the only way to avoid many of the pitfalls that result from staying in the present. . remain so, An argument consistent with an argument used by Podemos to oppose the shipment of arms to Ukraine: the refusal to help the invading Democrats, which is justified only as a lesser evil, to allow them to continue the genocide by their aggressor. to be prevented.
Thus, both Sánchez and Iglesias choose to force to avoid the greater evils (brutal in Vladimir Putin’s case, “hybrid” in Rabat’s case), attacking not with bombs, but with immigrants. ). The problem is that, by succumbing to brute force or hybrid force, these evils are only avoided in the short term, but at the cost of encouraging them in the future. In fact, if they succumb to their pressure, Putin and Rabat may consider themselves authorized to try again in the future, raising the stakes and the cost of their coercion. The surrender of Ukraine would be followed by an invasion of Lithuania, and the claim of the Sahara would be followed by Ceuta and Melilla. This is a blackmailer’s game, which can be avoided only by opposing blackmail. Will Sanchez be able to resist Rabat?
Exclusive content for customers
read without limits