With only one of these celebrations left, I thought it was a good time to record some of my thoughts at this point, in a time sandwiched between what I think are the 2 worthy of being Malta's national days. One, the establishment of a Maltese head of state, is the culmination of the establishment of a sovereign state, but the former could not have happened if the latter was not already in place; the others were then somewhat circumstantial occurrences which invariably had to happen over time.
Writing this a week or so later after Scotland rejected its call for independence from the UK in a referendum made me wonder even more how a country such as Scotland, with countless natural resources (including oil, gas and, erm - why not - whiskey) could not be bold enough to take a leap and disrupt any reliance or affiliation with another country, even after 300 years, but then a tiny island-nation with no resources of its own, except its people, who was never a ruler but always ruled since the dawn of time, who always relied on external aid, could then make this leap forward half a century ago after a devastating war and at the brink of a nuclear war? And what more, a move endorsed by all major political leaders at the time, settled all amicably and peacefully with no bloodshed whatsoever. And then move on to become a thriving economy, exploiting its rich history and heritage (ironically furnished by all its past subsequent rulers) to create a tourist industry and a manufacturing industry but also being able to read clearly the signs of the age, when manufacturing fled to the far east and instead diversified into freight-less and non-manual ventures but into those requiring 'solely' intellect, IT and so on. An island state which is a success story, with one of the lowest unemployment rates in Europe, which had the 2nd strongest currency in the world prior to joining the Eurozone in 2008, with a health system ranked 5th best in the world and free education to all.
It was a journey at times full of controversy and irony.
The fiery Mintoff changed political direction from integration with Britain in the 1950s to fully-fetched independence in the 1960s, being the first to propose the "Break with Britain Resolution" in Parliament, seconded by pragmatic Borg Olivier. The latter, after obtaining independence, then voted against the establishment of a republic, which in my mind would have represented the ultimate nationalist achievement.
Mintoff, whose political roots were probably established during his time in Britain whilst studying in Oxford in the late 1930s, possibly exposed to Fabianism and as an external observer of the relatively thriving social services and conditions in the UK which he must have longed for to have introduced in Malta (which he eventually did, and more), was then so ardent in getting 'rid' of the British.
Borg Olivier, the prime minister who ultimately negotiated the independence constitution, was arguably elected because of the Church's involvement in the 1962 election which effectively limited the odds of Mintoff's election into government to the slimmest possible, but then had to face a Church which was utterly against independence.
And a few decades later during the EU saga, it was the conservative party, still carrying the label 'nationalist', was pro-EU, whereas other leaders of the right strongly became Euro-sceptics. On the other hand, the labour party, the long-time apt voice of workers who would benefit strongly from such an open market as is the EU, failed to join all the other European left wing thinkers and politicians who tend to be in favour of the EU (even if, at times, this tends to be not really in line with socialist principles, but that is the game of politics for you).
And then the conservative party led by a devout Catholic presumably not amused by consumerism and liberalism, who viciously sought to have a free market and removing all importation embargoes and advocating free-for-all access to the capitalist frame of mind in the late 1980s, after having fought for and acquired EU accession, was most certainly overwhelmed by a transformation into a society with changing values, importing via media and the Internet and adopting an extensive liberal ideology, leading to introduction of civil rights such as divorce and civil unions, including for LGBT couples, and rightly so.
And in another twist of irony, the strongest voice opposing the EU a decade ago is today one of the 6 MEPs in Brussels.
A country of contradiction. A country often of political complexities, even if unnecessary at times. But nonetheless a country of success and economic progress and which has been in the international limelight for different reasons in every decade of its first half a century of sovereignty, aiding in the advancement of the world itself. Malta proposed to the UN measures to safeguard the oceans in the late 1960s. Malta advocated the idea of including a chapter on security in the Mediterranean as part of the Helsinki Accords in the 1970s. Malta hosted the Bush-Gorbachev summit in the 1980s, effectively ending the Cold War. Malta's Guido DeMarco was President of the UN's General Council in the 1990s. Malta was instrumental in helping the West handle the Libyan crisis a few years ago.
Each of these tasks and achievements is totally incommensurate with the size of this country.
I proudly look forward to be participant in the greater part of the next 50 years of this country's journey and, who knows, maybe at 81 also celebrate the first centenary of Malta, an independent sovereign state.
No comments:
Post a Comment