José Manuel Albares (Madrid, 1972), Minister of Foreign Affairs, is responsible for the program of the Spanish six-monthly presidency of the European Union, which has just started, with the unexpected novelty of the general elections on July 23. In this interview with La Vanguardia, Albares explains the general lines of the semester and answers various questions about the most sensitive chapters of Spanish foreign policy, when the political future of the country is decided.
Does not the call for elections devalue a Spanish presidency in which many efforts have been invested?
There is no devaluation. The European Union is used to having electoral periods during the semi-annual presidencies. France had a very successful presidency last year, with three elections; Belgium had it with an acting government. It was already known that there would be elections in Spain, even if it was at the end of the year. The Government has made an enormous effort to ensure that this presidency is truly a country project. The only attempt to devalue it comes from the Popular Party.
Alberto Núñez Feijóo, leader of the opposition and candidate for the presidency of the Government, complains that he has not received information from the Government.
More than a year ago I addressed all the political forces present in Congress and explained the general lines of the presidency. A few months ago I brought together the Spanish MEPs and they all came except the PP, which has voluntarily decided to situate itself outside the consensus.
The president of the PP has set up a working group in view of the possibility of taking over the Spanish presidency after July 23, if he wins the general elections and is investiture.
A few days ago I saw a list of people that Mr. Núñez Feijóo has appointed to deal with European issues and I was surprised, for two reasons. Almost all of them are men, and many of them were in charge of Spain’s foreign policy at the time when Spain was at its greatest distance from the European Union, which was the time of the Iraq war.
One of the most important events of the semester will be the EU-Latin America Summit to be held on July 17 and 18 in Brussels. Have the Latin American presidents already confirmed their presence?
More than 20 heads of state have already confirmed their presence, the latest, Brazilian President Lula da Silva, after a telephone conversation with President Sánchez. [The interview with Minister Albares was held last Thursday. La Vanguardia has questioned the refusal of Latin American countries to give their support to Ukraine at the next summit in Brussels, which our newspaper reported yesterday. The Foreign Office indicated that Minister Albares is waiting, pending the final text of the resolution, not yet concluded].
Are there basic lines of consensus with the PP that guarantee continuity in Spain’s relationship with the current Latin American governments?
I have seen the electoral program of the PP in terms of foreign policy and I confirm once again that for them Latin America is three countries: Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. As a minister I have spoken very clearly about those countries. But Latin America is more. The PP has an ideological policy on Latin America. He only conceives of being able to relate to governments with which he is ideologically in tune. For this Government, all the countries of Latin America are equally important for Spain. We want the relationship to be built on common values ??and that is why we have maintained very good relations with conservative governments in Latin America, as well as with progressive governments.
There is another pivot of foreign policy that requires consensus: Morocco. Is there a basic consensus on the policy to follow with Morocco in case there is a change of government in Spain?
All the governments of the democracy have considered that Morocco is the main priority, and I believe that it is undeniable that we have achieved a mutually beneficial relationship with that country. We have managed to improve that relationship. What I observe is that the PP is returning to its origins: to positions of clash with Morocco, a disturbing return to anti-Moroccan positions that refer us to the Perejil crisis. I think it is a wrong approach. The current good relationship with Morocco is mutually beneficial and is essential for Ceuta and Melilla, for the Canary Islands and also for Andalusia.
Does the letter that the President of the Government, Pedro Sánchez, sent to the King of Morocco regarding Western Sahara, admitting regionalization as possible, oblige a future government?
The PP has tried to introduce the idea that with that letter there was a change. In that letter it is confirmed that Spain continues to be where it always was: together with the personal envoy of the UN Secretary General, supporting him in everything that is needed to find a solution. The PP is the one that has to decide if it wants to stay within that framework of the United Nations or not.
How is the relationship with Algeria evolving?
Our hand is extended so that there is a relationship based on the same principles with which we relate with the rest of our neighbors and with the rest of the Arab countries: friendship and mutual benefit.
We return to Ukraine. The economic and social consequences of the war are already visible in Europe. Is the war, basically, the cause of the stumble of the Spanish left on May 28 and the advancement of the general elections to July 23?
No I dont think so. First of all, we must remember that the war is the sole responsibility of Vladimir Putin. Spain has complied with its obligation as a member country of the European Union. And we have faced the economic and social consequences of the war. We have faced them. The government has faced adverse consequences stemming from Russian aggression and a response based on European values.
And what perspective do you see for the war?
Unfortunately flat. Putin shows no sign of wanting to withdraw troops from him. Spain will be committed to Ukraine for as long as it takes.
