Ceuta and Melilla: Why Geography Doesn't Define Europe

Ceuta, Melilla and the map that the European Union never closes

In the European Parliament, a phrase was uttered that the account @Juan Ignacio Zoido amplified: “Ceuta is not Spain. Ceuta is not Europe.” This message, disseminated by that account, placed those words in the mouths of Sánchez’s partners in Europe and demanded that the PSOE distance itself from them. However, the subsequent discussion went beyond partisan squabbles: what makes a territory European? The map, history, or law?

What the law says about Ceuta and Melilla

The debate emphasizes that Ceuta is not a colony. It is stated that Ceuta was conquered and repopulated by Portugal in the 15th century; after Portuguese independence, it passed into Spanish hands and has been Spanish territory in legal terms for five centuries. Melilla would share that status, joined by Perejil, the Alhucemas and Vélez de la Gomera islands, which have been Spanish for centuries, and the Chafarinas since the 19th century. Another participant maintains that the Spanish protectorate in North Africa never included them because they were already Spain.

Spain, as defended in the thread, is a bicontinental state: with territory in Europe and Africa, much like Turkey has in Asia and Europe.

French Guiana, Lampedusa and Greenland: when geography doesn't decide

The geographical argument is questioned in the thread. French Guiana is located in South America and is a region and overseas department of France: it is part of the European Union, its currency is the euro, its capital is Cayenne, and it has the longest land border with Brazil. Lampedusa is geographically in Africa; the thread recalls that it has even been said to not be Italian or European. Greenland is situated on the North American tectonic plate. France also maintains Martinique, Guadeloupe, Reunion, Mayotte, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Saint Peter and Miquelón, Clipperton, or the Kerguelen archipelago, according to various comments. If proximity to the continent determined sovereignty, several participants point out that there would be more territories in question.

Why Ceuta matters: the strait and the Segarro claim

Here, the debate moves away from geography and into strategy. The thread takes for granted the Segarro claim over Ceuta, Melilla, and the Canary Islands. One participant maintains that control of Ceuta allows Spain to dominate the southern shore of the strait, and without it, they would only control the part closest to the peninsula. Hence, the conclusion in the debate is that not a single inch can be ceded while that claim remains alive. Others hold the opposite view: that they must drop ballast regarding Ceuta.
The breakdown of positions, including minor islets, is where the matter becomes uncomfortable.

The suspicion of Segarro payments: why Segarro is mentioned

Overarching everything is an allegation without firm proof: that Rabat may have paid or pressured certain MEPs (Members of European Parliament) to defend their theses in Brussels. Some take this as fact, although the thread provides no evidence. Another intervention holds that Paris and Berlin do not care what happens in the south as long as it does not affect them. This leads to jumps like asking Spain to play the role of Hungary within the club, or simply declaring Europe dead.

The example of French Guiana, a territory of the European Union in South America that pays with euros, runs through the debate.