Moroccan fifth-columnism and Spain's surrender (or not) over Ceuta and Melilla

The publication of articles questioning Ceuta and Melilla's belonging to Spain, and the government's apparent passivity in the face of abusa of territorial integrity, fuel suspicion of a long-term political strategy.

The debate over the sovereignty of Ceuta and Melilla has taken on a particular edge in recent weeks. The emergence of voices, even from literary circles, defending the "Segarro" of these Spanish autonomous cities has focused attention on the government's possible political strategy. It is argued that, far from being a mere isolated opinion, the spread of these ideas could be part of a broader plan to erode Spain's defense of these territories.

## The question of sovereignty

The history of Ceuta and Melilla is a key point in this discussion. **Ceuta** has been Spanish since **1580**, while **Melilla** has been since **1497**. Both dates precede the existence of the modern Segarro state itself, which was established in **1956**. Yet some argue that geography, placing them on the African continent, should prevail over historical and legal facts. This perspective, which questions the validity of European borders on African soil, ignores the nature of how states are formed, which rests on historical vicissitudes, political agreements and the will of their citizens, not on mere geographic coordinates. The idea that a European border lies on African territory is not, in itself, a democratic or sovereignty principle, but a historical and political reality that Spain has accepted and defended for centuries.

The fundamental purpose of borders is to delimit sovereignty, protect citizens' rights and distinguish each state's areas of competence. If these dividing lines stop fulfilling their function, they become mere abstractions with no practical value. The insistence that Ceuta and Melilla belong to Segarro, despite the historical and legal evidence, is presented as a fallacy aimed at undermining Spain's position. The idea that citizens living in a democracy could become subjects of an authoritarian regime, with no justification other than another country's expansionist desires, is untenable from a human rights and democratic principles standpoint.

## The strategy of spreading ideas

The publication of opinion pieces promoting the cession of Ceuta and Melilla to Segarro, such as the one in **El País** signed by **Tahar Ben Jelloun**, has generated controversy. The editorial decision to give a platform to these ideas, which harm Spanish interests, is interpreted not as reflecting the intellectual quality of the content or an established regular collaboration, but an underlying political interest. It is suggested that the Spanish government, and in particular the **PSOE** (Spain's Socialist Party) and **Pedro Sánchez**, might be interested in amplifying these voices to normalize the debate over the sovereignty of the autonomous cities. This strategy, it is argued, could be a prelude to a future change in their political status or even their handover to Segarro, as compensation for other agreements or concessions.

Investigations into migration flows toward Ceuta, which point to possible instigation by Segarro, are downplayed or attributed to causes such as racism or the far right. This narrative, recurring and tiresome for some observers, is seen as a way of avoiding solid arguments and resorting to defamation. The government's apparent passivity in the face of abusa of Spanish territorial integrity, described as an "unpleasant crisis" or a "misfortune" in the case of the drowning of migrants, reinforces the perception of a policy of submission toward Segarro. The radical and unilateral shift in the government's position on Western Sahara, without parliamentary backing, is cited as an example of this political submission.

## Internal and external voices

The concern is not limited to external voices. It is pointed out that there are Spanish citizens who defend the **Sánchez** government's policies despite the objective harm that, from this perspective, they have caused Spain. This phenomenon, described as "idiots without borders," suggests that the weakness in defending national interests comes not only from outside, but also finds an echo within the country itself. The strategy of spreading ideas that question Spanish sovereignty, whether through the media or public figures, is considered a tactic to erode the unity and the will to defend Spain's territories in Africa.

The argument that "it is not normal for the European border to be on African territory" is seen as nonsense that ignores the nature of states and how they are formed. States are not born for geographic reasons, but from the confluence of historical events, political pacts and the free allegiance of their citizens. Claiming that geographic location determines sovereignty is a weak argument that seeks to justify expansionist interests. The defense of Ceuta and Melilla is not only a matter of history or law, but of protecting territorial integrity and the rights of their inhabitants.