Gibraltar and the Spaniards

Sir,—In his letter on Gibraltar (March 19) Mr. Hugh Kay states categorically that the oxygen charge is utterly false. He accepts the Spanish version completely. One wishes that he would have taken the trouble to check from both sides if he wanted to be quite fair. The application for oxygen for hospitals was reiected by the Spanish authorities. Evidence can he provided. Supplies from Britain were sent OM. In the interim period the Navy in Gibraltar helped out.
The case of the dying lady who was delayed at the frontier is a genuine case. We know because .w. e were here, and it is not an Isolated case. We personally know of similar cases that can be substantiated.
Mr. Kay attempts to dispose of a complex historical, juridical, polit'cal and, above all, human problem in a few short paragraphs. It is significant that the discussion on Gibraltar by the Committee of 24 ranged over a period of three weeks and that-at the end of that period, the Committee, faced with a difficult and almost unique situation where a "colonial" people wished to remain closely associated with the administering power, could come to no conclusion hut to ask Britain and Spain to have talks about it. The complexity of the problem can perhaps be gauged by the fact that in its consensus the Cornmittee stated that the WHOLE of U.N. Resoluion 1514 (XV) applied to Gibraltar although Britain and Spain had each argued that only certain (and, of course, different) parts applied and others were irrelevant.
It should be noted also that the Committee's consensus was announced on October 16, 1964. The restrictions on the Gibraltar Frontier began on October 17. It was only sotne time later that Spain called on Britain to negotiate. One can only deduce that the re strictions were a premeditated plan to he implemented at Gibraltar 24 hours after the consensus was announced in New York and intended to soften up the British attitude during any subsequent negotiations. Is it surprising that Britain should refuse to dicuss the matter under the circumstances?
Mr. Kay's "simple" proposition about the Treaty of Utrecht can be answered equally simply: there has never been any question of it transfer of sovereignty from Britain to the people of Gibraltar. Indeed, the latter representatives before the Committee of 24 insisted that Gibraltar had no desire to be independent and that in fact they wished to continue and strengthen their close association with Britain, who would retain sovereignty and, in particular, responsibility for defence and foreign affairs.
Mr. Kay appears to regard the Gibraltarians' interests and current standards of living as "most
important". 7 he Gibraltarians know that the economic blockade at present imposed by Spain, and aimed at damaging their shopping and tourist trade. will affect their standards of living, hut the blockade has served only to stiffen their resolve not to be politically connected with Spain. Ii is in this respect that Mr. Kay has perhaps been misled.
The whole crux of the matter, surely, is this: should a community living under a democratic government be absorbed, against its wishes into a foreign country which has shown nothing but hostility to that community, and the system of government of which is unacceptable to them? It is primarily the political and ohnuemsan aspects of the problem that are important, not the emotional, legalistic or economic
On the question of smuggling— which is of course quite irrelevant to the real problem — an offer has been made to Spain to discuss all local difficulties, including smuggling. This offer has not been taken up. One can only deduce that it is of little importance to the Spanish economy and that the charge of smuggling, grossly exaggerated. is too useful a stick for heating the Gibraltarians to be given up so easily. Again this is a complex situation involving many Spaniards and again we are prepared to give Mr. Kay full information on this.
Catholic opposition to the Spanish Government, such as that of Professor Ruiz Jimenez, is described by Mr, Kay as mere "impatience" at the slowness of the liberalising tempo". This .iimniphaetireenccee" recent has iginna ifiaoc resulted .in or fRlutecI iL
Jimenez from the Cortes. Mr. Kay should also read the publications of the Spanish Y.C.W. and the statements of the Abbot of Montserrat now "summoned" to Rome, Impatience is hardly the word to describe the letter of the 339 Basque priests to their Bishops:
"Here you see put before you, Your Excellencies, what is in our humble opinion one of the fundamental reasons why every day a wider breach opens between us and the souls eonfined to our care. This reason is no other than thc contradiction that exists between Catholic doctrine on the human persons, and the fact that this doctrine is ignored by a regime which officially calls itself Catholic . . . This is the accusation of which we are the vict'ms."
Your Gibraltarian correspondents did not reject or accept Franco's claim to have saved Spanish Catholicism. What could be questioned, however, is the way the Spanish regime has capitalised on this claim for 25 years.
W. E. A. Chiappe, R. Norton.
(itbrallar,