Melilla and Ceuta
Column II
By Anna Calder
Many people may be surprised to know that it is indeed possible to land both on the African continent and simultaneously on Spanish territory. Immediately, you may think of the Canary Islands, located just off the Moroccan coast. However, the archipelago is not technically on the African continent, and is rather recognised as European.
The territories in question are actually on the Northern Moroccan coastline, specifically the cities of Melilla and Ceuta as well as a collection of smaller islands. Unbeknownst to many, deeply integrated in the Moroccan landscape, there are enclaves of Spanish language, architecture and culture.
Locations of Ceuta and Melilla along the Moroccan coastline, source: https://www.loyra.com/en/spanish-tax-authority-clarifies-requisites-to-apply-for-ceuta-and-melilla-gambling-tax-incentive/
The only reason I came to learn that these pockets of Spain existed was mainly due to my final year angst. Adamant that I would finish my year abroad, which got cut short, and that I would apply to a host of jobs in Spanish-speaking countries, I investigated places where I could go to teach English.
Melilla was advertised as an autonomous Spanish city with a proximity to Morocco that makes working there an exciting opportunity for anyone with an interest in Arabic or North Africa. When you look at a map, this ‘proximity to Morocco’ actually translates to quite literally bordering the African country rather than being on the Iberian peninsula.
Melilla, source: https://www.theworldorbust.com/top-reasons-to-visit-melilla-spain/
The origins and reason for Spanish ownership of Ceuta and Melilla can be traced back to the 15th and 16th centuries. Indeed, Melilla fell as a Berber town to Spain in 1497, and Ceuta was assigned to Spain by the Portuguese in the Treaty of Lisbon in 1580. For 500 years, and even after Morocco obtained independence in 1956, these two cities have stayed under Spanish control.
Melilla also holds particular historical interest. If you have studied the beginnings of the Spanish Civil War, you’re likely to have heard that Francisco Franco started his coup d’état in Morocco, the exact location of which was actually Melilla. Controversially, a statue of Franco is still standing despite it being half a century since the fall of the Spanish dictator. Similarly, in Ceuta the Falange and Imperial Eagle, representative of the Franco era, are still visible on an abandoned monument.
Ceuta Cathedral, source: https://www.afar.com/places/ceuta-cathedral-ceuta
Perhaps then it is fair to say that these Spanish autonomous cities are somewhat stuck in the past. Morocco would certainly agree, having claimed that these are not just autonomous cities, but ‘colonial enclaves’ usurped by the Spaniards. In light of Spain’s vehement condemnation of the UK and its ownership of Gibraltar, Morocco has emphasised Spain’s hypocrisy.
Like Gibraltar for the UK, Melilla and Ceuta are strategic real estate for Spain on the Mediterranean Sea, highly sought after for their fruitful trading position. However, Spain has rejected the comparison with Gibraltar, arguing that Melilla and Ceuta are naturally and ethnically Spanish, whereas the inhabitants of Gibraltar are ‘imported aliens’.
Gibraltar Rock, source: https://www.istockphoto.com/photos/rock-of-gibraltar
To some extent, they are correct given that these territories have been under Spanish rule longer than Pamplona or Tudela, both of which are cities on the mainland, and that the inhabitants of the North African cities democratically align themselves with Spain. The landscape and architecture also recall Spain, with fortresses reminiscent of Ibiza Town and Catholic cathedrals that could be spotted in Andalucía.
However, in an era heavily focused on decolonisation, I would argue that perhaps it is time for reflection, an end to hypocrisy and the returning of these so-called ‘colonial enclaves’. Why, when Spain relinquished so many of its colonial assets in 1975, did they not return Melilla and Ceuta? For me, Spain’s justification for their long-standing relationship with these cities is redundant for one principal reason: historical affiliation is not a valid explanation.
If this were a logical argument, then decolonisation itself would be called into question. Britain would have a ‘legitimate’ claim to India, considering its history with the nation extends back to 1608, whilst Spain might exert its former colonial power which dates back to the 16th century over the supposed ‘New World’ it discovered.
While my solution might sound drastic, I believe it’s about time countries quit playing strategic games of chess; nations laying claim to territories belonging to their empires that collapsed decades or even centuries ago is baseless and irrational.