Xavier Bru de Sala, July 9, 2021 Writer
Carles Puigdemont, in Waterloo (Belgium). / HORST WAGNER (EFE)
If Puigdemont would find himself with the strength to destroy JxCat as he has done with PDECat, it is likely that he would once again undertake the task of building for himself another tailor-made party, an intransigent party that would not abdicate all confrontation as Jordi Sànchez and company have done, but neither he plans to denounce the collaborationism of his advisers, those of Sànchez of course and, in order not to be in evidence before the majority of JxCat, he does not even give explicit support to the three mentioned voices. Those in favor of staying in the ‘no surrender’ that he still invokes, sustain the fiction of the determining political influence of Puigdemont. ‘Wait and see’, let the two years of rigor pass, and it will be seen how from Waterloo he raises the masses and blows everything up. Two years that with the extension for the elections at the end of the 2023 could be three, or four under the hypnotic baton of Pedro Sánchez. Eternalized and increasingly bland exile.
Puigdemont chooses not to return to Catalonia and considers requesting Belgian nationality
The figure of Puigdemont has only faded and will continue to do so. He does not have the reins of power, he does not mark the line of his own party, not to mention the direction of the country. So much so that, if he had the guarantees to return, he would be trapped in the logic that his predecessor Artur Mas has thrown off the board of politics. If you do not lead an option, if your party supports the opposite way to the one you have preached, if you are unable to win the elections because you have renounced your own message, you better stay in Brussels even if you had to stop invoking the persecution of Spanish justice not to return. So much so that what would really sink, completely and forever, the profile of Puigdemont as a symbol, would be a total and complete amnesty on the events of 2017 that ended so badly due to his terrible leadership. If he returned with guaranteed impunity, for example thanks to the European courts, perhaps it would be his followers who one day, anticipating a verdict that will make its way over time, would hold him accountable and dismantle his excuses for having been badly advised. As de Gaulle emphasized, “the considerations belong to many, the decision belongs to only one.”
From a point of view, therefore, not only political but in order not to go down in history as something more than ultimately responsible for having crashed the process, it is convenient for him, instead of returning, to explode, even if it is by light of a candle that becomes a birthday cake, its status as a symbol of an already more than chimerical resistance.