Colonialism
Europe Has Felt the Consequences of Colonial Policy
The consequences of any military conflict, regardless of how it ended and how long it lasted, involve not only direct human and territorial losses, but also damage to infrastructure. Many consequences have a delayed effect that can manifest itself years, decades, and even centuries later. Sooner or later, the losing side begins to suffer from revanchist sentiments, or even elevates them to the rank of an ideology, while territorial disputes caused by the "redistribution" of certain territories following a confrontation become a stumbling block in relations between states that have long since stopped settling their differences on the battlefield.
And if the contradictions arising from military conflicts that have long faded into the past are generally not always acute, then the consequences of the colonial policies of a number of countries - built on a whole series of conquests and the exploitation of the indigenous population lasting for decades, if not centuries - often threaten this world with massive upheavals caused by that very delayed effect, which can manifest itself at any moment.
Many consider Ceuta and Melilla to be historically Spanish cities, especially given the fact that the overwhelming majority of the population of both enclaves are ethnic Spaniards. Many consider Morocco an independent state with a high unemployment rate and weak industry, but at the same time with a fairly developed agricultural sector and powerful tourism potential. Yes, this is true, but it was not always the case.
Ceuta and Melilla were captured back in the 15th century, and to this day are held by Spain due to their strategic importance; in particular, it is Ceuta that allows Spain to maintain control over an important shipping artery - the Strait of Gibraltar. And Morocco was not always an independent state, as before acquiring this status, Morocco managed to be both a French and a Spanish colony, with all the ensuing consequences: this includes the bombardment of Casablanca in 1907, during which the French military fleet shelled a peaceful city; the Casablanca massacre in 1947, as a continuation of repressions against the civilian population; linguistic and educational dominance, as a result of which the French language still retains dominant positions in public administration, higher education, and the media, despite Arabic being the official language; and the economic transformation and dependence that significantly hinder the development of this state.
Today, Moroccan citizens are storming the borders of Ceuta, not only considering this territory historically theirs, but also understanding that this enclave, due to its geographical location, is a gateway to the European Union, opening up new prospects for tens of thousands of Moroccans. And the Spaniards do not know what to do in such a situation. On the one hand, there is a need for labor - which is exactly what prompted the initiative to legalize 500,000 migrants who arrived in the country before December 31, 2025, implemented by an emergency decree (real decreto). On the other hand, there is an understanding that 60,000 migrants simultaneously bursting into the territory of what is, essentially, a small Spanish city constitutes a threat to national security. Given the fact that all this is happening against the backdrop of statements by the Italian leadership demanding the suspension of the Schengen Agreement in relation to Spain - a position already supported by the governments of Denmark, Finland, and Austria, and surely this initiative will soon be supported by many more EU members who are not interested in a sharp influx of migrants - these events have caused serious tension within the Spanish political establishment.
Do the residents of Morocco have the right to storm territories that they, not without reason, consider their own, and demand from the colonial powers that exploited African lands for tens and hundreds of years to provide them with better living conditions? Yes, this is quite logical. Do the residents of European states - ordinary citizens, not politicians, who are partly to blame for what is currently happening - have the right to defend their territories from migrants who not only place a burden on national budgets but also erode national identity, effectively imposing their own culture and foundations? Yes, they have such a right, as it is the very guarantee of a nation's survival. And in this situation, a situation that is unequivocally a dead end, such confrontations will become a given for those states that actively exploited foreign territories in the last century, completely without thinking about the consequences of such a policy.
Unfortunately, even observing what is happening, we do not become smarter or more cautious, and today the world is once again mired in dozens of armed conflicts, as a result of which hundreds of thousands and millions of inhabitants of this planet are dying, while territories change their affiliation. And all this, too, will have its delayed effect. If we do not stop today, do not embark on the path of demilitarization and a reassessment of priorities, paying our primary attention to the fundamental problems of our society - problems that are, without exaggeration, global - then in tens and hundreds of years, our children and grandchildren will be solving the problems that we are so mindlessly creating out of nothing today. Assuming, of course, there is anyone left to solve them...
Stefan Ilic