On Spain and Europe’s Response to Ceuta.

The dangers of salon socialism.

This short reflection is directed at Leftist groups. Personally, I hesitated to comment on this because I wanted to reflect a bit more. Frankly, I still struggle with my reflection

Here is what I think.

Yes, the Spanish government under Pedro Sánchez is pro-Palestine. And yes, Spain, contrary to other EU Member States, has opened the door to the regularisation of over a million irregularised migrants. Yes, Spain is the only EU Member State that voted against the racist Deportation Regulation.

Political Instrumentalisation

Is it possible that the migrant crossings into Ceuta were engineered by political actors? Yes, I think so. It appears that Morocco is instrumentalising migration to pressure the Spanish government over its rapprochement with Algeria. Morocco’s occupation of Western Sahara is a key factor here. As for allegations of US-Israeli influence, the evidence is mainly circumstantial. However, that possibility cannot simply be dismissed.

We are quick to assume that Morocco’s actions must be influenced by Trump and Netanyahu. However, Morocco is an occupying force in its own right. And this is not the first time it has weaponised migration (see the 2021 Ceuta, when Morocco used migration to pressure Spain over Western Sahara).

Salon Socialism

A quick read through many Leftist social media accounts leaves a lot to be desired. Very strangely, migrant rights and safety have been relegated behind geopolitical takes: "This is the work of Israel and the US"; "They are punishing Spain for its support of the Palestinian people"; and so on.

I'll call these takes what they are: salon socialism.

The question is not whether these arguments are right or wrong. Structural analyses can be valuable, and I often appreciate attempts to explain the deeper forces behind political events.

The problem arises when the structural explanation becomes so dominant that it eclipses the people at the centre of the crisis. If the first instinct in response to migrants risking their lives is to turn them into evidence for a preferred geopolitical narrative, something is seriously wrong. Human beings cease to be the subject of the conversation and instead become props in a broader ideological story.

Good political analysis should be capable of doing both: examining the structural dynamics while also acknowledging and centring the immediate suffering, agency, and dignity of those directly affected.

Material and Political Consequences

I share the view of the Black Marxist tradition (Cedric Robinson, Angela Davis, Fred Hampton) that politics is ultimately about material conditions, not abstract ideas.

What are the material consequences of this crisis?

• 67 migrants have lost their lives, many of them children;

• the forcible repatriation of thousands of migrants;

• prosecution of around 60 people on trafficking charges;

• deplorable conditions in Ceuta, where migrants have been left without access to water, food, shelter, and medical care;

• Spain has mobilised its border management apparatus, in coordination with Frontex: military and border personnel, drones, and other surveillance technologies have been deployed;

• fascist EU states such as Italy, Denmark, Germany, and others have piled pressure on Spain, with an emergency meeting of EU interior ministers planned for Tuesday, 4 August, to "strengthen EU migration policy" - code for more racist and violent migration policies.

Who do you think suffers from this?

Politics should help us understand reality, not filter reality until it fits our preferred worldview.

Unconditional Support for Spain

I think this has been the most difficult part to stomach. I refer to salon socialism quite intentionally. Too many Leftists online are uncritically regurgitating far-right, morally and intellectually questionable talking points in defence of Spain and Prime Minister Sánchez’s actions.

Some examples.

1. Many large accounts have jumped on the bandwagon, focusing almost exclusively on claims that the US-Israel axis is behind this - that Spain is being punished for its pro-Palestinian stance. Somehow, Morocco’s agency and its occupation of Western Sahara are largely ignored. Yet the question of Western Sahara is also one of anti-imperial struggle and deserves equal attention.

2. This strange, unconditional support for Spain and Sánchez somehow ignores why Ceuta is considered Spanish territory in the first place. I have even seen some accounts attempt to justify Spain’s occupation of Ceuta with ludicrous claims such as: Spain owned this territory before the formation of modern-day Morocco.

So what about the people indigenous to this land?

As in Melilla, the Amazigh people are indigenous to this territory. This is land that was conquered by Portugal and later ceded to Spain. It is occupied land.

1. As the global far right and fascist governments across Europe piled pressure on Sánchez following the crossings into Ceuta —notably Meloni in Italy and Merz in Germany— large Leftist accounts immediately rallied behind Sánchez.

   Some accounts literally argued that this was no longer a "crisis" because the majority of migrants had already been returned. Others claimed that these did not look like "regular migrants." Still others focused primarily on videos of trucks dropping off migrants as evidence that the crossings had been orchestrated.

Now, I must confess: I am angry.

And I do not apologise for my anger.

Anger can be purifying.

Unpacking the Madness

Let's start with Sánchez's actions.

As already highlighted elsewhere in this rant, Sánchez immediately deployed the military, Frontex, and Spain's broader security apparatus; forcibly deported more than 48,000 migrants back to Morocco in violation of the principle of non-refoulement; echoed far-right discourse by claiming that migrant smugglers were responsible; and defended Fortress Europe.

No matter how you slice it, Sánchez and the Spanish government sacrificed the human rights of these migrants and international law, while mobilising far-right narratives —which, just a few days earlier, we all agreed were dangerous— to defend his political career and his government.

Most of my salon socialist friends will ask: What was he supposed to do?

Others will argue that Spain remains the odd one out in an increasingly fascist Europe.

I do not deny Spain's progressive positions on Palestine or its regularisation programme for irregularised migrants. Those deserve recognition. In fact, I agree that we should support the Spanish government when it seeks to uphold international law.

What I do not support is unconditional support.

Palestinian liberation cannot come before the liberation of Western Sahara, or the struggles of Sudanese, Haitian, Congolese, Kurdish, or other peoples fighting for liberation. Palestinian liberation is deeply connected to these other anti-imperial struggles. There is no need to construct hierarchies between them. We can demand and support Palestinian liberation while also actively supporting other peoples. These struggles reinforce one another rather than compete. In this sense, ignoring the imperial dynamics of occupied Western Sahara and Ceuta while imposing Palestinian liberation at the center of this situation is counterproductive to our collective anti-imperial liberation struggles.

By the same logic, we can applaud Spain’s regularisation programme and its opposition to the Deportation Regulation while simultaneously holding Sánchez’s government accountable for its militarised response in Ceuta and for mobilising far-right discourse.

We can support elements of Sánchez’s letter to the European Commission criticising other EU governments for attacking Spain and demanding solidarity while also condemning his blatant violation of the principle of non-refoulement by returning refugees to places where their lives may be in danger.

Likewise, we can suspect US-Israeli interference while criticising Morocco’s weaponisation of migration to pressure Spain, and at the same time question why Ceuta is considered Spanish territory.

Above all, we cannot fall into the securitisation frame by constructing migrants as threats through the dispossession of their identity and agency. When we say they "don't look like regular migrants," or flood social media with videos supposedly showing Moroccan security officers transporting truckloads of migrants as evidence that this was staged, we also at the same time reinforce the undeservingnessframe that leads to dehumanisation through categorisation. At the very least, our arguments should carefully ensure that we don’t invisibilise some oppressed groups in our attempts to liberate others.

This is irresponsible.

Concluding Remarks

International politics is complex.

The struggle for liberation is even more complex.

Race, class, gender, and colonialism continuously interact to oppress and exploit our communities, manifesting in different ways. We must resist the temptation to seek easy answers. Equally, we must resist forcing everyday reality to conform to our preferred ideological frameworks or structural analyses.

Our analysis must first and foremost be grounded in lived reality, foregrounding the needs of those communities directly affected by violence.

As I wrote on my Instagram story two days ago:

"Those who pay the price for what is happening in Ceuta are, ultimately, migrants who have become a geopolitical tool for the far right."

Credit: Cordon press

Looking back, I should have added: Conservatives and the Left.

The deeper point of this critique is that parts of the Left have temporarily adopted the far right’s frame of migration in attempts to defend Spain given its support for Palestinian liberation and migrant regularisation.

In the spirit of Black Marxism, I reiterate that the fight for justice is a fight for material conditions, not abstract ideas. Those material conditions require us, first and foremost, to foreground the needs of migrants who have become caught in a geopolitical struggle, not ideological grandstanding.