The Spanish Civil War - Essay Example

Running Head: Spanish Civil War The Spanish Civil War refers to the war of 1936-9. This was in fact the fourth such conflict on Spanish soil since the 1830s. The Spanish Civil War pitted ‘regionalists against centralists, anti-clericals against Catholics, landless laborers against latifundistas, workers against industrialists.’ (Preston.1986, p.9) Amid all this conflict one thing was abundantly clear, all of these conflicting groups ‘have in common the struggles of a society in the throes of modernization.’ (Preston. 1986, p.9) In the preceding years and the years that followed there was a general disconnect between societal realities and the political authorities governing society. Going back as far as 1808 Spain suffered a series of struggles perpetuated by those who sought reform and those who resisted it. The ruling classes were loathe to subscribe to reform that threatened to redistribute the country’s wealth for fear of losing their economic and political powers. Invariably power and wealth were divided among the ‘monarchy, the landed nobility and the Church.’ (Preston. 1986, p.10) This balance of power maintained its dominance until well into the twentieth century. The war of 1936-9 involved almost entirely every political position in Spain at the time and encompassed every social movement. There were primarily two opposing sides to the conflict with the Nationalist on one side and the Republicans on the other. The Nationalist were primarily comprised of Carlists and Legitimist monarchists, Spanish nationalists, fascists of the Falange, Catholics, as well as a cadre of conservatives and monarchist liberals. The Republicans found support from the Basque and Catalan nationalists, socialists, communist,s liberals and anarchists. (Esenwein. 1995 p.6) Looked at another way, the Nationalists attracted a large number of the Catholics and those associated with the Catholic Church in one way or another. The Nationalists also seemed to secure the support of prominent factions of the army, a majority of the large landowners, and quite a large number of businessmen as well. Meanwhile, an overwhelming number of urban workers, especially peasants and middle classes generally gravitated toward the Republicans. General Jose Sanjurjo, a monarchist is credited with the distinction of holding the position of the figurehead of the conflict. Working at his side as the primary planner of the conflict and second-in-command was Emilio Mola The Nationalists had several goals entering the conflict, but one of their more essential goals was to eradicate anticlericalism driven Republican faction. Hand in hand with this goal was the desire to defend the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church had suffered censorship as a result of its unfailing support of the Spanish monarchy. This pro-monarchy stance taken by the Roman Catholic Church offended the Republican followers who saw this alignment as the direct cause of Spain’s social struggles. The 1936 started out as a series of acts of arson committed against religious buildings and monuments. Not surprisingly, the Republican authorities either refused or failed to take active steps to prevent the acts of arson. These acts formed part of what was regarded as a social revolution. In furtherance of this so-called social revolution, religious buildings that were spared acts of arson were turned into ‘Houses of the People’. (Esenwein. 1995 p.35) Acting in harmony with their social beliefs Republican led massacres were primarily against members of the Catholic Clergy. The social and political factors giving rise to conflicts between the Nationalists and the Republicans originate out of Spain’s difficulty in holding on to its colonies in the nineteenth century. The weakening of its political structure is manifested in independence of Spain’s territories such as Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, Mexico and Venezuela. Following the Spanish-American War in 1898 Spain suffered the additional loss of Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Guam. (Broue. 1972 p. 3) These losses were the proverbial ‘tip of the iceberg’. In 1902 Alfonzo XIII sat on the Spanish throne and he only added to social unrest. An autocratic ruler, he ordered the execution of Ferrer Guardia, a radical leader. Adding fuel to the flames of unrest, Alfonzo XIII blocked liberal reformation. His autocratic rule conflicted with the general policies of Spain’s politicians and things came to a head following the country’s defeat in the war against Morocco in 1921. (Brour. 1972 p. 4) By 1923 Miguel Primo de Rivera took office by virtue of a military coup. He suspended Spain’s constitution and ordered martial law. Promising to remain in office for only ninety days, he reneged on that promise and committed a number of political follies that only led to more social unrest in a country that was struggling with an already fragile political structure. Rivera contributed little if anything to social reform although to his credit he tried to reduce Spain’s unemployment numbers by spending money on public works. He tried to accomplish this by raising taxes on the rich and when they condemned him for this move he turned his attention to public loans. As a result of Rivera’s poor economic strategies inflation spread throughout Spain and this ultimately inflamed an already raging social unrest. By 1930 Rivera had lost the military’s support and was forced to resign. (Esenwein. 1995 p. 14) In 1931, Alfonzo XIII, in a move entirely inconsistent with his autocratic rule, permitted democratic elections in Spain. It had been approximately sixty years since the country’s last democratic elections. Spain’s voters turned out droves and voted in record numbers for a Republic. Fearing violent backlash from the Spanish public, Alfonzo went into exile. A general election was called by the Second Republic, Spain’s provisional government . The election was set for June 1931. PSOE, Spain’s socialist party together with other left wing parties won the June 1931 election by a convinving majority. Niceto Alcala Zamora, a Republican, took office as Spain’s prime minister. However, his cabinet ministers consisted of several radical figures among whom were Manuel Azana, Francisco Largo and Indalecjo Prieto. By 16th October 1931, the political structure was veering further off course and the country would yet again become divided on political and key social issues. On October 16, 1931 Azana took office as Spain’s Prime Minister, replacing Niceto Alcala Zamora. Garnering support from the PSOE party Azana tried but failed to initiate agrarian reform and what amounted to regional autonomy. (Broue. 1972 p. 46) Azana took office with strong prejudices against the Catholic Church. He unabashedly held the Catholic Church liable for Spain’s stifled progress and inability to become modernized. He took steps to suspend special privileges enjoyed by the Catholic Church citing that Spain was no longer a Catholic nation. When the acts of arson began against the Catholic Church in May 1931 Azana openly declared when denounced for his inaction, that setting fire to each and every convent in the country could not adequately compensate for the loss of one Republican. (Preston. 1986 p.34) By August 10, 1932, following a failed military coup with Jose Sanjurjo at the helm, Azana and his government were able to garner more support and it seemed that he might at last obtain his Agrarian Reform Bill. He was also pushing for the Catalan Statute. These reforms were geared toward modernization but a lack of liquid funds blocked further action to bring these modernization programs to fruition. Elections were held in Spain again in November 1933. The results unseated Azana and his Socialist Party, putting CEDA, a right-wing party in office. CEDA won the elections with 115 seats, whereas Azana’s party took only 58 seats. Aligning itself with Radical Party CEDA took office and in the ensuing two years the new government repealed Azana and his government’s reforms. (Broue. 1972 p. 19) As a result of the new government’s early abolition of reform a general strike was conducted in the country on 4th October 1934. An armed conflict followed in Asturias. Many believed that Azana orchestrated these acts of social unrest and on 7th October he was arrested and incarcerated aboard a ship moored in Barcelona Harbor. When no direct proof of his role in the civil disobedience ventures surfaced Azana was eventually released from custody on or about December, 18th,of the same year. (Esenwein. 1995 p. 51) Azana’s troubles with the law did not end there. He was later suspected of providing weapons to the Asturias in their armed melee. When the matter came up for trial In March 1935, Azana acted as his own counsel and was eventually acquitted by the Spanish Court seized of the matter. It seemed that Azana was not yet done and neither were the people of Spain. On 15th January 1936, Manuel Azana was instrumental in forming and organizing a coalition of parties of left-wing dimensions namely: the PSOE, PCE (a Communist party), Esquerra Party and the Republican Union Party. These parties managed to come together just in time to participate in the national elections scheduled for February, 1936. (Esenwein. 1995 p. 52) Azana’a amalgamation of political parties became known collectively as the Popular Front ran a campaign promising to restore the Catalan autonomy, pardon political prisoners, as well as agrarian reformation. Moreover, the Popular Front also promised to put an end to political blacklisting and that those suffering property damages during the uprising and civil disobedience conducted in 1934 would be adequately compensated. Anarchists refusing to subscribe to the Popular Front’s ideas and policies tried to inflame the passions of the people, fiercely urging them not to turn out on Election Day. Reflective of division prevalent among the Spanish populace another coalition was formed. This one consisted of Spain’s front-burner right-wing political entities. This collection of parties include CEDA and the Carlists and although the Falange Espanola party did not join it members supported the amalgamation of right-wing parties calling themselves the National Front. On Election Day, February 16th, 1936 voter turnout was good but far from impressive. This reflects the growing unrest and disenchantment of the people. The Spanish people voted on Sunday, 16th February, 1936. 9,870,000 out of 13.5 million voters turned up to cast their ballots. The Popular Front secured 4,654,116 of those votes voted for the Popular Front, and the National Front, losing by a narrow margin secured 4,503,505 and the center parties shared the remaining 526,615 votes. The Popular Front, winning 263 seats out of the 473 seats was the newly elected government of Spain.(Broue. 1972. p, 26) In keeping with their pre-election promises the Popular Front government lost no time freeing all left-wing political prisoners. They also went to work implementing agrarian reforms that operated to penalize aristocracy. Consequently wealthy Spanish citizens wasted no time transferring large sums of money out of the country and the seeds of discontent had grown roots throughout Spain. The economic backlash was devastating. The Spanish saw the devaluation of the Spanish peseta with resulting losses to both the tourism and trade industries. Prices soared and as a result workers went on strike demanding salary increases to coincide with the high standard of living. When president Niceto Alcala Zamora was forced from his post on May 10th, 1936 Manuel Azana was his replacement. What followed was a military coup that included Emilio Malo . This is what ultimately led to the Spanish Civil War on July 17th, 1936. (Preston. 1986 p. 23) Spain suffered a series of political changes that always seemed to lead back to the same unhappy results for this country. The rich continued to get richer and the poor continued to get poorer. As a result of this striking inequality between the classes the rich became increasingly greedy, reducing wages, evicting tenants and generally ignoring the plight of the poor. Amidst government changes and joint political fronts there were never any serious talk of labor reform. The consequences could only lead to violence and bloodshed as citizens of vastly different needs and desires clashed. The rich and powerful wanted to sustain their privileged positions and the poor wanted to be rescued from depravation. The unanswered cry for attention and help by the poor gave way to hopelessness and despair. With nothing left to lose, they took matters into their own hands. As the world around them changed for the better, their lives continued to decline in value. No one spoke for them, so they spoke for themselves. On the other hand, change might mean a reversal of fortune for the privilege and they were just as committed to maintaining the status quo as the poor was to changing it. This kind of disconnect had prevailed in Spain for far too long and the only surprise is that the 1936 civil war had not happened sooner than it did in fact take place. Works Cited Bolloten, Burnett. 1991. The Spanish Civil War. UNC Press. California. Broue P. & Térmime, E. 1972. The Revolution and Civil War in Spain. Faber & Faber. London Esenwein, G. and A. Shubert 1995. Spain at War: The Spanish Civil War in Context. Longman. London and New York. Lannon, Frances. 2002. The Spanish Civil War 1936-1939. Osprey Publishing. New York. Preston, Paul. 1986. The Spanish Civil War. Grove Press Inc. New York. Thomas, Hugh. 1989. The Spanish Civil War. Random House Inc. New York Read More