Adolfo Suárez and his lesson in patriotism: secrets of a speech that changed history 40 years ago
Four of the closest collaborators of the then Prime Minister relate the ins and outs of the day of his resignation. Public and profound criticism of government acts is a necessity, if not an obligation; but the irrationally systematic attack and the permanent disqualification of people (…) are not in my opinion a legitimate weapon . “ Adolfo Suárez, in his resignation speech. Those moments in which “a special sense of responsibility” is assumed usually force dark circles and a glassy look. Even in the most charismatic man. At 7:40 p.m. on January 29, 1981, Adolfo Suárez announced his departure. The fire of the “peaceful revolution” no longer shone in his eyes, nor did the Machado quote appear on his lips: “Today is always still.”
The happy tune chosen by Televisión Española (TVE) for the presidential message had little to do with the farewell of a president who only found opposition in his wake: the Church, the Army, businessmen, the PSOE, the King, his own colleagues from UCD ..
https://www.polygon.com/users/Dramacool%20Be
https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1215958/overview
http://guildwork.com/users/dramacoolbe
https://www.ranker.com/writer/dramacoolbe
“I believe that I have assumed my responsibility with dignity during the almost five years that I have been President of the Government. The responsibility that I feel today seems infinitely greater to me (…) My departure is more beneficial for Spain than my stay in the presidency ”. Forty years have passed since that speech that shocked his adversaries and allies. The passage of time — Literature and History — have brightened the memory of a man who dreamed from a young age of venturing across the country. Hence the magnitude of his resignation.
“It was about time!”, He told Juan Carlos I when he learned of the appointment. “They will only get me out of here with an election or with my feet first,” is another of the phrases attributed to him — in reference to the military coups underway.
Suárez left after realizing that the “continuity of a work requires a change of people”: “I don’t want the democratic system of coexistence to be once again a parenthesis in the history of Spain.” This, which today may sound grandiose, was an unquestionable truth. As the then president well recalled, no one had ruled for so long — democratically — in 150 years.
“The open man, defiant, proud, dominating the stage and seductive was that day a sunken, defeated man. It was the face of disappointment. “ These are the words of Fernando Ónega , who was press director of the presidency, writer of speeches for Suárez, author of the mythical “I can promise and I promise.”
“Adolfo felt a terrible bitterness for having to leave that way despite feeling that he had changed Spain for the better. It was difficult for him to recover from that sadness. He did it little by little, but he succeeded. I have an emotional letter in which he makes it clear, ”says the journalist.
The circumstance of the resignation of Suárez is very far from the sanctification of the character after death. Many of those who today recognize him as a “great statesman” called him a “disaster and inoperative” in the face of a country plunged into a strong economic crisis and ravaged by ETA terrorism.
However, despite the anti-Suarez climate , the resignation came as a surprise. An unexpected sacrifice. This is confirmed by four historical leaders of the UCD in an interview with this newspaper — three of them ministers that January 1981-.
The correction of speech
Rafael Arias-Salgado (Madrid, 1942) was responsible for the Presidency portfolio. One of Suárez’s closest collaborators. The head of government summoned him, at that time, to a meeting for no specific reason. He met with Suárez himself, Pío Cabanillas -with the president- and Josep Meliá -secretary of State for Information-.
“Adolfo showed us the text of a speech. It was his resignation. We took a look at it, corrected it, and made some input. We wanted him to remove that phrase that linked democracy to temporality — ‘I do not want the democratic system of coexistence to be once again a parenthesis in the history of Spain’ — but there was no way ”, he details in a talk with EL ESPAÑOL.
“We did not want his resignation to be connected to a democracy at risk. Also, the phrase was misleading. It could even be interpreted that he himself described himself as a risk to democracy ”, adds Arias-Salgado.
Suárez worked that way. He was not good at pen and debating ideas, but he had great intuition, an unusual sense of strategy. He would take some notes and give them to his collaborators to put together the speech.
Rodolfo Martín Villa (León, 1934) was Minister of Territorial Administration. He was described as an internal opponent of Suárez. In the latest reshuffle, the president once again counted on him as minister to gain his trust. That day, I was having lunch at the Interior headquarters with Juan José Rosó n and Josep Tarradellas .
“I had to get up from the table in a hurry. On the way, I didn’t think at all that Adolfo was going to resign. If I say that I was contemplating it, I would be missing the truth. When he told the ministers, he was very serene. He presented his analysis and assured that there was no going back ”, notes for this newspaper the one who was later vice president with Calvo-Sotelo .
Martín Villa reveals that Suárez’s “analysis” pointed to the powers that be, at that time the businessmen, the media, the Church and the Army. Arias-Salgado, along these lines, reveals that the CEOE environment paid for press campaigns and paid columnists to sink the image of Suárez.
“We all knew that there was a collection of causes that affected him… But none of us imagined the sacrifice. Why? Because, from a very young age, he had a clear idea of what he wanted to be and how to achieve it ”. On the other end of the phone, Ignacio Bayón , Minister of Industry and Energy in 1981. Even today, Suárez’s phrase is engraved in his head: “I have decided not to be an obstacle.”
The break with the King
But why exactly did Suárez resign? Much has been speculated about it. The most fictional version — probably also the least credible — relates the resignation to ongoing military conspiracies. In 1980, the Ministry of Defense produced a report that included all of them. They had one point in common: more than blows against democracy, they seemed like blows against Suárez. Such was the anger against the president.
“In the Army — it had legalized the Communist Party — and in the CEOE they called it dangerous red,” says Arias-Salgado. Shortly after his appointment, the businessmen blessed Suárez, but changed their minds and made Manuel Fraga — Franco’s former minister and leader of the Popular Alliance — their candidate.
None of the interviewees gives credit to that version: Adolfo Suárez did not leave to avoid the coup. Fernando Ónega speaks: “I discard that hypothesis. There was a blow despite his resignation. A man who confronts the Armed Forces like this in Congress would have held the presidency if he had known that a riot was coming. “
What happened then? Arias-Salgado spoke with Suárez a few days after his resignation: “The awareness of his wear and tear influenced him. First came the division at UCD, when it began to lose internal management faculties. Then pressure from his family, who wanted him to leave office. And lastly, the most important thing: he felt that he had lost the King’s trust ”.
-Why did you feel that?
-According to the Constitution, the King’s confidence is not an indispensable condition to continue being president, but it was for Adolfo. When he went to see Juan Carlos I to announce his resignation, he hoped he would encourage him to recant.
-It didn’t happen.
-No. No phrase like “Adolfo, wait, you have to prepare the relay well.” Nothing of that. Juan Carlos made no gesture.
“What if I had?” Would Suárez have postponed his resignation?
-Yes. Adolfo would not have resigned at that time.
“I am unable”
It would be naive to assert that Suárez’s wear and tear was only due to the external pressures mentioned. The politician also collapsed, in part as a result of his actions. The testimony of Óscar Alzaga , professor of Constitutional Law and UCD deputy, is key at this point . He would end up founding the Popular Democratic Party (PDP).
“When Adolfo finds out that Felipe González is going to present a motion of censure, he meets the UCD Executive Commission. He tells us that he does not feel capable of facing Felipe in the debate. He even asks Landelino Lavilla , president of Congress , to develop a rule to prevent it. We were very concerned, ”says Alzaga. In the eyes of the then deputy, this was a “milestone” in the “deterioration of UCD’s faith in Suárez.”
Ignacio Bayón says: “I did not participate in any specific family. I was trying to get along as well as possible with everyone. Let’s say that those who were not close to Suárez wanted to appear ”. A very diplomatic way of describing the internal conspiracy that blew up the foundations of the centrist coalition.
When he announced his resignation to the UCD Executive Committee, Suárez also revealed that his successor would be Leopoldo Calvo-Sotelo . Óscar Alzaga, in public and in private, snapped: “In a democratic system, the president who resigns does not appoint a successor. The coalition must choose the candidate ”.
Suárez then brought Alzaga and Miguel Herrero de Miñón together : “He told us he would return to the presidency.” What was the plan? “He didn’t say too much, but I think he wanted to get his image back and come back, but his image didn’t improve as fast as he thought, not even with his role during F 23.”
Four decades ago, Adolfo Suárez resigned after almost five years in the presidency of the Government. He gave up what he most wanted to breathe into the “democratic system of coexistence” the oxygen it lacked.
“As time passes, leaving aside minor lateralities, the memory of Adolfo grows. He was an exceptional man for an exceptional moment ”. An increasingly generalized conclusion that describes a politician who, that January 29, 1981, was the target of an atrocious campaign.
