Time to amend article on neutrality

The question of Malta's neutrality and the possible review of the relevant article in the Malta Constitution is gathering momentum. Those who seek the retention of the article as it stands should be reminded of its inherent mistakes. We should not perpetuate them.

The basic mistake was that this article was introduced following blackmailing tactics. The threat was that unless the opposition in Parliament agreed to the insertion of the article in the Constitution, there would be no agreement on the article to guarantee that the party which obtained the absolute majority of votes in a general election would also have the right to govern. This is blackmail not worthy of a true democratic society. The review of the neutrality article should not be conditional on any other matter.

Another mistake was that the article was tailor-made to fit a specific political situation as if it were a permanent one. Through short-sightedness, the authors of the article refused to cater for a situation where two superpowers could become one, three or more.

Moreover, terminology was used which was far from precise since it was conditioned by perceptions based on vague political ideological concepts. The words "superpower" and "non-alignment" have no place in a legal document like the Constitution. The term superpower is a relative one, and as far as Malta is concerned, most other nations are superpowers in relation to it, politically, economically, and above all, militarily.

The term "non-alignment" is also vague. Malta was a member of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) which, at one time, was presided by Cuba, whose alignment to the Soviet block was notorious.

Apart from that, did not membership of the NAM imply that Malta was, in fact, aligned to this movement? Now that Malta is a member of the EU, will it not have to be aligned to it, in the same way but perhaps to different degrees, to the UN, the Council of Europe, the Organisation on Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Commonwealth?

The basic elements of neutrality are that its adherants are not members of a military alliance, and do not offer military bases or significant military facilities to belligerents in time of war. Even the term "significant military facilities" may give rise to different interpretations, as can be seen from the supply of steel by Sweden to Germany in World War II, the temporary sheltering in Montevideo of the German battle cruiser Graf Spee in the same war, and the clash between Napoleon and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta in 1798 when the former demanded that his fleet be allowed to enter Malta's harbours to be supplied with water.

Let us keep to basics.