Charles Xuereb (The Sunday Times of Malta, March 24), was surprised by my reaction to his suggestion to remove the George Cross from the Maltese flag and to re-contextualise, that is, remove, British colonial monuments. He characterisied it as lacking “any convincing arguments or academic lucidity”. Perhaps the following, though succinct, may be more helpful.
Given its size and location, Malta was easy and attractive prey to rapacious powers bent on controlling the Mediterranean. Malta’s history of colonial domination and its impotence to assert its independence following the outcome of the 1798 insurrection against the French testifies to the accuracy of this statement. Colonialism was and remains repugnant. Colonialists invariably put their own interests first and believe themselves superior to the indigenous population. Ours were no different. Yet, as happened elsewhere, they bequeathed (sometimes unintentionally), some architectural, legal, social and cultural benefits.
Far from being demeaning, the George Cross on our flag is a reminder of the Maltese population’s courage in a war that, in the face of history, geography and military strategy, Dr Xuereb believes we would have been spared had we not been a British colony. The George Cross is a badge of pride, not of submission, earned by the sweat, blood and tears of an entire population. It exposed the ingrained colonialist’s veneer of superiority for the sham it was.
Malta today confidently fulfills its international role. We have no time or place for angst derived from a colonial past that we should acknowledge without feelings of insecurity. Dr Xuereb’s desire, however passionate, to remove the George Cross and to re-contextualise British colonial monuments smacks of futile fist shaking at a ghost from the past.
Dr Xuereb believes his suggestion worth implementing. My question is: why limit it to the British period? Our colonial past did not start and end with them. Though Dr Xuereb calls the Knights “despots”, not colonialists, Valletta remains our outstanding monument to foreign rule – 268 years of it. Therefore, why not re-contextualise Valletta? Because it would be a tad more absurd than removing the George Cross to free ourselves of purported colonial-induced anxiety.
My contribution to this conversation stops here. I will be too busy following Dr Xuereb’s advice, updating my “reading list where it concerns academic literature on history, social science and the politics of memory and identity”. I might even copy him and carry out “research on the British colonial period”.