Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1098850
10 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 31 MARCH 2019 NEWS FOR Malta, 1979 represented the final chapter in its arduous transition from a war economy dependent on imperial military spending, to a civilian economy which has to constantly find new pastures to 'put food on the table' of inhabitants of a resource-poor island. Malta and the UK started off their EU trajectory from op- posite poles. One as a former imperial power which often fa- voured its 'special relationship' with the United States over its European allies, as was the case with the invasion of Iraq in 2001. The other, Malta, was occupied with the difficult task of finding short-cuts from colo- nial backwardness to first world prosperity. And while sitting at the EU table with other nations as an equal voice represented a step backwards for a former empire, it represented a step ahead for a former colony like Malta. While Britain struggled with the pains of decolonisation, de-industrialisation and loss of global power while rebuild- ing itself into a global financial centre, Malta embarked on the same road in a bid to redress the colonial legacy of under- development. The key issue ever since Malta ditched its reliance on the war economy was how to make ends meet. Labour prime min- ister Dom Mintoff eased the transition by resorting to his Cold War brinkmanship and extracted as much money as possible from Britain for rent- ing military facilities in the seven years preceding Freedom Day – the final departure of all British forces from Malta. Prime Minister Joseph Muscat himself raised historical paral- lels when noting that "it took the UK seven years to leave Malta and they ended up pay- ing an equivalent of over €1.5 billion in today's money. Seeing as it took seven years to leave Malta, two years were definitely not enough to leave the EU." After ditching the Mintoffian protectionism that was meant to nurture a national industrial base, subsequent Nationalist governments charted Malta's place in the world economy as a financial centre offering com- petitive tax advantages to com- panies setting up here, while subsiding tourism development with land grants, eventually using the same ploy to attract foreign property buyers. After 2013 Muscat did not deviate from this route, and in some instances pressed the accel- erator, in his bid to secure a development model which guarantees both social spend- ing and robust economic growth. New dependencies? The question is: has Malta cut its umbilical chord on the war machine only to find itself de- pendent on other unsavoury aspects of world capitalism like gaming and tax avoidance? And is its willingness to use public land to entice investment in property projects reminiscent of colonial days when parts of the country were off-limits for common mortals? Britain's transformation from industrial powerhouse to a global financial centre has left many behind, people all too ready to blame the EU for the decline they experienced in daily life. So far, Malta has been spared the kind of austerity which feeds populism and Eu- roscepticism. Still within the EU, Malta and the UK were allies in defending tax sovereignty from the intru- sions of the EU. With Brexit, Malta has been deprived of a powerful ally. Yet there was al- ways a fundamental difference in approach between the two countries: while EU regulations represented a shackle for a part of the British establishment, it was EU membership which added value to Malta's own ex- ceptionalism. That explains La- bour's smooth conversion from opposition to membership to a soft, flexible but confident Eu- ropeanism. In this narrative Malta can still bask in the glory of its place at the decision-making table while defending its turf against the "envy" of other EU member states who lament the loss of tax money to companies set up in Malta (and a number of other EU countries). In this way Malta may well have found a way to redress the structural imbalance between countries like Germany, whose big ex- ports build up a huge surplus for the country; and countries like Malta which have a trade imbalance, without ever ques- tioning the orthodoxy of the Eurozone. Brexit, which coincided with Malta's presidency of the EU, has also offered Muscat an op- portunity to project his lead- ership qualities to a European audience, coming across as a reasonable and measured inter- locutor. But while Muscat continu- ously reminds us of continuity between his model and Mint- off's vision of a free Malta, one cannot overlook one important distinction. While Mintoff was always keen on disrupting what he perceived as the designs of western imperialism by identi- fying with the global south, un- der Muscat with its place at the EU table, Malta actively par- ticipated in inflicting collective punishment on Greece in 2015 and in strengthening external borders and criminalising res- cue NGOs to keep immigrants from reaching the EU. 1979-2019 Tables turned on the colonial masters? Sweet historical revenge for Malta: a seat at the EU table from where to watch Theresa May's torturous Brexit. Or is it a loss for two countries who were stronger together in defending their 'exceptionalism' inside the EU? JAMES DEBONO looks into the issue Wave goodbye: President Anton Buttigieg salutes the last British military ship leaving Malta for good And goodbye to you again: Joseph Muscat with 'Brexit' PM Theresa May, and bottom: 1964, George Borg Olivier greets newly independent Malta