The Spanish government claimed on Tuesday that it has “evidence” showing that “digital forums” in both Israel and Russia have amplified the events in the Ceuta exclave, a Spanish territory on the Moroccan coast of Africa where tens of thousands of migrants entered a month ago, in order to “polarize and fracture” the European Union, according to the EFE news agency, as reported by Agerpres.
After both the opposition and the allies of Spanish Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s government spoke of Morocco’s responsibility in this crisis—whether through direct action or, conversely, through a lack of measures intended to prevent migrants from entering Ceuta— the government in Madrid stated on Tuesday through its spokesperson, Elma Saiz, that this government works based on evidence and that currently “there is no evidence, no information, and no indication that Morocco participated in what happened on July 30 and 31.”
Instead, the Spanish government spokesperson added, there is evidence regarding the role played by what she described as “ultra-internationalism,” after Russia, in response to previous accusations made by Spain, had asked Spain to present evidence regarding its alleged involvement in disinformation campaigns that supposedly triggered the crisis in Ceuta.
The spokesperson for the Madrid government referred to “internal reports” from the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, adding that on August 6, the European Commission also described Russia as a “source of disinformation” in the events in Ceuta.
According to the government in Madrid, more than 80,000 migrants illegally entered the Ceuta exclave on July 30 and 31, either by swimming to it or scaling the border fence; the majority of them have since returned to Morocco.
According to statements by Moroccan authorities and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, traffickers allegedly orchestrated this wave of migration following a Spanish court ruling prohibiting the deportation of migrants arriving by sea, though the Spanish prime minister maintains that the decision should not be interpreted in this way.
Source – AGERPRES
