Izquierda Unida has formally questioned the government over the Ceuta border crisis. The party highlights Spain’s reliance on US and Israeli military and technology. Lawmakers seek clarity on defense, cybersecurity, and digital sovereignty.
Izquierda Unida (IU) has intensified pressure on the Spanish government by submitting a set of seven pointed questions in Congress regarding the recent migration crisis in Ceuta. The move comes after an unprecedented surge at the border on July 30 and 31, when authorities reported that 80,000 people crossed illegally from Morocco. IU’s inquiry goes beyond the immediate incident, focusing on Spain’s military and technological dependence on the United States and Israel, and raising concerns about external influence on national security and migration policy.
The questions, addressed primarily to the Ministry of Defence, challenge the government to clarify whether it plans to overhaul its arms procurement strategy to reduce reliance on US and Israeli suppliers. IU also presses for details on whether Spain will support domestic cybersecurity firms to counter the dominance of companies like Palantir Technologies, a US-based software and AI provider with strong defense ties. The party, which is part of the Sumar coalition, further asks if the government intends to review the location of strategic technological infrastructure linked to NATO and to adopt a more autonomous approach to cybersecurity, citing what it describes as persistent pressure from the US and the Atlantic alliance.
IU’s document frames the crisis as part of a broader pattern of “hybrid warfare,” where coercive tactics—migratory, diplomatic, and digital—are used to exert influence without crossing the threshold of open military conflict. The party points to the “strategic triangle” formed by Morocco, the United States, and Israel, consolidated under the Abraham Accords, and claims Morocco has refined asymmetric tactics to advance its territorial ambitions. According to IU, the US is Morocco’s main arms supplier, accounting for 60% of its defense imports, and American lawmakers have issued reports describing Ceuta and Melilla as Moroccan territories. The party warns that this alignment could systematically undermine Spain’s and the EU’s positions.
Israel’s role is also highlighted, with IU noting that the country provides Morocco with advanced missile defense systems, further deepening Spain’s dependence on non-European technology. The party raises alarms about the vulnerability this creates, especially in light of alleged cyberespionage incidents such as the use of Pegasus software against Spanish government communications. IU also criticizes international forums, including the United Nations, where Ceuta and Melilla have been labeled as “anachronistic colonial enclaves.”
During the July crisis, IU accuses the Moroccan authorities of maintaining “calculated ambiguity” while thousands attempted to swim across the border, exploiting what the party calls the “grey zone”—a space of conflict marked by intense pressure without open warfare. The government now has 30 days to respond to IU’s questions, though parliamentary sources caution that written answers often take longer. Next week, seven ministers are scheduled to appear before parliamentary committees to address the Ceuta situation.
This latest development follows a series of political confrontations over the Ceuta crisis, with previous debates focusing on the government’s response and calls for accountability. For example, recent coverage has highlighted mounting pressure from police unions and EU officials demanding faster expulsions and more resources in Ceuta.
Ceuta and Melilla, Spain’s two autonomous cities on the North African coast, have long been flashpoints in migration and diplomatic disputes. Their unique status, combined with complex relations between Spain, Morocco, the US, and Israel, often places them at the center of broader geopolitical tensions. The current parliamentary scrutiny reflects growing unease over Spain’s strategic dependencies and the evolving nature of hybrid threats, which increasingly blur the lines between migration, security, and digital sovereignty. As the government prepares its response, the outcome may influence future policy on defense procurement, cybersecurity, and international alliances.
