From a quiet desk in the Spanish embassy to a view of the Eiffel Tower and the slate roofs of old Paris, a former regional president finds himself in a new city, new routines, and a different country. He has moved to the OECD capital but has not yet completed the move, missing personal memories and books, though he carries with him Timothy Garton Ash on Europe, the current read. He is solitary, slowly settling into a rhythm like strolling the streets at twilight. The land seems to follow him, and not long ago he wandered into a Joan Genovés exhibition, a reminder that people are still generous and forgiving, as some embassy staff trace their roots to Valencia and speak the language of home. He speaks by phone before the interview, voicing concern about European elections and the near inevitability of far-right triumph, noting how history tends to sweeten the past differently with each passing day.
Is the distance clarifying the view of life in Spain? The distance is not forgetfulness, but it makes analysis less bound to daily events. He cannot be indifferent to what happens in the Valencian Community, though the perspective shifts when one is abroad.
What has he learned in the months after the electoral defeat? Life is an ongoing learning curve. The flavor is bittersweet because he has witnessed behaviors, both positive and negative, that challenge expectations. Some memories fade, but not the impact of events that shape them.
He acknowledges the feeling of forgetting, yet insists the period has not been traumatic. He had hoped government action would yield a stronger electoral result for his party, the PSPV, the best in sixteen years, but reality required democrats to accept the outcome. He notes a striking contrast with a party that refuses to accept defeat.
The question about the People’s Party triggers a reflection on the moment when right wing factions align with extreme right movements. He emphasizes the importance of institutional legitimacy and the sorry fact that since 2004 the PP has not accepted electoral losses in Spain, which he finds deeply concerning. He contrasts this with how a different political culture could shape a more stable democratic consensus.
Does the current political climate evoke a memory of the late Felipe era when a leader should have left? He answers, with a touch of irony and resolve, that more courage would have been required. The current right responsible for cultural hegemony is testing the seams of a healthy coexistence. He notes that Spain as a whole is better off economically and socially than during the transition, yet the political atmosphere feels harsher. The underlying driver of this discomfort is insecurity and rapid change, which leaves a sizeable portion of the public feeling left behind. Combating the far right means addressing those root causes of disquiet.
Are the PSOE and PP destined to find common ground soon to moderate public discourse? There must be points of agreement, but not a false balance between two opposing behaviors. The Socialist party could do more to seek common ground, but those who reject the electoral results and delegitimize the government make consensus harder. In 2004 the first major repudiation of an electoral result occurred and set a precedent.
Looking back at when Pedro Sánchez came to power in Valencia, he says he knows him better now. The leadership shown in recent years is admirable, even if disagreements occurred. He sees European-level leadership emerging and is mindful of the short time he has spent here in Europe.
He wrestles with the wave of anti-Sánchez sentiment that surfaces across Europe. He argues the phenomenon is not uniquely Spanish and that the thread running through it is the role of democratic right in shaping public discourse. He struggles to recognize the Feijóo he once knew in the present moment.
Asked whether he faced two defeats electorally and then a suggestion to step aside, he responds that the electoral defeat was not a personal failure. He believes the party did well, delivering progress on many fronts and guiding the response to the pandemic. He describes a political atmosphere that muffled Valencian debate and notes that coalition partners did not fare well. The decision to step aside was his own, made after reflection, and he believes it was in the best interest of the Valencian Community. He though about his own future but stresses the importance of the present.
Is this OECD chapter a farewell to a political career? He says not. It is a chance to contribute, to be useful, to bring a practical touch to public life, and to learn from a different arena. He plans to stay for a period, then see what comes next, feeling alive and eager to work.
Could there be a return to frontline politics? He does not pretend to know the future. Personal plans exist, and a return to Valencia is possible, but for now his focus remains on the OECD. He will support the more active leadership of Diana Morant, who is taking the helm in a moment of challenge, acknowledging the public importance of her role without divulging private conversations. He asserts that Morant has the backing of thousands of supporters and that the deliberation process before her leadership has been thorough. He believes this is essential for avoiding the mistakes of past leadership and notes the significant work ahead.
People wonder if the PSPV risks becoming a federalist and Valencianist party. He believes the party should strive for a plural, multi-national Spain and sees the PSPV as a crucial bridge between different national visions. He dismisses any notion that Mazón has adopted left-leaning banners, noting that privatization of hospitals and basic income policies are more complex and should be treated with caution. He argues that deprivatization in Valencia should be approached carefully and that the business community has responded differently to current policies.
How does he view the current Generalitat’s alliance with PP and Vox? He expresses sorrow at the cultural hegemony of the far right and does not pretend to be an opposition specialist in this moment. Yet he remains committed to a constructive, forward-looking approach. He argues that governance cannot be reduced to electoral wins alone and emphasizes the need to govern for future generations, not just the next election.
Could a return to the frontline be possible? He hints at a future where he might contribute beyond the immediate political fray, focusing on public service where practical impact matters most. He closes with a candid note about Diana Morant and the linkage to Sánchez, stressing that leadership is demonstrated through action and decision making, not through private conversations. He believes inMorant as a capable leader and underlines that the final choice sits with her and the processes she leads.
As the interview ends, the sense remains that a long career continues to unfold, perhaps in new roles, perhaps in the same halls that shaped him. The road ahead is uncertain, but the determination to contribute remains steady.