TURN MALTA INTO AN AMERICAN FORTRESS OR LOSE IT
By Anna Marie
If Malta faced a sudden mass invasion in the style of the Ceuta crossings, the outcome would follow a grim and familiar path. Boats would arrive. Crowds would overwhelm the harbours and beaches. Officials would hesitate. Rhetoric about shared humanity would replace any firm response. Resistance would never materialise.
The rich and powerful would be the first to depart. Property owners already hold foreign passports and second homes abroad. Bank accounts sit in London or Zurich. Private jets and yachts stand ready. Within days of the first wave, the elite would board flights to Sicily, London or Dubai. They would frame the departure as temporary. In truth, they would abandon the island without a backward glance. Their wealth travels with them. Their loyalty does not. They have long treated Malta as a convenient base rather than a homeland worth defending. Once the streets grow unsafe and public services collapse, the calculus becomes simple. Leave.
Ordinary Maltese would face the same logic. The island is small. Resources are limited. Once the invaders settle and cannot be removed, daily life changes. Housing vanishes. Schools fill beyond capacity. Crime rises. Cultural markers such as language, festivals, churchesfade under pressure. Why stay to defend a place the authorities refuse to protect? Emigration becomes rational. Young families would seek work overseas. The Maltese diaspora spans all over the world, especiallyEurope, North America and Australia. Retirees would follow relatives already overseas. The remaining population would dwindle. Those without means would remain trapped. The rest would vote with their feet.
Maltese political parties show their true priorities. They fuss over protecting online gambling revenues. They show little interest in shielding the island from invasion. Worse, they seem keener on ending lives at home, from unborn children to the elderly through ready access to suicide, than on dealing firmly with invaders. This reflects extreme naivety. Our leaders cannot halt a foreign influx. Invaders would likely arrive unarmed. That would deny any clear justification for Maltese citizens to take up arms. Only by turning Malta into a base for the American military can the island truly secure its independence from the barbarians at the gate. History supports this. Malta gained independence from Britain while retaining British bases. Wisdom, not contradiction, guided that choice. Once the Maltese found themselves without outside protection under Mintoff, they rushed to join the EU to get some semblance of protection from the north. Today Britain itself faces endless dinghy crossings; the EU proved itself toothless in front of the Cueta invasion. Instead of promptly deploying to Cueta, the EU blamed Spain as if the latter opened the door for the Moroccan invaders. Instantly, the EU blocked the Spanish trying to cross over to the rest of Europe.
Today, American forces offer the surest guarantee for us Maltese. The key that the Knights foolishly handed to Napoleon should be handed, plated with gold, to the Americans instead.
Malta has endured sieges before. Yet modern soft attitudes differ from the resolve of 1565. Guilt and relativism now paralyse decision-makers. Nobody wants to join the police or the military, much less die defending Malta. Leaders preach openness while packing their own bags. The result mirrors the collapse projected in older dystopian tales. Society frays. Order dissolves. The island that once stood firm becomes unrecognisable.
Leaving is not betrayal. It is survival. When the powerful flee first and the state offers no defence, ordinary citizens follow the only sensible course. They protect their families. They seek safety elsewhere. Malta, left behind, would cease to function as the country its people once knew.