¶ … ETA is losing its popularity and standing among the Basque. There should be a section outlining who they are, and why they became popular in the first place. Sections on the steps the Spanish have taken to deal with ETA should be more detailed. You say five different ways that the Spanish have attacked the financial arm of ETA without providing any detail on what the Spanish did, or why this matters. So four of those sentences are just filler. Some of your sources provide a lot of detail (Watson and Whitfield in particular), but I do not see evidence of that detail.
On the pedantic side, the writing needs substantial work. There are several typos, grammatical errors and instances of poor sentence construction. Some examples are "supported by statics," misuse of possessives ("1980's"), and things like "The ETA continues to be a group that has had an effect on the society of Spain." The latter starts in the current tense, then shifts to the past tense. There are several sentences that are entirely superfluous. The first sentence under "Discussion" doesn't even make sense. If you are trying to say that there are three reasons why the ETA has seen its support among Basque people decline, just say that. Keep it simple.
You’re 70% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.