Skip to main content

The reasons that led Staffan de Mistura to propose the partition of Western Sahara

The conflict in Western Sahara, which has opposed Morocco and the Polisario Front, backed by Algeria, since 1975, remains one of the longest unresolved territorial disputes. Faced with diplomatic deadlock, the UN special envoy, Staffan de Mistura, reportedly suggested partition as a potential solution. This controversial proposal highlights the ongoing challenges in reaching a compromise acceptable to all parties involved.

Historical Context and Diplomatic Deadlock
Western Sahara has been claimed by Morocco since 1975, after the withdrawal of Spanish colonial forces. Morocco proposes an autonomy plan under its sovereignty, supported by France, while the Polisario Front advocates for a referendum on self-determination, including the option of independence. UN resolutions and international mediation have failed to find a consensual resolution to the conflict, plunging the region into a decades-long stalemate.

Previous mediation attempts, including Morocco’s 2007 autonomy plan, have not bridged the gap between the parties. This persistent failure has led the special envoy to explore new avenues, including territorial division.

Underlying Reasons for the Partition Proposal
Several factors may explain why Staffan de Mistura has proposed partition as a potential solution:

  • Legal and political deadlock: While certain international recognitions, such as that from the United States, may bolster Morocco’s political standing internationally, they do not change the applicable international legal framework. According to international law, and particularly the principle of self-determination, it is for the Sahrawi people themselves to decide their future status. UN resolutions and the ICJ's opinion make this principle a prerequisite for any legal and lasting solution to the conflict. In the absence of a self-determination referendum, any unilaterally imposed solution by Morocco, such as granting autonomy without consulting the Sahrawi people, would be legally contestable. The legitimacy of the process fundamentally depends on the Sahrawis’ consent through a free and fair consultation mechanism. Thus, recognition of Moroccan sovereignty by certain countries does not resolve the core issue, as it does not satisfy the self-determination criteria under international law.

  • Failure of previous negotiations: Negotiations between Morocco and the Polisario Front are at a standstill. The Polisario's refusal to accept Morocco’s autonomy plan and Morocco's opposition to a referendum including independence make traditional diplomatic solutions difficult.

  • Persistent regional tensions: The Western Sahara conflict exacerbates tensions between Morocco and Algeria, which supports the Polisario Front. The idea of partition might reduce tensions by allowing both sides to achieve partial satisfaction.

  • Involvement of international powers: France and the United States primarily support Morocco's autonomy plan, but this solution has not gained traction in the international community. Partition could be seen as an acceptable compromise for key international actors, reducing the risk of conflict in the region.

  • Regional stability: The situation in the Sahel and security concerns in the Maghreb might push the UN to seek a swift and pragmatic solution to stabilize the region, even if it involves a radical option like partition.

Reception of the Proposal
Officially, neither Morocco nor the Polisario Front has accepted the partition proposal. For Morocco, this would mean relinquishing full sovereignty over a territory it considers an integral part of its kingdom. The Polisario Front, on the other hand, seeks total independence, and such a division would not fulfill its aspirations. Moreover, regional political dynamics, particularly Algeria's role, complicate the situation and make this option potentially dangerous for regional stability.

However, it appears that the idea of partition may actually originate from Morocco. Faced with a political and legal deadlock over Western Sahara, despite the recognition of its sovereignty by former U.S. President Donald Trump, Morocco seems to have realized the limits of its position. The reality on the ground is particularly difficult for the kingdom: since November 15, 2020, the Sahrawi army has been waging a relentless war. Additionally, Morocco's economic situation is precarious, exacerbated by the growing war effort and rising social discontent. It seems that King Mohammed VI has considered this political maneuver to find an honorable exit. Morocco would hope to retain the “useful triangle” of Western Sahara, where the phosphate deposits of Boucraa are located, while ceding the less resource-rich areas to the Polisario Front.

Conclusion
On the surface, Staffan de Mistura's proposal to partition Western Sahara appears to reflect deep frustration born from the repeated failure of mediation efforts. Although this solution is officially rejected by both sides for now, it highlights the urgent need to find a lasting resolution to this protracted conflict. Regional tensions, diplomatic deadlock, and pressure from international actors weigh heavily on future negotiations, despite the highly controversial nature of partition.

The history of this conflict, marked by the Security Council's clear bias in favor of Morocco since 2007, and the economic interests of certain Western powers in Western Sahara, suggest that Morocco's allies may have subtly encouraged it to consider a partition solution. Such an outcome would allow them to safeguard their economic and geopolitical interests in the region, while offering a concession to the Polisario Front, giving it the semblance of a political victory in a conflict that has lasted since 1975. But the Sahrawi people, driven by their dignity and deep connection to their land, will never accept the division of their territory. They will continue to fight valiantly until the full liberation of Western Sahara.

This partition proposal is eerily reminiscent of what France proposed to Algeria in 1958: partial independence for the north, in exchange for control of the resource-rich south. Algeria, rejecting this half-measure, fought for four more years until it won complete independence. The same will be true for our Sahrawi brothers, who will undoubtedly liberate their land from Moroccan colonization. For nothing and no one can stop a proud people from reclaiming their national pride and independence.

Belgacem Merbah

References

  • Devdiscourse, "Dividing Western Sahara: A New Avenue for Peace?" [consulted in October 2024].
  • UN, Resolutions on Western Sahara, Security Council (1975-2024).
  • Reuters, "UN's De Mistura floats idea of partition for Western Sahara", 2024.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Origin of the Caftan: Algeria Responds in the Language of Heritage

Avoiding direct polemics or loud declarations, Algeria has opted for heritage diplomacy and UNESCO procedure to respond—indirectly—to Moroccan claims over the origin of the caftan. At the 20th session of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (New Delhi, 8–13 December), Algiers emphasized confirmations and updates to elements inscribed since 2012, reinforcing its reading: the caftan is an authentic element of Algerian cultural identity, recognized within UNESCO’s framework. A Procedural Argument Elevated to Cultural Diplomacy In a statement published on 11 December via official channels, the Ministry of Culture and the Arts hailed “a new victory” for Algerian cultural diplomacy . Without departing from institutional sobriety, its communication stressed two core points: Inscription precedents : According to Algiers, the caftan appears in national files recorded since 2012, notably within the recognition of Tlemcen’s traditional herit...
Post a Comment
Read more

Madrid, February 2026: A negotiating sequence that further complicates Rabat’s hand

The consultations held in Madrid on the Western Sahara dossier—under direct U.S. stewardship—signal a qualitative shift in how the file is being managed: Washington is increasingly setting the pace while the United Nations recedes to an observer role, according to convergent coverage from Spanish, regional, and international outlets.  1) An unprecedented framework: Washington “leads,” the UN observes Multiple reputable outlets report that on February 8, 2026 , a closed‑door meeting took place inside the U.S. Embassy in Madrid, gathering four high‑level delegations—Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, and the Polisario Front—with UN envoy Staffan de Mistura present more as an observer than as the driver, while U.S. officials Massad Boulos (special representative for Africa) and Michael Waltz (U.S. ambassador to the UN) ran point. The Madrid session followed a first, secret 48‑hour contact in Washington roughly two weeks earlier—an unmistakable sign that the U.S. has moved from “facilitator...
Post a Comment
Read more

Morocco’s Obsession with the Algerian President: Between Fascination and Diversion

While the Algerian president has taken a summer break, logically suspending his official activities, an unusual stir can be observed on the other side of the border. Many Moroccans, amplified by countless live streams and comments on social media, are eager to know: “Where is the Algerian president?” A question that might seem trivial at first glance, but in reality reveals deep political and psychological dynamics. A Revealing Paradox What stands out first is the paradox. The King of Morocco himself is often absent—whether for health reasons or extended vacations abroad—to the point that his prolonged absences have become a constant feature of Moroccan political life. Yet, despite this, the attention of many Moroccans is not focused on the management of their own internal affairs, but rather on the presence or absence of Algeria’s head of state. At the same time, Morocco is grappling with multiple crises: economic, with mounting debt; social, with poverty affecting millions of citizen...
1 comment
Read more