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.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The CIA declassifies a document that reveals Morocco's true motives in the 1963 Sand War

The recent declassification of a CIA document dated August 23, 1957, sheds new light on French intentions regarding oil fields in Algeria and plans for post-independence Algeria. This document provides valuable details on French economic and political strategies, as well as the geopolitical dynamics of the era. French Intentions for the Algerian Sahara According to the document, France intended to retain the Algerian Sahara at all costs, planning to divide it into two separate departments. This decision reflects the strategic importance of this resource-rich region for France. The Sahara, with its vast oil and gas reserves, represented a major economic stake. Infrastructure Strategy and Cooperation with Spain France did not plan to build pipelines to the north of Algeria to avoid any energy dependence on an independent Algeria. Instead, discussions were underway with Spain to evacuate oil and gas via Western Sahara, then under Spanish control. The Spanish authorities, enthusiastic abou

Morocco persists in communicating imaginary projects to counter Algeria's concrete and operational initiatives in favor of its African depth

  After the imaginary Nigeria-Morocco gas pipeline project , Morocco recently embarked on a new pipe dream entitled: access for Sahelian countries to the Atlantic Ocean. The only thing serious about these projects, whose feasibility and financing are still unclear, are the Pharaonic means of communication used by Morocco to hammer home its fallacious and intellectually dishonest messages.  We should also note the diplomatic efforts made by the Moroccans to organize colloquia in Marrakech with African leaders of dubious morality and mediocre intellectual level, in order to present a project with vague outlines and objectives.  We can legitimately wonder why the foreign ministers of the Sahel countries decided to travel to Marrakech, as the project to give the Sahel countries access to the Atlantic is far from being an easily achievable project, as it faces a number of geopolitical, geostrategic and financial challenges: Was Mauritania consulted (it did not take part in the Marrakech mee

Algerian-Moroccan relations through the media prism and Moroccan-led mediation attempts

On August 24, 2021, Algeria took the historic step of officially severing diplomatic relations with Morocco. This move, seen as a direct response to Morocco's hostile actions, highlights a series of political, historical and geopolitical tensions that have plagued relations between the two neighbors for decades. This summary explores the major reasons for this rupture, integrating media dynamics, unsuccessful attempts at mediation, and historical grievances accumulated against Morocco. Relations between Algeria and Morocco have historically been marked by geopolitical tensions, notably due to the Western Sahara conflict and deep-seated political rivalries. This climate of mistrust is exacerbated by media coverage on both sides, with Moroccan media playing a key role in maintaining an obsession with Algeria, while Moroccan attempts to seek international mediation to ease these tensions remain unsuccessful. 1. Historical and political background The rivalry between Algeria and Morocc