The Moroccan Diplomatic Mirage Surrounding Western Sahara: Between Media Euphoria and Unchanging Legal Reality

The Moroccan press, in a wave of near‑triumphal euphoria, loudly hailed the message sent by former U.S. President Donald Trump to King Mohammed VI on the occasion of the Throne Day celebrations. In this letter, the former occupant of the White House reaffirmed U.S. recognition of Morocco’s so‑called sovereignty over Western Sahara, first announced in December 2020. For Rabat, this reiteration was presented as yet another step toward the definitive normalization of its annexation and a sign of international validation.

Yet behind this media and diplomatic commotion lies an inescapable truth: this message, however symbolic, alters nothing in the legal status of Western Sahara. The reality of international law—enshrined in United Nations resolutions and confirmed by the International Court of Justice—remains unchanged: Western Sahara is a non‑self‑governing territory, still awaiting the completion of its decolonization process.

The illusion of sufficient recognition

If recognition by a member of the Security Council were enough to alter the legal status of a territory, France would long ago have struck New Caledonia or French Polynesia from the UN list of non‑self‑governing territories. The United States could have done the same for American Samoa or the U.S. Virgin Islands. The United Kingdom, likewise, could have removed Bermuda or Gibraltar from that list.

The persistence of these territories on the UN’s official register illustrates a fundamental principle: unilateral recognition by a State, even one holding a permanent seat on the Security Council, cannot replace the multilateral process set out in the UN Charter.

I. Western Sahara: A Question of Decolonization, Not a Bilateral Dispute

Since 1963, the UN has listed Western Sahara as a non‑self‑governing territory subject to a decolonization process. Resolution 1514 (XV) on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, adopted in 1960, establishes that “all peoples have the right to self‑determination” and that any attempt at annexation is incompatible with that right.

In its Advisory Opinion of 16 October 1975, the International Court of Justice was explicit: no ties of territorial sovereignty exist between Morocco and Western Sahara that could justify an annexation.

II. Morocco’s Autonomy Initiative: A Unilateral Proposal on Shaky Foundations

In 2007, Morocco presented its “Initiative for Negotiating an Autonomy Statute” as a political compromise. Yet a close reading reveals a plan built upon a flawed premise: Morocco’s presumed sovereignty, despite the fact that such sovereignty has never been recognized by the international community.

1. A process that denies the essence of self‑determination

The plan makes no provision for a free choice between independence, autonomy, or integration—an essential condition for any referendum in line with international norms. It confines the process within the Moroccan constitutional framework, thereby hollowing out the right to self‑determination.

2. Exclusion of legitimate representatives

The Polisario Front, recognized by the UN as the legitimate representative of the Sahrawi people, was not consulted in drafting this plan. This absence of dialogue turns the initiative into a unilateral imposition rather than a negotiated solution.

III. A Fictitious Autonomy under Centralized Control

Beneath the veneer of decentralization, the plan preserves tight control in the hands of the King:

• Monopoly over religious, diplomatic, military, and judicial affairs.
• Appointment of the regional government’s head by the central authority.
• Subordination of regional courts to national tribunals.

Such provisions reduce “autonomy” to a mere institutional façade, devoid of any real sovereignty.

IV. Resource Exploitation: Institutionalized Spoliation

Phosphates, fishing zones, and the energy potential of Western Sahara are exploited by Rabat without the consent of the Sahrawi people, in violation of repeated rulings by the Court of Justice of the European Union (2016, 2018, 2021). The Moroccan plan offers no mechanism for independent resource management or prior consultation, thereby legitimizing an economic appropriation contrary to international law.

Conclusion: Law as the Final Bulwark Against Annexation

Despite the Moroccan press’s enthusiasm and occasional diplomatic endorsements, international law remains the immovable point of reference. The future of Western Sahara will be decided neither by protocol letters from heads of state nor by unilateral declarations, but through a UN‑supervised process guaranteeing a free and impartial referendum, with all options—including independence—on the table.

If the international community wishes to preserve both the stability of the Maghreb and the credibility of the international legal order, it must:

• Reject any solution imposed unilaterally.
• Reaffirm the inalienable right of the Sahrawi people to self‑determination.
• Protect the territory’s natural resources from unlawful exploitation.

---

By Belgacem Merbah

---