ALGERIAN PATRIOTS - ENGLISH

Since 1963, the Western Sahara has been listed by the United Nations among the non-self-governing territories, awaiting the completion of the process of decolonization. This status means, in legal terms, that the fate of the territory can only be determined through a UN-supervised referendum on self-determination, in accordance with the UN Charter and successive resolutions of the General Assembly. Yet, in 2020, Morocco sought to exploit a unilateral recognition by former U.S. President Donald Trump of its alleged sovereignty over the territory—a political transaction tied to the normalization agreements known as the Abraham Accords. However, despite its media resonance, this move has no legal weight under international law, especially when compared to Trump’s own inability to alter the legal status of territories administered by the United States for decades. The United States and Its Non-Self-Governing Territories: Sovereignty on Hold The United States administers several territories...

As the United Nations Security Council prepares for its decisive vote on October 31, 2025, regarding the renewal of MINURSO’s mandate, discussions over Western Sahara have intensified, exposing a growing polarization within the international community. The draft resolution submitted by the United States—traditionally the penholder on this issue—has stirred notable controversy, revealing persistent rifts between major powers and regional actors. Established in 1991, the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) was tasked with overseeing the ceasefire between the Kingdom of Morocco and the Polisario Front, while preparing a self-determination referendum. Yet that referendum has never materialized, and today the mission finds itself weakened by budgetary constraints—chiefly American—and recurrent political deadlocks. In this delicate context, UN Secretary-General António Guterres recommended a one-year extension of the mandate, until October 31, 2026, to allow...

Behind the ornate walls of the Security Council, Washington has retreated from its ambition to make Morocco’s autonomy plan the sole basis for negotiation. Tested against the realities of power politics, this exclusivity collided with UN arithmetic, veto threats, and the jurisprudence of international law, reverting—yet again—to the familiar language of a “just, lasting, and mutually acceptable” solution and the routine extension of MINURSO’s mandate without doctrinal change. In the background, one structural fact remains: the U.S. recognition of Moroccan sovereignty in December 2020, embedded in the diplomatic bargaining of the Abraham Accords, shifted the center of gravity of the issue beyond the UN framework—without creating multilateral consensus. 1) A “Plan” Without the Parties: Algeria Excluded, Sahrawis Marginalized The 2024–2025 cycles confirmed the impression of a process steered elsewhere : Algeria publicly denounced the American penholder’s “biased” approach and abstained...

Since the breakdown of the ceasefire at Guerguerat in November 2020, the Western Sahara conflict has emerged from its historical “freeze,” in a diplomatic and security environment increasingly favorable to Morocco. This dynamic stems from a combination of factors: U.S. recognition in 2020, successive alignments of key allies (Spain, Israel, then France in 2024), deepening of Moroccan-Western military interoperability, and attempts to “securitize” the Polisario in the U.S. Congress. In this context, Algeria—the Polisario’s main backer—finds its status quo diplomacy yielding diminishing returns. This article offers a diagnosis of the strategic deadlock and options for redeployment to defend Algeria’s vital interests without triggering a spiral of regional escalation.  1. From Guerguerat to the Reconfiguration of the Maghreb (2020–2025) The collapse of the ceasefire at Guerguerat in November 2020 marked the end of an era of “hibernation” for the Saharan conflict. Since then, the Wes...

A recurring media narrative today portrays Moroccan “autonomy” as the only “realistic” solution to the Western Sahara dispute, suggesting a decisive shift in international law and UN practice. This article, grounded in primary sources, demonstrates that the applicable legal framework remains unchanged: Western Sahara is still classified as a non-self-governing territory undergoing a decolonization process based on the Sahrawi people's right to self-determination. UN Security Council resolutions continue to call for a just, lasting, and mutually acceptable political solution that ensures self-determination—without endorsing a single predetermined outcome. Recent European jurisprudence reaffirms the territory’s status as “separate and distinct” from Morocco and underscores the requirement of Sahrawi consent for any agreement affecting it. While some bilateral positions support the Moroccan initiative, they do not alter the binding nature of UN norms. 1. A Legal-Political Dispute Und...

 During its extraordinary session on October 24, the UN Security Council witnessed a fresh eruption of deep divisions that shake the UN institution whenever the Sahrawi issue is raised. This issue remains one of the last decolonization files in Africa, despite ongoing attempts to dilute and circumvent it. Washington’s Project… A Coup Against International Legitimacy The document submitted by the United States was nothing but a crude attempt to rewrite history and whitewash the Moroccan occupation under the guise of “political realism.” The American proposal clearly seeks to erase the principle of self-determination, the cornerstone of all UN resolutions on Western Sahara since 1965. What Washington is proposing is not a “peace plan” as it claims, but a plan of submission, aiming to impose the logic of force over the logic of justice, and to cement Moroccan control over a land where the occupier holds only the legitimacy of repression, while the Sahrawi people hold the legitimacy...

 The claim circulated by Moroccan media that “Algeria is moving toward abstention” in the upcoming UN Security Council vote on Western Sahara is not news—it is fiction. A fiction crafted to mask Rabat’s diplomatic setbacks and to fabricate the illusion of a global consensus around an “autonomy” plan that has no foundation in international law. This narrative is less analysis than fantasy. It seeks to impose a storyline where Algeria is “isolated” and where major powers are allegedly preparing to abandon their principles. The geopolitical reality, however, is clear: neither Moscow, nor Beijing, nor Algiers will endorse any resolution that legitimizes occupation or entrenches a colonial status quo. The UN Charter is not a bargaining chip. Law, Not Illusion The question of Western Sahara is not a “regional dispute”; it is an unfinished process of decolonization. The only legitimate outcome remains the same: a credible UN-supervised referendum on self-determination. Everything else ...

On October 23, 2025 , Brahim Ghali, President of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic and Secretary-General of the POLISARIO Front, denounced a new Moroccan escalation in Western Sahara: the construction of a 93-kilometer road linking Smara to Mauritania, crossing the sand wall erected by Morocco since the 1980s. According to the UN Secretary-General’s report (S/2025/612), this road constitutes a “second passage” to Mauritania, alongside the Guerguerat corridor. In a letter addressed to António Guterres, Ghali described the initiative as a “provocative and escalatory measure,” recalling the precedent of Guerguerat in 2016. According to the POLISARIO Front, the “civilian” justification put forward by Rabat hides a political and military logic: every infrastructure south of the wall reinforces the occupation and creates facts on the ground. A Strategic Moroccan Road Under Civilian Cover The route from Smara to Bir Moghrein crosses the liberated zone and connects the occupied territory...

This Thursday afternoon, Belgian Minister of Development Cooperation, Mr. Prévot, publicly endorsed the “Moroccan autonomy plan” for Western Sahara—a project deemed illegal under international law and contrary to Algeria’s historic position. A few hours later, the same official nevertheless called his Algerian counterpart, Ahmed Attaf, to discuss “calmly” cooperation in areas such as renewable energy, transport, mining, agri-food, and pharmaceuticals. Two seemingly incoherent sequences, yet deeply revealing: it is not Mr. Prévot who is ambiguous—it is Algeria that lacks a clear line. When Strategic Confusion Becomes a Constant This absurd scene—a European minister backing Morocco before extending a hand to Algeria—does not happen by chance. It reflects a perception firmly rooted in Brussels and other European capitals: Algeria does not truly know what it wants. Our diplomacy claims to be proud and sovereign, yet remains vague about its priorities. One day, it asserts neutrality o...

Recently, American businessman Steve Witkoff claimed in an interview with 60 Minutes Overtime that he was working on a supposed “peace agreement” between Morocco and Algeria, suggesting that a deal could be reached within 60 days. Standing beside him, Jared Kushner—known for promoting the Israeli-Moroccan agenda—positions himself as a mediator. For Algeria, this initiative is nothing short of a complete illusion. I. Morocco: A Weakened and Hostile Neighbor Since independence, Morocco has consistently adopted a hostile and opportunistic stance toward Algeria: The Sand War in 1963, The unilateral severance of the Maghreb-Europe Gas Pipeline, Interference in Algerian internal affairs, including support for terrorist groups. Today, Algeria’s strategy of isolating Morocco is beginning to bear fruit. The kingdom faces an unprecedented social crisis, soaring public debt, and an economy on the brink of collapse. In such conditions, Algeria has no interest in engaging in dialogue or me...

Contrary to a narrative that proclaims the “consecration” of Moroccan sovereignty at the Security Council and the elevation of autonomy as the sole solution, the texts – Charters, resolutions, jurisprudence – tell a different story: a non-self-governing territory, an inalienable right to self-determination, and a still-active UN process. Even the Moroccan Autonomy Plan (S/2007/206) acknowledges that no outcome is valid without a freely given vote by the Sahrawi people. Positive Law: A Non-Self-Governing Territory and a Right to Self-Determination Since 1963, Western Sahara has been listed by the UN as a non-self-governing territory. In UN terminology, this means incomplete decolonization and a right to self-determination for the people of the territory – a legal compass that neither the General Assembly nor the Security Council has altered. In 1975, the International Court of Justice confirmed that the historical ties of allegiance invoked do not amount to sovereignty; thus, nothing ...

On October 9, 2025, the New Lines Institute published an article by Ty Dávila titled “U.S. Engagement With Algeria’s Tuareg Is a Strategic Imperative.” Beneath a veneer of cooperation and goodwill, the article reveals a clear attempt to interfere in Algeria’s internal affairs, particularly in its Saharan regions inhabited by Tuareg communities. Analyzing the document, its author, and its institutional context highlights a U.S. strategy aimed at influencing Algerian policy to serve American geopolitical interests. Interference Under the Guise of Development The article proposes three areas of intervention: participatory research, localized aid, and engagement with the Tuareg diaspora. Though presented as alternatives to military involvement, these measures are in fact a soft form of penetration into Algeria’s social and political structures. By targeting marginalized communities, the United States seeks to establish internal channels of influence capable of shaping national policy. ...

The recent announcement that Steve Witkoff, a U.S. special envoy appointed by Donald Trump, intends to “end the diplomatic crisis between Algeria and Morocco” has sparked widespread reactions and questions. According to his own statements, he hopes to achieve a “peace agreement” between the two countries within the next two months, while simultaneously working on negotiations between Iran and the United States. But this wording—“peace agreement”—raises a fundamental question: what war are we talking about? A Misreading of the Situation Algeria and Morocco are not at war. There is no armed conflict, no direct military confrontation between the two states. What divides them is a deep political crisis, rooted in irreconcilable positions on sovereignty, regional security, and mutual respect. Reducing this complex reality to a mere “disagreement” to be smoothed over by ad hoc mediation reflects either a misunderstanding of the nature of the dispute or a deliberate attempt to place both ...