ALGERIAN PATRIOTS - ENGLISH

The recent discussions in Madrid on the Western Sahara question have brought to light a central element—rarely expressed with such clarity: a profound misalignment between American expectations and the content of the Moroccan document presented as a substantial evolution of the autonomy plan . This diplomatic moment acted as a revealer, exposing not only the limits of the Moroccan proposal but also the strategic ambiguities surrounding the international management of the dossier. Since the United Nations classifies Western Sahara as a non‑self‑governing territory, any political proposal is expected to meet a fundamental legal requirement: enabling the effective exercise of the right to self‑determination . Yet the tension between this principle and the Moroccan claim of sovereignty remains the core of the dilemma. 1. From 4 pages to 40 pages: a change in form without a change in substance? The Moroccan document presented in Madrid—expanded to roughly forty pages—was expected to meet...

France’s decision to recognize Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara is neither a mere diplomatic adjustment nor an act of pragmatic realism. It is a profound strategic miscalculation—one that reflects a flawed understanding of power dynamics in the Maghreb and a significant misreading of the Algerian state , its vital interests, and its stabilizing role in the region. In seeking what it perceived as a comfortable partnership with Rabat, Paris underestimated a fundamental reality: Western Sahara represents an absolute red line for Algeria , touching simultaneously upon its historical doctrine, its national security, and the regional balance of power in the face of Moroccan territorial ambitions . I. Western Sahara: Algeria’s Non‑Negotiable Vital Interest Contrary to the dominant European view, which reduces Western Sahara to a localized territorial dispute, Algeria regards it as an existential issue embedded in its post‑independence strategic doctrine. 1. A doctrinal constant root...

Since the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2797 , the Western Sahara file has entered a new phase—one marked less by legal progress than by an intensified battle of narratives. Morocco, supported by certain Western diplomatic circles, has sought to portray its autonomy plan as a definitive, irreversible solution endowed with international legitimacy. Yet a careful reading of the resolution, combined with a strict application of international law , reveals a far more sobering reality: the conflict remains legally unresolved, and Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara has never been established.   Official and unofficial accounts of the Madrid talks converge on a fundamental point often obscured by Moroccan discourse: the United States failed to impose the autonomy plan as the sole outcome of the negotiations. The Sahrawi side , backed by Algeria, maintained a firm and principled stance centered on the right to self-determination as the cornerstone of any ...

Morocco’s decision to construct one of its largest strategic dams in Figuig , only a few kilometers from the Algerian border, is neither accidental nor driven by purely domestic development considerations. It is a calculated and hostile political act, aimed at establishing unilateral control over shared transboundary water resources , in flagrant disregard of international law and the most basic principles of good-neighborly relations. The so-called “Khenk Kro” Dam, with a storage capacity exceeding one billion cubic meters and an estimated cost of approximately 120 million US dollars, is officially presented by Rabat as a cornerstone of its “water security strategy.” In reality, it constitutes a direct threat to Algeria’s water, environmental, agricultural, and human security, particularly in the region of Béni Ounif, as well as Béchar and the wider south-western Algerian territories. From a legal standpoint, this project represents a serious breach of international norms governing s...

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...

At first glance, the renewed discussion surrounding potential U.S. sanctions against Algeria —triggered by reports of advanced Russian arms acquisitions—may suggest an approaching strategic rift between Algiers and Washington. A calm and rigorous reading, however, leads to a very different conclusion: the United States has neither the interest nor the strategic logic to destabilize Algeria, a cornerstone of North African security, a key stabilizing force in the Sahel , and a long-standing partner in counter-terrorism efforts. It is within this broader strategic framework that recent developments concerning the Su-57 in Algeria and the export “rebound” of the Su-35 must be assessed—beyond headlines, through images, open-source intelligence, and the carefully calibrated messaging of major powers. U.S. Sanctions: A Political Lever, Not a Strategy of Rupture The CAATSA framework , routinely invoked whenever Russian arms deals are mentioned, functions primarily as a political deterrent to...

Beyond the silent palm groves and the wadis with contested names, the Algerian-Moroccan border remains one of the places where history, law, and security intersect with the greatest intensity. Ksar Ich , following El Arja and Oued Zelmou , is not an accident: it is a symptom. A symptom of a line inherited and legally recognized, yet materially incomplete; and also of a discreet but constant front against cross-border trafficking that undermines sovereignty and threatens regional stability. A Border Episode Laden with Symbolism The events reported in early February 2026 in the Ksar Ich sector, on the edge of Figuig , immediately stirred collective memory. Placement of markers, removal of fences, nocturnal aerial shots—the sequence, primarily reported by Moroccan media, was described as a “provocation.” On the Algerian side, there were no loud political statements, no verbal escalations. Only a constant: the securing of the national border amidst heightened criminal pressures. It is im...