Western Sahara: It's Time for the People to Choose
The intra-state conflict between Morocco and Western Sahara has been
unaffected by the Arab Spring and remains neglected by the wider
international community. This situation, argues Carne Ross, has allowed the
humanitarian situation and prospects for peace in Western Sahara to continue
drifting aimlessly.
By Carne Ross for Middle East Institute (MEI)
16 October 2012
_____
The <
http://www.aps.dz/Ban-Ki-moon-renews-confidence-in.html> latest
diplomatic dance on whether or not former US Ambassador Christopher Ross
should be allowed to continue to mediate UN-led talks between the Frente
Polisario and Morocco on the future of Western Sahara is symptomatic of a
much bigger problem ¯ the large powers' unwillingness to advance an end to a
dispute that they mistakenly see as peripheral to their strategic interests,
and their resultant acquiescence in the brutal and illegal occupation of
Western Sahara by Morocco for more than 35 years.
Western Sahara is not part of Morocco, nor has it ever been. When still
under Spanish colonial rule in 1963, Western Sahara was listed by the UN as
a Non-Self-Governing Territory, putting it on the same path towards
independence traveled by almost all other colonial territories in Africa.
Spain was expected and indeed obliged to oversee a process of decolonization
that it completely failed to deliver upon. Instead, Spain's withdrawal in
1975 was knowingly orchestrated to leave the territory to a tripartite
administration with Mauritania and Morocco that eventually led to the
illegal annexation of Western Sahara by Morocco.
It is therefore not an accident that not one country anywhere in the world
has recognized Moroccan sovereignty in Western Sahara, and that the African
Union counts the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), governed by the
Frente Polisario, as one of its founding members. As the International Court
of Justice put it in 1975, "neither the internal nor the international acts
relied upon by Morocco indicate the existence at the relevant period of
either the existence or the international recognition of legal ties of
territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and the Moroccan State."
Following Morocco's "Green March" into the Territory in 1975, and after more
than 15 years of fighting between the Frente Polisario and the Moroccan
armed forces, a ceasefire and UN Settlement Plan was agreed between the
parties and endorsed by the UN Security Council. At its heart was the
establishment of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western
Sahara (MINURSO). The Settlement Plan provided for a short transitional
period for the preparation of a referendum in which the people of Western
Sahara ¯ the Saharawis ¯ would choose between two clear options:
independence or integration with Morocco. All subsequent plans put forward
to resolve the dispute, including those brokered by former US Secretary of
State James Baker, have revolved around the same principle: it is for the
people of Western Sahara to decide their own political future.
Since 1991, Morocco has blocked the holding of the referendum that it itself
agreed to and that was the basis for the ceasefire and the Settlement Plan.
The UN presence, mandated to organize a referendum within six months of the
ceasefire, has been seriously hamstrung by Moroccan interference. This
includes restrictions on the freedom of movement of UN personnel, heavy
monitoring and restriction of access to Saharawi leaders and human rights
activists and, as revealed by the UN Secretary-General in his most recent
<
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/12/us-sahara-un-idUSBRE83B1A12012041
2> report (UN Doc. S/2012/197), unlawful interception of the UN's secret
diplomatic communications.
Even worse, Morocco's chief ally on the Security Council, France ¯ despite
its vocal support for democracy and human rights in the Middle East and
North Africa, and its trumpeting of its own virtuous record in this area ¯
has routinely prevented the Security Council from even allowing the UN to
monitor human rights in the Territory. The result is that MINURSO is the
only UN peacekeeping mission established since 1978 to be operating without
this most basic of capacities, despite the UN itself considering human
rights monitoring to be an indispensible feature of modern peacekeeping.
The only logical conclusion is that Morocco has something to hide. It has.
In its confidential, internal contribution to the UN Secretary-General's
report on Western Sahara in 2011, the UN's own High Commissioner for Human
Rights said that alleged violations of human rights "demonstrate the
critical need for.regular independent, impartial and sustained human rights
monitoring and reporting within a clear mandate covering the entire
Territory and [the Tindouf] refugee camps." Moreover, the US State
Department's
<
http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/humanrightsreport/index.htm?dlid=18644
1> 2011 Country Report on Human Rights Practices for Western Sahara
confirmed "credible reports that [Moroccan] security forces engaged in
torture, beatings, and other mistreatment of detainees," and that "Human
Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and local NGOs continued to report
abuses, especially of Sahrawi independence advocates."
But this all pales in comparison to the humanitarian tragedy of the 150,000
or so Saharawis left languishing in refugee camps near Tindouf in southwest
Algeria, driven from their homes in Western Sahara by the invading Moroccan
forces and thereafter kept at bay by a 1,200 kilometer-long militarized wall
(the "Berm") that separates the Moroccan-controlled portion of Western
Sahara from the "Free Zone" controlled by the Polisario (see map
<
http://minurso.unmissions.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=raSpR1ewAOk%3d&tabi
d=9541&language=en-US> here).
Setting aside for a moment the appalling humanitarian consequences of this
so-called "frozen conflict," it is even more disheartening to consider the
largely haphazard and piecemeal attempts by the UN and its Security Council
to broker a solution. Successive "Personal Envoys" of the Secretary-General
¯ charged with facilitating negotiations between the two parties ¯ have
lacked the strong backing of the Security Council necessary to force
progress. Those envoys appointed since 2007 ¯ when Morocco presented its
disingenuous proposal for Western Saharan autonomy under Moroccan
sovereignty, and the Polisario demanded, in accordance with past agreements,
a referendum that includes independence as an option ¯ have tended to focus
on the stark differences between the two proposals. But this approach may be
flawed, ignoring the simple fact that both parties' proposals would involve
a vote of some kind. So the real question is: Who gets to vote, and on what?
Given the chance, current Personal Envoy Christopher Ross might focus the
parties on answering these questions. But Moroccan antics and Security
Council inattention have conspired to allow the UN process to drift on
aimlessly for years. Unfortunately, Ross's energy this year has been focused
on securing his own job as Personal Envoy following Morocco's announcement
in May that it no longer had confidence in him, making the ridiculous claims
that he was "partial" for having dared to detail in the Secretary-General's
latest report Morocco's systematic interference with MINURSO's operations.
It would actually not take much to advance the resolution of this
long-standing dispute. The United States and France both have bilateral ties
with Morocco, but that does not mean that Morocco's position should be
supported at all costs. The US State Department has itself
<
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5431.htm> acknowledged that "the Western
Sahara dispute remains the primary impediment to regional integration and
development goals and Moroccan-Algerian relations." As a result, the Maghreb
suffers from unfulfilled economic potential and a fragmented response to the
threat of terrorism that is of increasing concern to the Western powers
holding the biggest levers for resolving the dispute in Western Sahara ¯ the
US and France. Facilitating a solution to the Western Sahara dispute is an
indispensible piece for solving this regional jigsaw puzzle.
When history, international law, regional geopolitics and security concerns
all point to the same conclusion, there is really no other option. It's time
for the Security Council to assume control and accelerate resolution of the
dispute by deciding on a clear timetable and deadline for holding a
referendum on self-determination, as required by international law. It's
time to let the people choose.
Gathering of people and flags in the background, courtesy jaysen/flickr
<
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/deed.en> Creative Commons -
Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic
<
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaysen/111345375/> Creative Commons -
Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic
Commemoration of the Saharawi Republic's 30th anniversary
------------[ Sent via the dehai-wn mailing list by dehai.org]--------------
Received on Tue Oct 16 2012 - 17:58:03 EDT
