Étiquette : Western Sahara

  • Press release of Frente Polisario

    Tags : Western Sahara, Morocco, Frente Polisario, UNO, General Assembly, Omar Radi,

    PRESS RELEASE
    PRESS RELEASE

    New York, 27 September 2023

    The Statement of the Representative of the Occupying State is a discordant voice and an affront to everything that the United Nations stands for The occupying state of Morocco continues its desperate attempts to distort the established facts regarding the international status of Western Sahara and the legitimate struggle of the Sahrawi people, which is manifested in the statement delivered yesterday by the representative of the occupying state to the United Nations on behalf of his country before the seventy-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly.

    The statement of the representative of the occupying state is an insult to the intelligence of Member States because of the blatant lies and distortions that it contains regarding the question of Western Sahara, which has been on the agenda of the United Nations General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies since 1963 as a decolonisation issue in recognition by the International Organisation of the inalienable right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination and independence in accordance with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) concerning the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.

    Following the statements in support of the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination and independence delivered successively by Member States since the beginning of the General Assembly session on Tuesday, the statement of the representative of the occupying state of Morocco came as a discordant voice and an affront to everything that the United Nations stands for, including the commitment to the principles of international law, the defence of peoples’ rights to freedom and independence, and the inadmissibility of the acquisition of land by the use of force.

    The false allegations contained in the statement of the occupying state of Morocco concerning the international status of Western Sahara and the legitimate struggle of the Sahrawi people had already been refuted by documented and irrefutable arguments in the letter (S/2023/219) dated 20 March 2023 and the letter (S/2023/456) of 19 June 2023, which were distributed to Member States as official documents of the Security Council, among other things. Therefore, rehashing the same preposterous allegations before the United Nations General Assembly demonstrates once again the incoherence of the representative of the occupying state and his lack of any “argument” to support his untenable position.

    What makes matters worse is that the representative of the occupying state of Morocco has resorted, as usual, to blaming others in a barefaced attempt to divert attention from the chronic structural problems facing his ruling regime, especially in the wake of the natural disaster that recently befell the Moroccan people, which exposed the Moroccan fragile regime before the whole world and showed its true face, despite its attempts to hide the dire situation with its false propaganda and poorly staged “charades”.

    The intransigence evident in the statement of the occupying sate of Morocco before the United Nations General Assembly demonstrates once again that the occupying state is a rogue state that disregards international law, and that it has no political will to comply with the resolutions of the United Nations and the African Union on the need to reach a peaceful, just and lasting solution to the decolonisation of Western Sahara, the last colony in Africa.

    However, no matter how long the occupying state of Morocco persists in its escalatory rhetoric and intransigence, the Sahrawi people, who are firmly attached to their internationally recognised and legitimate rights, will resolutely carry on their liberation struggle by all legitimate means until they attain their non-negotiable freedom and independence and the establishment of sovereignty over the entire Sahrawi Republic.

    Ambassador Sidi M. Omar

    Representative of the Frente POLISARIO at the United Nations and Coordinator with MINURSO

    #Western #Sahara #Westernsahara #Polisario #Morocco #UNGA #Omar_Hilale

  • Polisario Front reportedly rejected new ceasefire with Morocco

    Tags : Western Sahara, Marruecos, Frente Polisario, alto el fuego, El Guerguerat, ONU, Staffan de Mistura, Estados Unidos,

    The war destroyed between the Marruecos and the Frente Polisario following the violation of the marroquíes of the alto and the attack on Saharawi civilians in the breach of El Guerguerat, lasted until November 3 years in a context of increased tension in all the region. Armed shocks expand to the whole region before the start of negotiations between the belligerents.

    The crimes were established on the month of November 13, 2020, when the brown occupation edict was broken in the military wall that divides the Western Sahara and deprives us of our positions in the East of the wall to attack Saharan civilians who are already in my possession. peaceful protest in the legal breach of El Guerguerat, in response to this act and as it was carried out by various members of the Polisario Front, the Saharawi liberation ejection quickly intervened in the defense of civilians and responded with artillery ruffles. One day later, the Frente POLISARIO declared the end of the tregua 30 years later.

    According to diplomatic sources in declarations to this media, Morocco, through the U.S., asked for a new cease-fire in order to withdraw from El Guerguerat and abandon its occupied sites from November 13, 2020. However, the proposal was rejected by the POLISARIO Front.

    Before the lack of international guarantees, the Frente POLISARIO avoided firming the new deal with a new high fuego, and tildó of suspicion and little creíble the claimido acuerdo con Rabat.

    The re-escalation of the conflict, due to the construction of infrastructure and a paso not permitted in the extrusion zone of the Plan de Arreglo, in the border region of El Guerguerat, space which is denuncia as a zone of transportation of expoliated and traffic of illegal mercancías. Before the inaction of the international community, Saharawi civilians moved in a year to block the passage. Therefore, the Frente Polisario considered the attack on these civil wars by the marroquíes as a violation of the alto el fuego ya that viola el acuerdo militar número 1 firmado entre las parties en 1991.

    Diplomatic sources were subtracted from the declarations it was that, following the Saharawi response, the Biden administration was forced to exert pressure at all levels to agree with the POLISARIO Front to reconsider its position and accept the proposal with the end of reviving the current political process. the auspiciousness of the UN. It is now confirmed that the pressure of EE.UU. until the moment has expired, it is not yet fruity.

    #WesternSahara #Marruecos #Polisario #ONU #Staffan #Demistura #alto_el_fuego

  • The UN warns of the risk to regional stability in Western Sahara

    The UN warns of the risk to regional stability in Western Sahara

    Tags : Western Sahara, Frente Polisario, Morocco, Algeria, ONU, MINURSO,

    The two years of rupture of the ceasefire by the Polisario Front fuel the outbreak of tension between Morocco and Algeria derived from Rabat’s historic claim to that territory

    Where there are white vehicles with the acronym of the UN there is an international problem. Where there is a headquarters of the organization, the problem is also old. The United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (Minurso) occupies the premises of a former school in the center of El Aaiún, not far from the collective taxi rank. It is an ancient building, with a landscaped interior patio, kept in an apparent state of magazine like many other UN facilities in the world with a barracks-like appearance. Nobody has bothered to change the furniture, most of it from before 1991, when he began his mandate after the ceasefire between Morocco and the Polisario. The resumption of hostilities between the two contenders for a little over two years now leads the Minurso.

    “We are in a situation of low intensity conflict, with incidents on the wall or embankment (which divides the territory of the former Spanish colony, to the west under the control of the Moroccan Army) and drone attacks after the collapse of the ceasefire in November 2020″, says a senior United Nations diplomat, who speaks to EL PAÍS on condition of anonymity. “In Western Sahara there are no other UN agencies that can report, no NGOs or international media, like in other places. Only we can see what happens, ”he explains, referring to the latest report by the Secretary General, António Guterres, to the Security Council, published last October.

    Can you imagine a situation without the presence of the Minurso in Western Sahara? “The mission is important and very useful. Above all because we represent a political trip wire (detonation or alarm cable) not only between Morocco and the Polisario, but also between Algeria and Morocco. The situation runs the risk of being much worse, and the tension may increase, with real regional implications for stability”, points out the senior diplomat consulted in El Aaiún.

    The political mediation of the current envoy of the Secretary General for the Sahara, the veteran Italian-Swedish diplomat Staffan de Mistura, seasoned in the conflicts in Afghanistan and Syria, remains completely silent. He excepted some signs of stagnation, presumably because of diplomatic pressure from Morocco. In July of last year, everything was prepared at the Minurso headquarters for De Mistura’s visit to El Aaiún. But it was canceled at the last moment when he was in Rabat and had already traveled to the rest of the points on his regular tour: Algiers, Nouakchott and Tindouf (Algeria), where the Saharawi refugee camps are located under the control of the Polisario Front independence movement.

    According to the verbal report of a UN official in El Ayoun, the situation suggests that it is now not safe to move around Western Sahara, particularly east of the wall or embankment where the Polisario usually operates. Nor is it possible to resupply the international observer teams from both sides, as was the case before. There have been attacks with drones against water tankers, the same ones that are used by the Minurso teams. For UN personnel, freedom of movement is a basic rule, and if you lack it, you are in danger.

    “Demining operations have been halted since the collapse of the ceasefire. We hope to be able to restart them soon. We are in one of the areas with the greatest contamination or propagation of mines in the world. Now there are also unexploded projectiles after the resumption of hostilities, » details a senior MINURSO official.

    The UN mission for the Sahara does not have a traditional humanitarian mandate. In Tindouf, Minurso worked in the past with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in adopting confidence-building measures, but this activity was suspended about 10 years ago. It has about 500 local and international members – 300 civilians and 200 military – and deals essentially with operational and logistical issues.

    “It would be a lot worse if we weren’t here. There is no other way for the international community to have impartial information on the ground. We received reports of 27 drone attacks last year and were able to investigate 18 of them, » added a senior UN official consulted. “The presence of our observation teams to the east of the wall or embankment deters a regional escalation. The MINURSO military observers are not armed and attacking them is a war crime. That is one of its strengths, ”he argues.

    —With everything that is happening now in the Ukraine or in the Sahel, don’t you think that the Western Sahara conflict has been relegated?
    -I do not think it is like that. A potential worsening of relations between Morocco and Algeria has consequences for the rest of the world. The supply of gas to Europe through the Gibraltar Strait pipeline, for example, is at risk. I don’t see it as a forgotten conflict.

    The recent statements by the director of the Moroccan Royal Archives, Bahiya Simu, on the so-called Eastern Sahara, the border part of Algeria that Morocco claimed as its own after French decolonization and for which both countries waged the War of the Sands six decades ago, they have unleashed a political storm on both sides of the deserted border.

    Simu spoke in February in Rabat at a forum of the MAP press agency to ensure that « there are historical documents that attest to Morocco’s sovereignty over the so-called Western Sahara, but also over Eastern Sahara. » In his opinion, colonial France handed over Moroccan territory to « French Algeria thinking of continuing to keep the country under its rule. » Tindouf, where the refugee camps controlled by the Polisario Front are located, is the capital of the disputed region.

    His words have caused an impact in the neighboring country. The president of the Algerian House of Representatives, Brahim Bughali, has spoken during a public session on the controversial issue of Eastern Sahara. “The Moroccan regime is trying to parasitize our country and sell its expansionist objectives. The National Liberation Army [Algerian Armed Forces] is ready to protect our borders,” warned the third highest-level charge in Algeria, quoted by the Moroccan digital portal Hespress.

    From El Ayoun, the senior United Nations diplomat contacted highlights that the world has been involved for decades in East Timor, which is a much more difficult place to find on a map than Western Sahara. “Preconceived ideas about that territory changed. Everything changes. The incidents of November 2020 in the Sahara are a perfect example of this ”, he adds.

    ―Is the decision of the United States to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over the Sahara another example?

    -Things change. From our perspective, we are in a moment of evolution in a context of political and operational changes. Minurso’s role in promoting regional stability remains important. Our [original] mandate was to organize a referendum [on self-determination]. But I think it would be naive – that is my personal opinion – to think that a referendum could be held tomorrow. The center of gravity seems to be shifting towards other types of political agreements than those foreseen at the beginning of the 1990s.

    « But I could be wrong, » concludes the head of the Minurso before saying goodbye in El Aaiún. “If you had asked me in 1998 if there was going to be a referendum in East Timor, I would have said no. The territory voted for self-determination the following year. You never know ».

    Source

    #Western_Sahara #Morocco #Algeria #UN #MINURSO

  • USA and Morocco impose their position on the Sahara to Spain

    USA and Morocco impose their position on the Sahara to Spain

    Tags : USA, Spain, Western Sahara, Morocco, PSOE, Pedro Sanchez,

    Odón Elorza

    The changes in the global scenario, exacerbated by the war in Ukraine and the geopolitical interests of the United States and the European Union , have led Pedro Sánchez and Minister José Manuel Albares to position themselves in favor of a Moroccan proposal for the Sahara. Western that is neither credible nor respects international law.

    This shift, which affects the relationship with Algeria , has been consummated without prior debate or due transparency and against the position adopted by the PSOE in its electoral program and in the Resolutions of its 40th Congress. I did express it in 2022 before the Socialist Group of Congress and in various articles. The collective “Socialists for the Sahara” has also published a successful manifesto.

    The pronouncements of Donald Trump (December 2020) and then Joe Biden in favor of the Moroccan thesis, the support of the monarchies of the Persian Gulf, the maneuvers and blackmail of the Moroccan king -with his Spanish lobby-, the pressure towards Europe from the mafias with illegal emigration trafficking, the influence of China and Russia in Africa and the advance of jihadist terrorism in the Sahel region have forced and narrowed, even more, the discourse and turn of Spain. In this way, the UN resolutions on decolonization and the right to self-determination of the Saharawi People, which have been turned into dead paper for years, are sacrificed.

    A summit accompanied by another contempt from Mohamed VI to Spain, which has not served to guarantee the security and territorial integrity of Ceuta and Melilla or respect for the continental shelf of the Canary Islands



    This definitive change in Spain, after years of lukewarmness, has been evidenced in the last Spanish-Moroccan summit in Rabat, which has included in a joint declaration, full of rhetoric , the weakness of the Spanish position and the concessions of political and economic support to the Moroccan regime. A summit, accompanied by another contempt from Mohamed VI to Spain, which has not served to guarantee the security and territorial integrity of Ceuta and Melilla or respect for the continental shelf of the Canary Islands.

    Morocco’s non-credible offer in favor of a status of real autonomy and freedom for the occupied territories in the former Spanish colony-province of the Sahara, presented at the UN in 2007, has not even materialized. The Polisario Front also presented its plan in April 2007.

    Morocco’s non-credible offer in favor of a status of real autonomy and freedom for the occupied territories has not even materialized



    But let’s go back to the Sahara conflict. Nearly 47 years have passed since the illegal invasion of the territory of Western Sahara by Morocco and the flight of the army of Franco and Juan Carlos I. In that time, there has been no progress in a political solution. On the contrary, they have all been setbacks.

    The humanitarian situation of hardship in the Saharawi refugee camps in Tindouf and the Moroccan repression in the former Sahara worsened, political support and international solidarity for the cause decreased and different events have reinforced the strategic role of Morocco and its role as gendarme from the gate to Europe. The EU pays the bill to Morocco and Spain bows its head.

    In any case, the most recent UN resolution on the problem must be respected , number 2602 of October 29, 2021 , which sets the lines of action. The UN « commits itself to helping to reach a just, lasting and acceptable political solution for both parties, based on compromise, and that provides for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara within the framework of provisions in accordance with the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations”. The UN stresses the importance of the parties committing to open a dialogue process on the respective proposals through the initiation of talks sponsored by the United Nations.

    The EU pays the bill to Morocco and Spain bows its head

    Spain cannot fail to defend the interests of the Saharawi People. She has that legal and moral obligation . And it must facilitate the resumption of a political process of contacts between Morocco and the Polisario, in preparation for the negotiation phase. The objective is to reach a peace accepted by both parties on the basis of a well-defined proposal and with real guarantees of compliance. But in a planet of serious crises and uncertainties, the Saharawi cause is very small and for many a chimera.

    The proposal for an autonomous status for the territory of the Sahara, like the option of independence, must be discussed and agreed between the parties to, in the end, proceed to a democratic referendum. As the beginning of the dialogue, respect for democratic freedoms and the safeguarding of human rights in the Sahara must be guaranteed.

    For all these reasons, it is of vital importance that Spain exercise its diplomatic responsibility as the former administrator of the territory, grant Spanish nationality to the Sahrawis , increase humanitarian aid to the camps and guarantee the permanence of a MINURSO contingent.

    *Odón Elorza is a former PSOE deputy for Guipúzcoa, former mayor of San Sebastían and a law graduate.

    Source

    #Western_Sahara #USA #Morocco #Spain #PSOE #Pedro_Sanchez

  • Controversial agreements between EU and Morocco

    Tags : Morocco European Union, Western Sahara, Fishing agreement, agricultural agreement,

    Despite several court decisions, the European institutions cling to strategic trade agreements with Morocco.

    By Pauline Hofmann and Benoît Collombat (Radio France)

    They are at the heart of relations between the European Union and Morocco. Two trade agreements (one on agriculture and the other on fishing) grant Moroccan products customs preferences. Problem: on several occasions since 2016, European justice has pointed out their illegality. And Western Sahara is at the heart of the problem.

    This territory, eight times the size of Belgium, is in the middle of a territorial dispute. Morocco, which has occupied it since the end of Spanish colonization in 1975, claims sovereignty over what it calls « the southern provinces », rich in fish and phosphate. Facing Rabat, we find the Polisario Front, a Sahrawi independence movement supported by neighboring Algeria.

    So where is the problem with this customs deal? The European Union has decided to apply it to all products coming from Western Sahara. An illegal decision as it stands, according to the justice which reaffirms the “separate and distinct status” of the region.

    A conflict of interest

    In 2018, after a first legal setback, the European Parliament relaunched these agreements. “From the start of our work, it was obvious that the Commission and the Council were putting significant pressure on us to approve the agreements as they stand,” recalls Heidi Hautala, currently MEP (Greens) and co-president of Parliament European. She recounts with bitterness a working trip to Western Sahara in 2018: “The Moroccan position dominated 100% of the presentations made during the mission. Only two other MEPs, including the rapporteur, the Frenchwoman Patricia Lalonde (ALDE), are part of the trip. “We tell him to look both ways. She replied: “Oh no, no, I will only go to the area under Moroccan control”, assures Gilles Devers, lawyer for the Polisario Front. Sahrawi activist, the Belgian Mahjoub Maliha had offered his help to the services of the Parliament to meet Sahrawis. But in an exchange of emails, the latter invoked “security reasons” preventing the meeting.

    Patricia Lalonde had to withdraw from the file due to a conflict of interest. She was part of EuroMedA, alongside Gilles Pargneaux. Without being registered in the transparency register, the organization had co-organized an event in the European Parliament with the OCP, the Office Cherifien des Phosphates, a Moroccan company active in Western Sahara. Patricia Lalonde did not respond to our questions.

    In January 2019, the European Parliament ended up voting in favor of these agreements, including, despite the previous court decision, Western Sahara. The head of European diplomacy Federica Mogherini then welcomed a “new stage in the strategic partnership” between the EU and Morocco. European Commissioner Pierre Moscovici welcomed an agreement which puts an « end to legal uncertainty harmful to all, in particular to businesses and inhabitants of Western Sahara ».

    « Rejoicing at the good relations with Morocco is not a scandal when you are in the European Union », defends today Pierre Moscovici, head of the Court of Auditors in France. « When relations with Morocco are bad, it’s bad for Morocco and for the European Union », two strategic partners. He recalls having wanted to place the country on the blacklist of tax havens. “We did not ignore the judgment of the Court of Justice, we thought that European law made it possible to provide this solution. In 2021, European justice once again canceled the agreements, as voted by the European Parliament. The Council and the Commission appealed. A new decision is expected this year.

    Source

    #Qatargate #Morocco #Western_Sahara #Fishing_agreement #Agriculture_agreement

  • Western Sahara : The Troika effects on other crises

    Tags : Western Sahara, African Union, PSC, AUC, Morocco, Algeria, UNO, SADR,

    How the latest AU decision on Western Sahara could affect other crises

    At its 31st summit in Nouakchott, Mauritania the African Union (AU) decided to limit its own peace efforts in the Western Sahara in order to support the process led by the United Nations (UN). This support will be through a troika of heads of state, together with the AU Commission (AUC) chairperson. The move is a big win for Morocco, which believes the AU-led efforts are biased. However, it could set a precedent for other AU member states that disapprove of AU interventions.

    Morocco’s return to the AU and subsequent election to the Peace and Security Council (PSC) in January 2018 has brought a new dimension to the AU’s approach to the crisis in Western Sahara. In the past, the AU usually described this as a ‘decolonisation’ issue and accepted the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) as a member. This membership is still seen by Morocco as proof that the organisation is not impartial.

    Morocco has often objected to the way the PSC – at the level of ambassadors in Addis Ababa – continues to call for the territory’s independence.

    The AU’s decision in July 2018 to fully support the UN process in order to resolve tensions between member states could therefore be seen as a victory for Morocco. The assembly appealed to the parties in the conflict ‘to urgently resume negotiations without pre-conditions and in good faith under the auspices of the Secretary-General of the UN, whose Security Council is seized of the matter’.

    This decision is also in line with the outcome of the UN meeting in April 2018 that urged member states to support the UN peace process, which involves negotiations between the parties.

    Some view the 31st summit decision on Western Sahara as a compromise to prevent the deterioration of the relationship between Morocco’s allies and staunch supporters of Western Sahara such as Algeria, South Africa and other countries in Southern Africa. Keeping the discussions out of the PSC could be a way to avoid confrontation.

    However, the decision has serious implications for the PSC, owing to the precedent it sets for other member states.

    Reversal of prior AU decisions

    The latest decision to provide decisive support to the UN process is a reversal of the AU’s January 2018 decision, which called for ‘joint AU and UN facilitated talks for a free and fair referendum for the people of Western Sahara’.

    The new decision also states that the AU will engage the issue mainly at the level of the newly established troika, which is made up of the outgoing, current and incoming AU chairpersons and the AUC chairperson. The troika will provide support to the UN process and report directly to the AU Assembly and, if need be, the PSC, but only at the level of heads of state.

    The decision nullifies the ad hoc committee of heads of state on Western Sahara that was established in 1978, during the early years of the violent confrontations. The Nouakchott decision also makes no mention of the AU high representative for Western Sahara, currently the former president of Mozambique, Joaquim Chissano.

    Precedent for other member states

    This latest Western Sahara decision is crucial for the AU and the PSC because, for the first time, the AU has taken a formal decision to limit the PSC’s involvement in a crisis in Africa. Since the re-launch of the continental body as the AU in 2002 and the operationalisation of the PSC in 2004, the PSC has seen itself as a major player in every security issue on the continent.

    In line with the PSC Protocol, conflict situations on the continent are discussed by the 15-member PSC at all levels. Most of the time it is at the level of the Addis Ababa-based permanent representatives, who meet regularly on security issues irrespective of whether the peace processes are led by other intergovernmental organisations.

    For instance, the PSC has engaged on several issues, including the situations in Libya, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and South Sudan, where the UN and sub-regional actors play dominant roles. While the AU may play a minimal role in a peace process, the PSC’s discussions complement mainstream processes, thereby enabling the AU to fulfil its day-to-day conflict management role.

    While the PSC has shied away from discussing certain emerging security threats such as Cameroon and Zimbabwe owing to political pressure from member states, no formal decision was ever made in this regard. As a result, nothing prevents the PSC from putting it on the agenda of its deliberations at ambassadorial level in future.

    Impact on the PSC working methods

    The assembly’s decision to limit the PSC’s role in Western Sahara to heads of state could negatively impact the council’s working methods. PSC summits at the level of heads of state take place only once or twice a year and are usually scheduled to discuss a burning crisis situation. The past few summits since 2016 have been devoted to the situation in South Sudan.

    This means that the Western Sahara issue may not make it to the PSC summits and, even if it does, there may not be binding decisions, given that the AU is meant to support the UN process.

    The implications for other issues are evident. In future, member states that disagree with the PSC’s involvement could insist on a UN process with the support of heads of state. This not only affects the working methods of the PSC but could also undermine its relevance in addressing certain security threats on the continent.

    Limits of the AU troika

    Experience also shows that committees of heads of state often lack the political will to deal with crises. Besides, the troika of former, current and future AU chairs is a notion that is not inscribed in the AU Constitutive Act and it has no real powers outside the AU Assembly. Similar high-level committees were set up in the past to address conflicts in Libya, Burundi and South Sudan, but failed to record any major milestones in either setting the agenda for peace or effectively resolving the crises in those countries.

    Going forward, the AUC chairperson has a responsibility to include the issue of Western Sahara on the agenda of the AU Assembly and PSC summits of heads of state. This includes developing a roadmap for the AU troika to meet regularly to urge the UN to accelerate efforts to resolve one of Africa’s long-running crises.

    Source

    #Western_Sahara #Morocco #African_Union #AUC #PSC #SADR #Algeria

  • President Abdelaziz Bouteflika : « I am not Jesus »

    Tags : Morocco, Algeria, Wikileaks, Abdelaziz Bouteflika, Western sahara,

    Cable in which Algeria rules out a confrontation with Morocco

    President Bouteflika assures, at a meeting in 2005, that the Sahara question will not lead to a ‘casus belli’.

    03 DIC 2010 – 22:30 CET
    ID: 38855
    Date: 2005-08-19 11:35:00
    Origin: 05ALGIERS1753
    Source: Embassy Algiers
    Classification: CONFIDENTIAL
    Dunno:
    Destination: This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

    C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ALGIERS 001753

    SIPDIS

    E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/19/2015
    TAGS: PREL, PHUM, PBTS, WI, AG, MO, Algeria-Morocco Relations, Polisario
    SUBJECT: SENATOR LUGAR DISCUSSES WESTERN SAHARA,
    ALGERIAN-MOROCCAN RELATIONS WITH BOUTEFLIKA

    Classified By: Ambassador Richard W. Erdman, Reason 1.4 (b) (d)

    1. (C) Summary. Senate Foreign Relations Committee
    Chairman Richard Lugar, accompanied by Ambassador, Supreme Allied Commander in Europe General James Jones, and members of his delegation met with President Abdelaziz Bouteflika the morning of August 18. Following the meeting, Senator Lugar and his delegation departed for Tindouf to oversee the release of the last 404 Moroccan POWs held by the Polisario.

    Lugar expressed appreciation for Bouteflika’s efforts to create new momentum for resolving the Western Sahara conflict. Bouteflika recalled his commitment to President Bush in 2001 to support James Baker, noting that he had done so and accepted the Baker Plan, but when Baker quit he had left a vacuum that had not been filled. Bouteflika reiterated his assurance that Western Sahara would not be a casus belli for Algeria, but said the Polisario had the right to resume fighting « on its own territory » if it chose to do so. Bouteflika insisted that Algeria would respect the outcome of a referendum no matter what it was, but would not be a party to negotiations with Morocco on behalf of the Sahrawis. Bouteflika sharply complained about Morocco’s last-minute cancellation of a planned meeting with King Mohammed in Rabat in June by Prime Minister Ouyahia, saying he could not accept « dealing with diplomatic relations in such an irresponsible manner. »

    Referring to advice from Presidents Bush and Chirac that he bear in mind King Mohammed’s youth, Bouteflika said, « I am not Jesus Christ, and will not turn my other cheek. » Algeria was ready to discuss « objective interests » with Morocco, but only if the Moroccans were « serious. » Senator Lugar noted that President Bush had asked him to undertake this humanitarian mission, adding that the U.S. wanted Algeria and Morocco to reopen the land border and reengage at the highest level. Did Bouteflika think the Moroccans understood his position on a referendum? Bouteflika said the Western Sahara had been on the UN’s agenda since the 1970s. Algeria favored respecting international law and was defending the right of self-determination, but would not accept being a negotiating partner on the fate of the Western Sahara with France, Spain, Morocco or the U.S. End summary.

    LUGAR MISSION
    ————-

    2. (U) Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Senator Richard Lugar and his delegation, which included Supreme Allied Commander in Europe General James Jones, visited Algeria August 17-18 as part of a Presidential Mission to oversee the release of the last 404 Moroccan POWs held by the Polisario Front in Tindouf. Senator Lugar, Ambassador, General Jones, and members of Lugar’s delegation met with President Abdelaziz Bouteflika for two and a half hours the morning of August 18 before flying to Tindouf. NEA DAS Gray, EUCOM J-5 General Gration, NSC Director Pounds, and DCM also attended the meeting, at which Bouteflika was flanked by Presidential Chief of Staff Belkheir, Chief of Defense General Gait Saleh, Council of the Nation President Bensalah, and Minister Delegate for Maghreb and African Affairs Messahel. Septel reports Lugar and Bouteflika’s discussion of U.S.-Algerian relations and a number of regional issues.

    A HUMANITARIAN MISSION
    ———————-

    3. (C) Senator Lugar began by conveying the greetings of President Bush, who fully supported the humanitarian mission to secure the release of the Moroccan POWs. The initiative taken by Bouteflika should create new opportunities for Algeria and Morocco and develop momentum toward resolving the Western Sahara conflict. Lugar noted the UNSYG’s appointment of a new personal envoy, van Walsum, as a positive sign of the UN’s support as well. Bouteflika warmly welcomed Senator Lugar and his delegation, adding that he was aware of the Senator’s record of reaching consensus. Bouteflika said he was aware that there were some concerns in Washington about Lugar’s planned meeting in Tindouf with Polisario leader Abdelaziz, but commented that there was no need for concern since this was a strictly humanitarian mission. The Sahrawis, he said, would talk about their concerns, but this should « not offend anyone from the land of Washington and Wilson, » the leader of a war for independence and the founding father of the idea of self-determination.

    4. (C) Bouteflika recalled his first meeting with President Bush in 2001, at which the President had asked him if he was ready to work with James Baker. Bouteflika promised the President he would work cooperatively with Baker and had done so (i.e., accepting the Baker Plan and getting the Polisario to accept it as well) until Baker had resigned. Baker’s resignation had left a vacuum in the settlement process that still had not been filled. Bouteflika praised Baker for being able to see the needs of both sides, Morocco and the Polisario’s. Baker « represented the American values we admire. »

    WESTERN SAHARA NOT A CASUS BELLI, BUT POLISARIO HAVE THE RIGHT TO FIGHT
    ————————————-

    5. (C) Recalling the Houston Agreement negotiated by Baker with Morocco and the Polisario, Bouteflika said he had still been out of politics then. But at the time, he had thought the agreement flawed because it did not set a deadline for implementation. He said that if he had been the Polisario, he would have signed the agreement but insisted on the right to take up arms after six months or one year if it were not implemented. The Polisario was now paying the price for not insisting on a time limit.

    6. (C) Bouteflika said that when he became President in 1999 he had taken a position that was not completely accepted at the time by the army and intelligence services, i.e. that the Western Sahara would never be a casus belli for Algeria. The Polisario cannot drag Algeria into war, he stressed. But if they decided to fight « on their own territory, » that would be their decision. If they did so, they would not be allowed to fight in Western Sahara and then return to Algeria as a base.

    MOROCCO MUST GO BACK TO UN
    ————————–

    7. (C) Bouteflika said he had urged Morocco to return to the UN framework. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the international community mobilized itself, but the Western Sahara was considered a « mere tribal issue » even though it had been a Spanish colony. Bouteflika criticized Spain, saying the Spanish Socialists had not been honest with the Sahrawis. From time to time, Spain approached Algeria about entering negotiations with France, Morocco and Spain to resolve the conflict.

    Algeria, however, had no claim to the Western Sahara and would not negotiate on the Sahrawis’ behalf. Bouteflika stressed that he was only advocating self-determination, a principle enshrined in the UN Charter. Morocco wanted improved relations with Algeria, but Algeria would not respond until Morocco agreed to return to the UN framework. The only thing Algeria asked of Morocco was to accept UNSC resolutions and international law. That is my sincerest hope, Bouteflika said.

    ALGERIA WILL ACCEPT RESULT OF REFERENDUM
    —————————————-

    8. (C) Bouteflika said he was ready to sign a document now committing Algeria to accept the result of a referendum, whichever way it turned out. He said he realized a referendum was a « Pandora’s box, » but Algeria would accept the outcome. Algeria would defend the right of self-determination even if it was the last UN member-state to do so.

    « I AM NOT JESUS CHRIST »
    ———————–

    9. (C) According to Bouteflika, bilateral relations with Morocco had started to gain momentum earlier this year. Prime Minister Ouyahia was ready to visit Rabat with a large delegation. There were many bilateral agreements with Morocco dating to the 1960s and they were in serious need of review. The Moroccans informed Bouteflika that King Mohammed would see Ouyahia and his delegation. Then, only an hour later, the Moroccans said that « circumstances were not favorable » for the visit, even though it had been prepared months in advance. Bouteflika underscored that he could not accept dealing with diplomatic relations « in such an irresponsible manner. » Morocco would always be Algeria’s neighbor, neither country would move and they had to get along. But it was unacceptable to handle serious issues in an « infantile manner. » Bouteflika said that in his discussions with Presidents Bush and Chirac, among other leaders, he was told that the king was young while he was a veteran diplomat. But, he said, « I am not Jesus Christ » and will not turn the other cheek.

    10. (C) Bouteflika recalled that he was born in Morocco and knew that country very well. Morocco stood to gain a great deal from reopening the land border, since north-east Morocco depended on trade with the Oran region of Algeria. Even with the border closed, Morocco makes three billion Euros a year from smuggling, he claimed. Both countries have objective interests in better relations, but if the Moroccans want to discuss normalizing relations they must be serious about how they treat Algeria.

    11. (C) Turning to the Arab Maghreb Union, Bouteflika said that if the Libyans organized a summit, he would attend in order to make it a success, not to embarrass anyone. As soon as Morocco returned to the UN framework for the Western Sahara, Algeria would engage on bilateral relations and the AMU.

    U.S TRIES TO DO THE RIGHT THING
    ——————————-

    12. (C) Senator Lugar said the United States tried to act in a manner consistent with democratic values of human rights and respect for the right of self-determination that Bouteflika had mentioned. The U.S. acted even when its own national interests were not directly engaged when it was the right thing to do. It was in this context that President Bush had asked that the Senator undertake this mission. The President respected Bouteflika’s initiative to gain the release of the prisoners and was looking for ways to improve Algerian-Moroccan relations. The U.S. believed the two countries should reopen their border and reengage at the highest level. The U.S. wanted to work with Algeria to see how we could make a difference.

    13. (C) Senator Lugar asked whether Bouteflika thought the Moroccan Government understood his position that Algeria would support the results of a referendum no matter what they were? Was the question of who would have the right to vote still a significant issue? What were the other principal issues? Bouteflika said the Western Sahara was not a new issue for the UN. Baker had done very good work, and the UNSYG had a complete list of voters in a referendum. Algeria will accept the results of a referendum, but that did not mean it would « condone Moroccan tricks. » The Western Sahara has been on the UN agenda since the 1970s, at the same time as Brunei, Suriname, and Belize, all of which were long since independent. Algeria supported respecting international law. It would not accept being a negotiating partner on the Western Sahara with France, Spain, Morocco or the United States, but Algeria would defend the right of self-determination.

    Source : Wikileaks

    #Morocco #Algeria #Western_sahara

  • Corruption: Leaking of confidential AU documents

    Tags : Western Sahara, African Union, African Commission, Moroccogate, Qatargate, Maroc, DGED, bribery, Jean-Baotiste Natana, Morocco,

    On the occasion of the widespread media coverage of the scandal known as Marocgate, which shook the European Parliament, it should be recalled that these corrupt practices have been widely practiced by Morocco in Africa and the African Union.

    Indeed, presidents, ministers, ambassadors and civil society figures have received money and gifts in order to obtain their support for Moroccan aims in Africa, in particular to prevent the African Union from intervening in the UN-led peace process in Western Sahara. For Rabat, this intervention was an initiative of the African Commission under the chairmanship of Ms. Dlamini Zuma.

    Thus, Morocco succeeded in recruiting Ms. Zuma’s chief of staff, Jean-Baptiste, a dirty cop from Burkina Faso, a country that is part of the French-led nebula known as Françafrique, of which the Kingdom of Morocco is the main stronghold.

    Thanks to its recruit, Rabat obtained confidential documents from the African Commission, including a letter sent by Ambassador Yilma Tadesse, the African Union’s representative to MINURSO, to Ms. Dlamini Zuma, regarding the publication of a Moroccan media on the former president of Mozambique, Joachim Chissano.

    Indeed, the website Duid.ma published on July 1, 2014 an article entitled « AU. A drug trafficker appointed as special envoy for Sahara-REabat totally rejects the decision of the African Union » which caused the indignation of Ambassador Yilma Tadesse, representative of the African Union to MINURSO, the UN mission operating in Western Sahara. « Writing a news story on the development is, of course, one thing but engaging in a scurrilous defamation, simply quite another. It is indeed regrettable that the paper had to stoop so low in launching such an attack on the person of one of the African freedom fighters and dedicated leaders or oru continent, » he wrote in this regard.

    #Qatargate #Maroc #Parlement_Européen #Eva_Kaili #Antonio_Panzeri #Francesco_Giorgi #Qatar #Marocleaks #Mohamed_Belahrach #Moroccogate #DGED #Yassine_Mansouri #Western_Sahara #African_Union


  • Morocco’s New Tango with the African Union

    Tags : Morocco, Western Sahara, African Union, bribes, corruption,

    Ahead of the African Union Summit which takes place from 22-31 January 2017 in Addis Ababa, Yohannes Woldemariam analyses Morocco’s campaign for readmission to the continental body.

    Why is King Mohammed VI of Morocco suddenly keen to join the African Union (AU), after his late father King Hassan II abandoned the continental Organization of African Unity the (OAU), in 1984?

    Morocco is currently courting a number of African countries relentlessly, including Madagascar, Tanzania, Rwanda, and others. Morocco has signed 19 economic agreements with Rwanda and 22 with Tanzania—two countries that traditionally backed the Western Sahara’s quest for decolonisation. Nigeria and Morocco have also signed a total of 21 bilateral agreements, a joint venture to construct a gas pipeline that will connect the two nations as well as some other African countries to Europe.

    Clearly, the economic agreements with these countries imply ulterior motives for increasing Morocco’s leverage in its campaign to return to the AU and deal a blow to Western Sahara’s aspirations for self-determination. Morocco is waging a similar campaign internationally and in the halls of the US congress by hiring expensive lobbyists and public relations firms.

    For Morocco, joining the AU is part of the tactic of trying to use the organisation for its objective of neutralising Western Sahara, from the inside, which has become a terribly divisive wedge issue within the AU.

    Outside Africa, Morocco has powerful support for its position from influential Gulf States such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia, which are not members of the AU, but which can still use their political influence and the power of the purse to coerce and lobby cash-strapped African countries and the United Nations. In a clear show of muscle, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and UAE walked out from a meeting of the Arab and African foreign ministers meeting, which was held in the capital of Equatorial Guinea, Malabo, in preparation for the fourth Arab-African summit, because of opposition to the presence of a delegation from the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR). Among African countries, Senegal strongly backs Morocco’s position, undoubtedly due to great pressure from France and Moroccan economic investments in Senegal. Morocco is also the largest investor in Ivory Coast and therefore can count on strong Ivorian support. Morocco has stronger support in Francophone Africa.

    Kenya, which once supported SADR reversed course in 2007 but now Foreign Minister Amina Mohamed, candidate to head the African Union Commission, is calling for holding, as quickly as possible, “the referendum on Western Sahara people’s self-determination.” Zambia has similarly vacillated after early support for the cause of Western Sahara. According to WikiLeaks, at least until 2009 Ethiopia’s position was to recognise the SADR, declared by the Polisario (Western Sahara’s guerrilla army) in 1976 as its representative body. It still remains to be seen, how countries will line up when it really matters.

    The case of Western Sahara bears striking resemblance to Eritrea’s struggle for independence from Ethiopia and the independence struggles of Namibia, Belize and East Timor. According to the Wikileaks report, both Belize and East Timor are listed among countries who recognise SADR.

    Africa committed itself to maintain colonial borders, drawn arbitrarily in the 19th and 20th centuries, after the collapse of European colonialism. This commitment was not made because those borders made any sense: borders were rarely congruent with ethnic geographical homelands or previous historical delineations. One can debate the pros and cons of this but Africa made the decision in Cairo in 1964, to keep these borders in order to avoid disruptive and endless conflict of trying to rearrange colonial boundaries, to fit language groups or ethnicities. For better or worse, that is what was decided with the Cairo resolution (AHG/Res. 16(I)). Nevertheless, Morocco is choosing to violate that resolution by gobbling up Western Sahara.

    But why does Morocco need the AU, the much troubled continental body? The explanation lies in Morocco’s illegal Occupation of the Western Sahara and its need to legitimise it by enlisting as many African countries as possible, to accept Western Sahara’s fate as fait accompli. Morocco has been colonising the territory since 1974. Recently, UN General Secretary Ban Ki Moon characterised Morocco as an occupying force, which obviously did not sit well with Morocco.

    An impasse of a no-war, no-peace status exists since 1991, after a ceasefire brokered by the United Nations. Morocco has proposed “internal autonomy” but the Saharawis insist on a United Nations supervised referendum vote, with independence on the table. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) after consideration of materials and information provided by both sides concluded there is no evidence:




    establish[ING] any tie of territorial sovereignty between the territory of Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco or the Mauritanian entity… the Court has not found legal ties of such a nature as might affect the application of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) in the decolonization of Western Sahara and, in particular, of the principle of self-determination through the free and genuine expression of the will of the peoples of the Territory.




    In a rare show of some backbone, the OAU welcomed Western Sahara’s membership, which incensed Morocco and caused its withdrawal from the organisation in 1984—making it the only country to do so in its history. This was a strategic mistake by Morocco, which it seems to have finally realised.

    Illegal Mining of Western Sahara’s Potash Resource

    Morocco is exploiting and using Western Sahara’s potash resource to bribe and lobby countries like Ethiopia, casting doubt on the sincerity of its offer for “internal autonomy” to the territory.

    According to the financialpost.com:



    Two Canadian fertilizer firms have become the dominant buyers of phosphate rock from the disputed territory of Western Sahara after other companies stopped the practice… Western Sahara Resource Watch (WSRW) found that Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan Inc. and Agrium Inc. shipped a combined 916,000 tonnes of phosphate from the territory last year. That accounted for 64.5 per cent of all purchases from Western Sahara in 2015. Potash Corp. shipped 474,000 tonnes and Agrium shipped 442,000…


    The Financial Times reported that the OCP (Morocco’s state-owned phosphate company) sealed a deal to build $3.7bn fertiliser plant in Ethiopia. This is hailed as the largest investment of Morocco outside the country and as an example of South–South cooperation. The clue for this motive is to be found in “Ethiopia’s support for Morocco’s return to the African institutional family …articulated in a joint statement issued following King Mohammed VI’s … visit to Ethiopia, the first since his accession to the Throne.”

    Moroccan robbery of Western Sahara’s resources is widespread. Hillary Clinton was complicit with relaxing US foreign aid restrictions on Morocco during her tenure as Secretary of State, allowing US funds to be used in the territory of Western Sahara where OCP operates phosphate-mining operations. Collaterally, Hillary’s favour to Morocco resulted in US$12-million for the Clinton-Foundation, courtesy of King Mohammed VI.

    Morocco’s commitment to South- South Cooperation is questionable at best. Morocco is framing its charm offensive in Africa in terms of South– South cooperation. But what really is Morocco’s commitment to South-South cooperation? Like Ethiopia, Morocco’s commitment, first of all, is commitment to an extreme form of neoliberalism and to an environmental narrative that blames pastoralists and their overgrazing practices as an excuse for invading and appropriating land for commercial agriculture and other land grabs. In Morocco, stat e services such as health care and education have faced drastic reduction. The promotion of exports and the lowering of tariffs is the reality. For the majority of their populations, rampant degradation and poverty are the reality in both countries.

    A central tenet of South-South cooperation is poverty reduction, but neoliberalist market fundamentalism is incompatible with reducing inequality and protecting the environment. The beneficiaries from these policies are the elite and international capitalists; the results are a far cry from South-to-South cooperation that would alleviate poverty. Even the 22nd Conference of the Parties (COP22) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was used by Morocco to insert itself in the 16 November 2016 meeting of the Africa Action Summit in Marrakesh. King Mohammed VI was the new face in the meeting, clearly pushing his campaign to get rid of SADR from the AU.

    The struggle to deal seriously with climate change should not be circumvented by the unjust political agendas of opportunistic leaders. As Hamza Hamouchene of War on Want, articulates: there cannot be authentic environmental justice in Morocco when its government ignores the political rights of the Saharawi people.

    Similarly, In 2009, in his capacity as a designated negotiator, the late Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi betrayed the G77’s and Africa’s collective stance in Copenhagen by making a back-door deal with France retreating from the agreed upon 1.5 degrees Celsius target to 2 degrees and thereby dealing a serious blow to the bargaining capacity of the global South. As Kate Sheppard of Mother Jones magazine wrote:



    The major powers welcomed Ethiopia’s defection from the 1.5-degree target. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown…endorsed the side deal with France….Obama placed a call to Zenawi [in which he] expressed his appreciation for the leadership [of] the Prime Minister… [In negotiating] with African countries on climate change.




    The truth was that Meles used Copenhagen to further his own immediate agenda at the expense of Africa and King Mohammed VI was using COP22 to support Morocco’s agenda of denying the rights of the Saharawi people. Ethiopia is now seen as key for Morocco’s goals, as a founding member of the OAU hosting the headquarters of the AU’s Chinese-funded 200-million-dollar building in Addis Ababa, showcasing Chinese soft power. The world must not forget that Ethiopia still sits on its own violation by occupying parts of Eritrean territory in contravention of an ICJ verdict.

    Moroccan and Ethiopian version of South-to-South cooperation is simply a repackaged version of neoliberalism based on extractive activities and destroying the lives of the most vulnerable.

    The honorable thing for African Countries and the AU to do, as they recently have done in standing up to Yahya Jammeh of the Gambia, is to rebuff Morocco’s arm twisting and vigorously support the self-determination of the Saharawi people.


    Dr. Yohannes Woldemariam is a Visiting Professor of International Political Economy at Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica.

    LSE, 20/01/2017

    #Morocco #Western_Sahara #Bribes #African_Union #Bribes #Corruption

  • Morocco-gate : The bargaining chip is the Saharawi people

    Tags : Qatargate, European Parliament, Antonio Panzeri, Eva Kaili, Marocleaks, Western Sahara,

    The bargaining chip between Morocco and MEPs is the Saharawi people

    LUCA ATTANASIO

    At the centre of the Moroccan strand of the scandal that has engulfed the European Parliament is the Western Sahara issue. Rabat aimed to bribe parliamentarians and officials to circumvent the EU Court of Justice ruling safeguarding the Saharawis’ right to profits from the resources of their territory.

    At the centre of the Moroccan strand of the scandal that has engulfed the European Parliament is the Western Sahara issue.

    Rabat aimed to bribe parliamentarians and officials to circumvent the EU Court of Justice ruling safeguarding the Saharawis’ right to profits for the resources of their territory.

    « Something always happens in the European parliament, » explains Fatima Mahfoud, Polisario’s representative in Italy, « that interrupts proceedings favourable to our demands. And so far, as the Maroc-Leaks show, Che Panzeri was crucial in Morocco’s lobbying in the EU.

    For Noam Chomsky, it was they in October 2010 who triggered the Arab Springs. Ahead of the Tunisians, the Saharawis brought 20,000 activists to Gdeim Izik, in the middle of the southern Moroccan desert, to demonstrate peacefully and demand respect for rights from Rabat.

    The ‘Sahrawi spring’ was bloodily repressed by the Moroccan police forces and their cause sank again amidst the utter disregard of the world.

    Today, the issue of Western Sahara, Africa’s last colony by Africans, resurfaces for yet another chapter of rights frustration.

    A bargaining chip, the Saharawis are said to be the sacrificial victims of shady dealings between European parliamentarians and Moroccan officials interested in maintaining the status quo of EU-Morocco trade put in serious jeopardy by an EU Court of Justice ruling in 2016.

    THE COURT REJECTS EU-MOROCCO AGREEMENTS

    The legal body had rejected the trade agreements between Europe and Rabat precisely because of the area of Western Sahara, which is rich in phosphates and very rich in fish, and demanded that any future signature be made with the consent of the Polisario Front, the political body representing the Saharawis.

    The Court’s ruling, however, was substantially bypassed by the European Commission, which re-proposed the contents of the previous text without any substantial changes and, above all, without involving the Saharawis. And when in 2019 the texts of the new agreement were approved by a large majority in parliament, the Polisario lodged an appeal and received a new assent from the Court, which in 2021 invalidated all agreements. Despite this, the parliament again approved the trade agreement with Morocco and the new appeal lodged by Polisario is expected to be answered in 2023.

    For years, one wondered how it was possible for the European parliament and commission to circumvent rulings of the European Court of Justice. Today, the first answers are emerging. For some time now, the powerful Moroccan lobbying system has been on the lookout for MEPs who tend to be close by political vocation to oppressed peoples or those deprived of fundamental rights in order to convince them, through licit and illicit methods, to shift support and votes in favour of Rabat’s interests. In this way, they allow a stable political and commercial relationship between the EU and Morocco and de facto erase the demands, ratified in this case by the Court of Justice, of the Saharawis.

    ‘Something always happens in the European Parliament,’ explains Fatima Mahfoud, Polisario’s representative in Italy, ‘that interrupts proceedings favourable to our demands. We had a last example last 14 December: following the Qatar gate a motion was voted to limit lobbying and the left tabled an amendment to extend it to Morocco as well, but the overwhelming majority voted against it’.

    THE ‘FRIENDS’ OF MOROCCO
    Among the most active in guiding the choices of the parliament and the committee is, as is well known, Pier Antonio Panzeri, head of the EU-Morocco joint committee from 2010 to 2014 and president in his third term 2014-2019, of the delegation for relations with the Maghreb and the Arab Maghreb Union, including the EU-Morocco, EU-Tunisia and EU-Algeria joint parliamentary committees.

    His relations with Abderrahim Atmoun, Morocco’s ambassador to Poland, and a man who exerted great pressure on the EU to avert the downsizing of Morocco-Europe trade relations, as well as those between Moroccan emissaries and parliamentarians, among whom, as the Belgian judiciary would have us believe, in addition to Panzeri, there would be Cozzolino and Vice-President Kalili, are now being examined by the investigators. That Panzeri was crucial in lobbying Morocco in the EU is demonstrated by many of the texts revealed by Maroc-leaks.

    cv-mogherini-2014-1Download

    One among many, from 2014, from the Moroccan Foreign Ministry’s Directorate for Relations with the EU reads in one passage, ‘Federica Mogherini … will lead European diplomacy …Coming from the Pd, which supported the motion against Morocco in the Italian parliament, she has adopted positions favourable to the separatists’ arguments on the Sahara issue. It is therefore necessary to act with Morocco’s friends (senior European officials and members of the Socialists & Democrats party, in particular Pargneaux and Panzeri) to make her aware of this issue… »

    THE SAHARAWI NATION ONLY FOR THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE

    For half the world – the African Union and almost all African countries, many American and Asian countries – the desert people, settled for centuries between southern Morocco, Mauritania and the Atlantic Ocean, is a nation – the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic (Rasd) – with a government and a parliament (in exile in Tindouf, Algeria, ed). For the other planetary hemicycle, however, it is no more than the extreme southern offshoot of Morocco. Spanish Sahara until 1975, the early 1960s saw the establishment of united independence groups under the Frente Polisario banner.

    The organisation, Spain having left the scene in 1976, presented its demands for self-determination to the United Nations. But it was Morocco that took advantage of the political vacuum left by Spain: on 6 November 1975, King Hassan II ordered more than 300,000 of his subjects, protected by 20,000 soldiers, to occupy the region to the south.

    Since then, the people of the desert have experienced exile and gradual fragmentation: a large portion lives in what Rabat considers to be its last southern region; another, much smaller portion lives in a strip of impassable land conquered by the Polisario army, called Liberated Territories, beyond the longest wall in the world, 2,700 kilometres, erected by Morocco and littered with mines; finally, about 200,000 people populate the refugee camps of Tindouf, Algeria.

    After decades of conflict, which Polisario faced with the support of Algeria, a UN agreement was reached in 1991 that, in addition to a truce, provided for the immediate organisation of a referendum on self-determination. More than 30 years have passed and that consultation is still waiting to be held.

    The demands of the Sahrawi people continue to be frustrated even when decisive bodies such as the EU Court of Justice accepts and supports them.

    « We are going to the January congress, » Mahfoud said again, « in a state of war after Morocco violated the ceasefire in 2020, and we learn with great sadness that we have been used as a bargaining chip by parliamentarians from an institution on which we put a lot of trust. We hope that this scandal will finally open the eyes of many’.

    One among many, from 2014, from the Moroccan Foreign Ministry’s Directorate for Relations with the EU reads in one passage, ‘Federica Mogherini … will lead European diplomacy …Coming from the Pd, which supported the motion against Morocco in the Italian parliament, she has adopted positions favourable to the separatists’ arguments on the Sahara issue. It is therefore necessary to act with Morocco’s friends (senior European officials and members of the Socialists & Democrats party, in particular Pargneaux and Panzeri) to make her aware of this issue… »

    THE SAHARAWI NATION ONLY FOR THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE

    For half the world – the African Union and almost all African countries, many American and Asian countries – the desert people, settled for centuries between southern Morocco, Mauritania and the Atlantic Ocean, is a nation – the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic (Rasd) – with a government and a parliament (in exile in Tindouf, Algeria, ed). For the other planetary hemicycle, however, it is no more than the extreme southern offshoot of Morocco. Spanish Sahara until 1975, the early 1960s saw the establishment of united independence groups under the Frente Polisario banner.

    The organisation, Spain having left the scene in 1976, presented its demands for self-determination to the United Nations. But it was Morocco that took advantage of the political vacuum left by Spain: on 6 November 1975, King Hassan II ordered more than 300,000 of his subjects, protected by 20,000 soldiers, to occupy the region to the south.

    Since then, the people of the desert have experienced exile and gradual fragmentation: a large portion lives in what Rabat considers to be its last southern region; another, much smaller portion lives in a strip of impassable land conquered by the Polisario army, called Liberated Territories, beyond the longest wall in the world, 2,700 kilometres, erected by Morocco and littered with mines; finally, about 200,000 people populate the refugee camps of Tindouf, Algeria.

    After decades of conflict, which Polisario faced with the support of Algeria, a UN agreement was reached in 1991 that, in addition to a truce, provided for the immediate organisation of a referendum on self-determination. More than 30 years have passed and that consultation is still waiting to be held.

    The demands of the Sahrawi people continue to be frustrated even when decisive bodies such as the EU Court of Justice accepts and supports them.

    « We are going to the January congress, » Mahfoud said again, « in a state of war after Morocco violated the ceasefire in 2020, and we learn with great sadness that we have been used as a bargaining chip by parliamentarians from an institution on which we put a lot of trust. We hope that this scandal will finally open the eyes of many’.

    Domani, 19/12/2022

    #Qatargate #Maroc #Parlement_Européen #Eva_Kaili #Antonio_Panzeri #Francesco_Giorgi #Qatar #Marocleaks #Mohamed_Belahrach #Moroccogate #DGED #Yassine_Mansouri