Response: The Moroccan Sahara issue is settled historically, socially and legally

There are endless documents that serve as evidence about the legitimacy of the allegiance of the tribes of the Sahara to the Moroccan Monarchy, which was transmitted by the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice in 1975.

Editorial Note: The following insights from the Moroccan Embassy in New Delhi pertain to two opinion pieces recently published in our editions.

On June 20th, and earlier on the 23rd of May 2024, your online website published two articles, the first entitled “New World, New Hope: The Struggle for a Free Western Sahara Continues” and the latter: “At Western Sahara: visiting a forgotten people,” which we consider to be lacking credibility and accuracy about the history of the Sahara. The articles were based on a unilateral opinion about the Moroccan Sahara issue without taking into consideration multiple factors and realities:

Morocco [Photo: Savvas Kalimeris/Unsplash]

At the outset, I would like to say that the Moroccan Sahara is as sensitive as any territorial issue for any other country. Therefore, in the context of the right of reply, we would like to state, in the beginning, that the Moroccan Sahara issue is settled historically, socially and legally. There are endless documents that serve as evidence about the legitimacy of the allegiance of the tribes of the Sahara to the Moroccan Monarchy, which was transmitted by the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice in 1975.

Your articles portray the Moroccan Sahara issue under a negative prospective despite the important socio-economic development that the whole region has been undergoing. They are devoid of true historical background while dismissing voluntarily important and crucial facts.

Although the articles do mention the polisario movement and the individuals ruling it, they fail to recall that the movement is housed, financed, and supported by Algeria. Algeria is a main player in the artificial conflict of the Moroccan Sahara, and without which involvement and active support this issue would have never existed.

Contrary to what was claimed in the articles about “Morocco impeding the organization of the referendum”, the United Nations concluded that it was impossible to hold the referendum because the polisario claimed wrongly that it represents the entire population of the region, denying the right of registration of members of the Sarahawis living in their homeland, Morocco.

At the international level, the polisario has never been recognized as a liberation movement, let alone as the only legitimate representative of the Sahrawis. In fact, the artificial Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is neither recognized by the UN nor the Arab League. Sri Lanka has never recognized the movement. The polisario does not have the legitimacy to speak on behalf and represent all Sahrawis, given that the utter majority of the population of the Moroccan Sahara elect their representatives democratically at different levels of local and national institutions, while there have never been transparent and democratic elections since its creation.

These articles go in length to document life in Tindouf camps. It is important to underline that in these camps there are many documented cases of slavery, torture, repression of the freedom of expression and dissent opinions as well as detention, deprivation from the freedom of movement, and child soldiers by the polisario, in defiance of their rights to be in school. There are many reports corroborating these human rights’ abuses.

As for the Moroccan-ness of the Sahara, it has been long established that this region was taken over in the 19th century by the Spanish colonial power. The Kingdom of Morocco holds a unique position in the history of colonization, as well as in the decolonization processes. In 1956, Morocco started to recover its territorial integrity gradually and through negotiated international agreements.

All these agreements were negotiated by Morocco and Spain following recommendations by the United Nations. Madrid Accords were concluded on 14th November 1975 by Spain, Morocco and Mauritania following the advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice on 16th October 1975 and the launching by Late His Majesty Hassan II, on 6th November 1975, of a peaceful “Green March”. The polisario did not exist during the Spanish colonial period. Morocco was the only country to claim the territory, at the international level (UN) as far back as early 1960’s when it registered it in the UN Decolonization (Fourth) Committee.

With regards to the defence wall that the Kingdom has built in its southern territory, which the articles wrongfully called “Wall of shame”, they are completely fallacious: This wall was built for purely defensive purposes to protect the inhabitants of the Moroccan Sahara and avoid the incursion of the armed guerrillas to the Moroccan territory and their killings and kidnappings of the population helped by the Algerian army. A report by the Secretary-General of the United Nations in October 20, 1988 described it as “the defensive sandstone wall”.

The articles also wrongfully claim that “Morocco broke a long-standing ceasefire dating back to 1991”. This is an absurd fabrication and the reality is exactly the opposite. The truth is that the polisario movement paralyzed the Guergarate passage (an act which the articles referred to as “peaceful protesters”), blocking access to a crucial route in the movement of people and goods across the Sahara, on which multiple communities in many sub-Saharan countries depend. After multiple warnings, the Kingdom, in order to restore regional order, intervened and secured once again the passage. Following the liberation of El Guergarate, the polisario separatists were quick to declare the end of the ceasefire and “the resumption of armed fight.

The economic activity that the southern provinces have witnessed is the result of a wise vision, and the investment of financial resources, for the well-being of local populations, in order to improve their standards of life, and include them in the economic process, through providing jobs, and wealth redistribution. The investment done by foreign companies is not done at the expense of local populations, in this context. It is done legally and in line with international law.

When it comes to journalists in the Moroccan Sahara, the Kingdom has made numerous reforms and established a legal framework to ease the liberty of the press. A press platform in the Sahara can be created upon a declaration only, with no need for approval. Furthermore, there has been no report of aggression or acts of violence against any journalist in the performance of his/her duties in the Sahara. No publication has been seized or seen its online access blocked.

Unlike what is said by certain parties, prisoners from the South of Morocco enjoy the same rights as the rest of their fellow countrymen, in accordance with the regulations related to detention facilities in Morocco. They are in regular contact with members of their families, from whom they receive regular visits and parcels, with no restrictions imposed, unlike their cousins detained in the camps.

In conclusion, the articles advocated false judgments and misleading opinions lacking in accuracy. They are contrary to both the ethics, which serious newspapers like yours should observe, and to the reality of the long-lasting artificial conflict, which finds its roots in the Cold War era, and survives only because of the Algerian regime position of preventing, by all means the completion of the territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Morocco, for a reason it knows. The fact is that Morocco is in its Sahara and the Sahara has been, is and will remain in Morocco.

Press Department, Embassy of the Kingdom of Morocco, New Delhi