Eg. as regards the present position, ie. stand-off:
The Polisario is first and foremost a nationalist organization, whose main goal is the independence of Western Sahara. It has stated that ideological disputes should be left for a future democratic Western Sahara to deal with. It views itself as a "front" encompassing all political trends in Sahrawi society, and not as a political party. As a consequence, there is no party programme. However, the Sahrawi republic's constitution gives a hint of the movement's ideological context: in the early 1970s, Polisario adopted a vaguely socialist rhetoric, in line with most national liberation movements of the time, but this was eventually abandoned in favour of a non-politicized Sahrawi nationalism. By the late 1970s, references to socialism in the republic's constitution were removed, and by 1991, the Polisario was explicitly pro-free-market.
The Polisario has stated that it will, when Sahrawi self-determination has been achieved, either function as a party within the context of a multi-party system, or be completely disbanded. This is to be decided by a Polisario congress upon the achievement of Western Sahara's independence.
...
Polisario has denounced terrorism and attacks against civilians,<9><10> and sent condolences to Morocco after the 2003 Casablanca bombings. It describes its struggle as a "clean war of national liberation". Since 1989, when the cease-fire was first concluded, the movement has stated it will pursue its goal of Western Sahara's independence by peaceful means as long as Morocco complies with the cease-fire conditions, which include arranging a referendum on independence, while reserving the right to resume armed struggle if terms are breached in its view.
International law and the UN appear to recognise Western Sahara's right to independence following decolonisation by Spain, which had been present in the these lands "opposite the Canary Islands" since the 13th century at least, and in a 'modern Western' legal sense since The
Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 between Portugal's King Jaão and Isabel and Fernando of Spain. At the time Franco's moribund government unilateraly and precipitately relinquished responsibility for the territory in 1975, Western Sahara was an administratively fully-integrated Province of Spain, equal to any other in the Nation. It is understood, in fact, under international law that Spain should recognise it has a duty to seek to ensure a legal and peaceful transition of status of its ex-colony to a free and independent State, but this is a duty, under the de-facto shadow of French (with strong economic ties to Morocco) and US (with strong strategic interest in Morocco) diplomacy, that Spain appears to have a limited ability to perform.
From the, Northern, Morocco point of view, of course, these are ancestral lands of the people, the Berber tribes, of that part of the world since far back in time before Roman or any other Empire. The people of Southern Morocco and Western Sahara and Northern Mauritania are the same people, the same essential mixture of tribes. To the North of the Atlas Mountains, the true geographical-cultural dividing-line in Morocco, traditional as well as modern life-styles begin to change. From Marrakech and Agadir north through Casablanca, Rabat and Tangiers and east through Meknés and Nador and Fez a network of new highways connects these centers of quite rapid economic development and modernisation, including much irrigated agricultural development, taking advantage of the EU's special terms for access for Moroccan agricultural produce to its markets. In recent years, a lot of Morocco's newly-generated wealth (growth rates over 10% these last several years) has been invested in Western Sahara, where infrastructure and economic development projects (and much administrative overhead, often in the form of government-paid sinecures) are essentialy subsidised by the North. Migration has also been encouraged from the North into Western Sahara, with economic incentives paid. In this way Morocco seeks to consolidate its de facto presence and legitimacy in the South. It is to be noted that, it seems, the origins of the current (the latest in a long line of different) Royal Family of
King Mohammed VI is in the South, and I have heard it said that if this King loses this opportunity to achieve sovereignty over the presently-occupied Western Sahara the Monarchy itself could fall.
What's at stake in Western Sahara and in the region, apart from the Sahrawi people's right to self-determination and Morocco's ancestral claims, monarchy and modern national pride? Well, economically there are rich fishing grounds on the Saharan Banks, and possible small oil and gas deposits on the continental shelf off the coast, and
Western Sahara's phosphate mines are the world's largest source of this vital ingredient of the fertilizers that help feed the world, with Morocco providing two-thirds at present of the supply.
Longer-term, in the best of circumstances, I could foresee intelligent development of this whole region making use of its abundant solar energy. Agricultural development would be possible in controlled evnvironments, and desalination of the Atlantic's waters made feasible by harnessing solar energy in the desert and distributing it through local, regional and international grids - such as
the Desertec project which, at the international level many people are already working on.
It is difficult to predict the immediate future, but there may be a return to guerilla war the way things are presently going. Polisario accepts that the option to choose autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty be included in the eventual UN-mandated Referendum, but Morocco does not accept that independence be an option. The absence of the independence option would render the referendum meaningless. It appears to be Morocco which most fears an unfavorable outcome.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
