WHY THE TRUE FACTS MATTER
- From: tariq <tgazoulit@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 04:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
WHY THE TRUE FACTS MATTER
An answer by Moulay Ahmed
Maalaini
Journalist/ researcher
To « Why the facts matter » a response by the
Saharawi
Journalists and writers Union
To “Why the Maghreb matters” a policy report by
the
Potomac Institute and John Hopkins
University SAIS
INTRODUCTION :
On the 31st of March 2009, the Potomac institute for policy studies
and the conflict management program the Johns Hopkins University
(SAIS) has published a 15 page report entitled: “Why the Maghreb
Matters: threats, opportunities, and Options for Effective American
Engagement in North Africa”, the introduction of such report reflects
the importance of the Maghreb region to the United States of America.
The first paragraph of the introduction points out the main concern of
the Americans, and their priorities: “The Maghreb matters to the
United states for reasons ranging from its strategic geographic
position on the Mediterranean and at the western end of the Arab-
Muslim world, to the threats posed by the increase of terrorism in the
region, to the economic opportunities and resources it offers the US.
The US needs a policy to promote American interests in the area by
treating the five North African states as a region and working to
strengthen the economic and security ties among them – and with the US
and Europe- and by taking the lead in promoting a resolution to the
Western Sahara region conflict based on the proposal of autonomy
within Moroccan sovereignty now on the table at the United Nations
(UN) and supported by a bipartisan consensus in the US congress.”( see
Why The Maghreb matters 31 March 2009/Potomac institute for policy
studies)
Within few days, and exactly on the 5th of April 2009 the Union of
sahraoui journalists and writers responded in a 10 page report
entitled “Why the facts Matter” expressing its frustration to the
report mentioned above “the Saharawi journalists and writers Union
(UPES) would like to express its indignation and frustration with the
recent publication of a biased, un-factual, and patronising report
entitled “why the Maghreb Matters” (see why the facts matter/The
Sahraoui Journalists and writers Union/ 5 April 2009)
Although differences of points of view are perfectly acceptable when
it comes to disputes and conflicts, but the fact of the matter is
that defending the thesis of the Polisario front at the expense of
the historical reality, and the true facts of the conflict is not
acceptable at all , as the aim of this response basically to the 10
page response of the Union of Sahrawi journalists and writers is to
provide the Maghreban /Arab/and international opinion public the truth
and the whole truth surrounding the Western Sahara region conflict .
The process of decolonisation of Moroccan territories and the Western
Sahara issue
The process of decolonization of Moroccan territories which were
occupied by Spain took place through negotiations; in this respect
Morocco regained the north zone in April 1956, Tarfaya and Tan Tan in
1958, Sidi Ifni in 1969, and the Western Sahara region in 1975 .It is
not by chance that the general assembly resolutions adopted in 1965
and 1968 confirming the right to self-determination refer not only to
the inhabitants of Sidi Ifni, but also to those of Western Sahara. In
fact the UN recognize two different decolonization problems, that of
territories which at the time of colonization had no international
juridical status to which the procedure providing for self-
determination and independence applies, and other territories
constituting an integral part of state, this is clearly the case of
Western Sahara as the international court of justice in the Hague
expressly recognized that Western Sahara was not a territory without a
master but one over which Morocco exercised its sovereignty “ ….. That
at the time of colonization of Western Sahara by Spain, the Cherifian
state had a particular character is certain. The particularity lay in
that in hat it was founded on the religious link of Islam which united
the populations, and on the allegiance of the various tribes to the
sultan through the intermediary of their caids or sheikhs , more than
on national territory” ((4) see international court of justice /
advisory opinion 16/10/75) . From the Moroccan point of view
regaining Western Sahara in accordance with the treaty of Madrid of 14
November 1975 has marked the end of a continued struggle that lasted
over a century .the treaty in question created tension in the
northwest of Africa. The Algerians blamed Morocco for not recognising
that the sahraouis had the right to make their own decisions. What the
Algerians did not appear to realize was that the entire Moroccan
population, including sahraouis, had been fighting for the return of
the Sahara since 1884, when Spain laid claim to the area, and since
gaining the incomplete independence in 1956; Morocco had continued the
fight for unity and territorial integrity.
The legal ties between Western Sahara region and the kingdom of
Morocco were actually recognized in the treaties which took away
Moroccan independence. These treaties are the basis to assess the ties
that always existed between Western Sahara region and the Kingdom of
Morocco. To start with, there is the Anglo-Moroccan agreement of 13
march 1895, clause I of which reads as follows: “If this government
buys the building etc…in the place above – named From the above-
named company, no-one will have any claim to the Lands that are
between Wadi Draa and cape boujdour, and which are called Tarfaya
above-named, and all the lands behind it, because all this belongs to
the territory of Morocco”
Great Britain thus recognized that Moroccan territory extended to cape
boujdour, including SEGUIA AL HAMRA. Moreover, the letters annexed to
the treaty of 4 November 1911 signed between France and Germany,
state: “Germany will not intervene in any special agreements which
France and Spain may think fit to conclude with each other on the
subject of Morocco comprises all the part of northern Africa which is
situated between Algeria, French west Africa and the Spanish colony of
Rio de Oro (wadi dahab)”.
The Alaouite dynasty has ruled Morocco since the mid-seventeenth
century. In pre-colonial times, three of the Alaouite Sultans: Moulay
Rachid, Moulay Ismail, and Moulay Hassan, were already pursuing active
Saharan policies. In 1905-1906, Sultan Moulay Abdul Aziz sent military
support to sheikh Maouelainin to support him in his fight against the
French. Morocco continued the struggle against its division and
occupation at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Moroccan
resistance on the central government as well as the popular level,
prevented the entire occupation of Western Sahara and the rest of
Moroccan territory until the beginning of the last century, when this
became unavoidable. However, the fight continued in different forms
and finally led to the recognition of Morocco’s independence in 1956.
The Moroccan Spanish declaration of 7 April 1956 and one signed with
France on 2 march of the same year, contained confirmation of Spain’s
desire to “respect territorial unity guaranteed by international
treaties” and the commitment to “take all necessary steps to put this
into effect” . In the same year the Moroccan army of liberation
started organizing guerrillas for an offensive against the Spanish at
Ifni, and Western Sahara region. In 1957, the Moroccan Liberation army
succeeded in pushing the Spanish back to the coast. It was only with
the aid of French troops that Spain was able to re-establish itself in
Western Sahara.
After Morocco independence late King Mohammed V formally claimed
Western Sahara as an integral part of the Kingdom. In 1957, he set up
the “direction des affaires sahariennes et frontalieres”, and on 25
February 1958 he formally demanded the return of Western Sahara to the
motherland Morocco. He said in a famous speech in the little oasis
town of M’hamed on the edge of the Sahara: “we will continue to do
everything in our power to recover our Sahara and all that which, by
historical evidence and by the will of its inhabitants, belongs as of
right to our kingdom”
Late King Hassan II’s initiative in organizing a peaceful march to the
Sahara, in November 1975 led to the Madrid agreement of 14 November
1975, it was in practical terms, the first step towards the process of
decolonization of the west Saharan territories.
The green march (Al Massira al khadra in Arabic), could be described
as the master stroke which resolved the dispute between Morocco and
Spain. Plans for the march, which was named after the holy colour of
Islam, were first announced by King Hassan II on 16 October
1975.recruting offices were set up throughout morocco, and by 20 of
October as many as 524,000 volunteers were said to have registered.
The march caught the imagination of the Moroccan people. It was
portrayed as a holy march , and its participants were told that they
would be armed only with the coran and they should consider themselves
as Mujahidin, or holy warriors, in a campaign to reclaim Islamic
territory from the Spanish invaders. The marchers numbered 350,000
volunteers and gradually assembled in a vast tent city near
Tarfaya .It became evident to the Spanish government as much as to
western observers of this remarkable mobilization, that King Hassan II
would be unable to call off the march or fail in his pledge to send
the marchers across the border even if he had wished to do so , he
said : “ I can not turn 350, 000 Moroccans who have responded to my
call with enthusiasm into 350,000 frustrated Moroccans”.
As soon as Spain accepted the reopening of negotiations, on 9 November
1975, late king Hassan II ordered the marchers to return to their
homes. On 14 November 1975, an accord was signed in Madrid to crown
the negotiations with Spain by Morocco and Mauritania, in accordance
with article 33 of the United Nations charter, and resolution 380.The
difference of opinion over Western Sahara which, until 1975, divided
Morocco and Spain does not therefore date from the time when the
United Nations organization took an interest in the issue. It dates
back to the period in morocco’s history when, during the nineteenth
century, the country was faced with the ambitious appetites of the
colonial powers and their desire to divide Morocco in order to
subjugate it.
King Mohammed VI, immediately after his enthronement in 1999, set
forth a development strategy built on social and economic development.
Initially, the new young King is seen as a reformer, keen to
liberalize the economy, root out corruption and establish the rule of
law and democracy. When he was crown prince he was beside his father
late king Hassan II in most the national and international activities,
and in particular when it comes to the Western Sahara region issue. In
this respect during summer of 1996 a delegation of the Polisario front
led by Bachir Mustapha Said met the crown prince then Sidi Mohammed,
that was in practical terms his first direct and secret meeting with
the Polisario delegation in Morocco, the aim of the meeting was about
the application of Autonomy principle in western Sahara, in fact the
Polisario delegation was to a certain extent in favour of such
settlement and also of continuing direct negotiations with the late
king Hassan II
The sahraoui Arab Democratic republic
The “SADR” is a contradiction with the request by Polisario front for
a referendum on self-determination. the unilateral proclamation by
Polisario of the SADR is a violation to the international law,
particularly that the sahraoui Arab Democratic Republic has no
territorial existence, it is set up in Tindouf inside Algeria
territories, it has no attribute of sovereignty, and exists only on
the territory of a foreign country. As to the recognition of the
“SADR” no European country, no Arab and Muslim country apart from
Algeria recognizes the “SADR”. An imminent figure of the Polisario
front Mustapha Bouh ( who went back to Morocco), admitted the
following “we must be clear that the diplomatic campaign was a
relative failure in the Arab world and in the Middle East, the
Polisario and the SADR were very weak, not even Yasser Arafat wanted
to have relations with us, nor did China ….. the majority of the
capitals that were to be opening diplomatic relations with SADR were
doing under the friendly and insistent pressure of Algeria ( see
interview with Mustapha Bouh , 5 august , 2005 with ESISC) .
As to the number of countries which actually still recognized the “
SADR” is 27 countries after the withdrawal of the recognition of at
least 52 countries , among others : Angola, Ghana, Iran, Syria,
Peru, Nigeria, India, El Salvador, Kenya (source:http://
www.worldstatesmen.org/western_sahara.html)
Algeria an Obstructive party to the conflict
One aspect of the present deadlock is basically a result to the
Algerian non commitment to its explicit statement, which says that it
does not consider itself as part of the conflict. Facts on the ground
show unfortunately that Algeria is the main and strategic supporter of
the non elected and non democratic Polisario.
In his report of 19 February 2002, the former secretary general of the
UN Kofi Anan informed the security council on the visit of the
Algerian president to Houston on 2 November 2001during which he told
the UN secretary general personal envoy James Baker that Algeria and
the Polisario are ready to discuss and negotiate the splitting of the
territory as a political solution to the dispute over western Sahara.
This initiative proves Algiers direct involvement in the conflict .In
addition, Algeria continues under the leadership of Bouteflika to
exert a direct control on the refugee camps, particularly by strictly
controlling and limiting the movement of sahraoui refugees. Algeria
and its president should be held responsible for the non-
implementation of the convention on the refugees’ status of 1951, by
virtue of which any contracting state, which is Algeria in the case of
sahraoui refugees on its soil, gives the refugees living regularly in
its territory the right to choose to remain, or to move freely.
In the 28 February 2006 Algeria took part in the festivities of the
Polisario for the 30th anniversary of its creation, there is no doubt
that Polisario would not organize such a big military parade in
Tifariti without the approval of the army approval. For the same
occasion Bouteflika seized the opportunity to send a message to the
leadership of Polisario where he described Morocco being “the
colonizer country”.
When it comes to the recent developments concerning the Moroccan
substantial autonomy proposal. The secretary general personal former
envoy for Sahara Van Walsum stated (in his press conference at the
headquarter of the UN, after presenting his report to the UN chief)
that the Moroccan proposal to grant substantial autonomy to the
western Sahara “was the result of an extended political process of
national and international consultations” .As to the role of Algeria
in the conflict Mr Walsum recognized the pre-eminent role of Algeria,
“Algeria has in this whole dossier (Sahara issue) played an absolutely
pre-eminent dominant role ever since1975” this is the third time that
a senior UN official dealing directly with the western Sahara issue
that recognized in a diplomatic Worthing to what extent the Algerians
are directly involved in the western Sahara dispute ,and even in the
decision making on behalf of the separatist movement called
Polisario
During the last decade a number of Algerian politicians, and even
former policy makers and military generals have expressed openly
their total disagreement with Boutaflika’s politics towards the future
of western Sahara .Anouar Haddam one of the leaders of the Islamic
Salvation Front told “ALKHABAR” a daily Algerian newspaper “ Sahraouis
would never agree to separate themselves from Morocco” . Louisa Hanoun
the general secretary of the Algerian labour party said “the western
Sahara issue is an artificial problem” she added “Morocco is the only
Maghreban country that is facing external plans ton split its
territories”.
The former Algerian prime minister Abdelhamid Ibrahimi, insists that
the leadership of the army is behind the dispute over western Sahara
dispute, in his latest interview with the daily newspaper “ATAJDID” on
the 12 December 2006 he said “the autonomy plan was discussed when I
was prime minister with president Benjdid, provided that Morocco
preserves its sovereignty over its territory, including foreign and
defence policies. The agreement was made, and president Benjdid did
not refuse”
When it comes to the army leadership it is worth mentioning that the
former general and defence minister Khalid Nezar advocates a political
solution to the conflict, he said “the settlement of western Sahara
conflict should be achieved through the application of such
substantial autonomy as proposed by king Mohamed VI”
It seems that although the political leaders and most of the former
generals of the Algerian army are explicitly against their president’s
policy towards the Sahara, Bouteflika is determined to follow the
instructions of the generals with the aim to achieving the strategic
goals as seen by the Algerian army intelligence leadership which have
nothing to do with the wellbeing of sahraouis
Morocco’s autonomy plan as a practical solution to the conflict
On Wednesday, April 11, 2007 the Moroccan government submitted its
proposal for a substantial autonomy for the Western Sahara region to
the newly nominated secretary general of the United Nations
organization, taking the first step, which the international community
has called for repeatedly, toward a political direct dialogue with the
parties concerned i.e. : Algeria and the Polisario front.
The conflict between the Kingdom of Morocco, and the Algerian-backed
Polisario front, dates back more than three decades. From 1975 until
an UN-brokered cease-fire agreement in 1991.
The terms of 1991 cease-fire agreement were not fully met until august
2005, when the Polisario, under pressure from the international
community released the over 400Moroccan prisoners of war. During their
very long capture the Moroccan POW’s faced barbaric torture, and
forced labour from both: the Algerian and Polisario military
intelligence services. On April 2003, the France libertés foundation
led an international mission of inquiry on the conditions of detention
of Moroccan POW long held in the refugee camps in Algeria, the French
foundation produced detailed accusations of torture, forced labour,
arbitrary detentions, and summary executions of captured soldiers,
that revealed the true nature of the Polisario front, which had long
portrayed itself as a victim.
Allowing the sahraoui people to vote on a referendum seems like a
simple solution, but the Polisario had insisted on restricting the
voter lists locked that process into more than six years of fruitless
discussion. The UN became aware of the fact that referendum is in
practical terms impossible to carry out since sahraouis do not live
only in Morocco, but also in Algeria, Mauritania, and Mali. This means
simply that there should be a change of these countries borders, in
order to organize a just and fair referendum, since the countries
concerned would totally reject the idea, the general secretary of the
UN confirmed that the organization of such referendum is impossible
politically and technically.
Recognizing this deadlock, the UN shifted its approach to encouraging
direct negotiations between Morocco and the Polisario. Even if the
idea of autonomy is not new, The Moroccan Proposal for substantial
Autonomy is the first, and the only practical proposed framework for a
political solution, and from it the two sides can craft a final
agreement. It preserves Moroccan sovereignty, but gives the Western
Sahara sufficient autonomy to become effectively self-governing. The
project consists of giving Western Sahara a substantial autonomy
within Moroccan sovereignty. According to the autonomy proposal
sahraouis will have an elected regional parliament, with power over
local policies in terms of management, and decisions, and president of
a local government, the right to create local laws, as long as they do
not contradict Morocco’s constitution, regional judiciary to rule
regarding local laws, and control of local police, schools, economy,
infrastructure, taxation and housing. The Kingdom of Morocco would
control external defence and foreign relations, national judiciary,
religious affairs, with King Mohamed VI as the highest religious
authority.
The Moroccan proposal is an answer to the UN Security Council
resolution and to the constant international community appeals for a
political solution to the Western Sahara issue, as it is a fruit of
national and international consultations. The King Mohamed VI
supervised closely the process of drawing up such a proposal that
guarantees peace, security, and stability in the region of North
Africa on one hand, and gives the Western Sahara sufficient autonomy
to become effectively self-governing on the other hand. The UN
charter, the ultimate international jurisprudence stipulates that self-
determination must take into account the territory integrity and
unity, so autonomy remains one of the best solutions for self –
determination, this type of substantial autonomy exists in the most
highly developed countries across the world.
The philosophy behind the Moroccan proposal is that Sahraouis claims
will be satisfied, and Algeria will keep its dignity, provided Morocco
remains sovereign over its southern territories .
Although both Algeria and Polisario refused the Moroccan proposal,
before it was submitted to the UN, and even before finding out about
the content of it .the secretary general personal former envoy for
Sahara Van Walsum recognized ( in his press conference at the
headquarter of the UN , after presenting his report to the UN
chief) the role of Algeria in the conflict “Algeria has in this
whole dossier (Sahara issue) played an absolutely pre-
eminent ,dominant role ever since1975” this is the first time that a
senior UN official dealing directly with the western Sahara issue that
recognized explicitly in a diplomatic Worthing the extent of
Algerians direct involvement in the western Sahara dispute ,and even
in the decision making on behalf of the separatist movement called
Polisario while Algiers keeps insisting that “it is not a part in the
conflict”.
The conflict impede the construction of the Arab Maghreb Union (UMA),
hindering any form of agreement between the neighbouring countries,
while keeping sahraoui families from returning home to live among
their own .It also created a center of tension in the north west of
Africa encouraged by the proliferation of human traffic, in particular
in the form of clandestine immigration, weapons trafficking, drugs,
the deviation of goods in the camps as well as the appearance of
terrorism.
The UN charter, the ultimate international jurisprudence stipulates
that self-determination must take into account the territory integrity
and unity, so autonomy remains one of the best solutions for self –
determination, this type of substantial autonomy exists in the most
highly developed countries across the world
THE LACK OF DEMOCRATY AND VIOLATION
OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN TINDOUF REFUGEE CAMPS
The lack of real democratic practices in the refugee camps in Tindouf
reflects undoubtedly The manner of arbitrary arrest were carried out,
according to “an independent committee of inquiry into allegations of
violations of human rights, crimes, abuses and various other
irregularities brought against the Polisario front” some victims were
brought to the polisario’s administration complex at Rabouny, not far
from Tindouf, or to the offices of the polisario military security.
They were then transferred in secret to places of detention and
torture, mainly to Rachid prison, known within sahraoui refugees as
the black prison. Others were arrested at work, during their military
training, or in their camps.generaly speaking the victims of arbitrary
arrest were transferred to Rachid prison in early evening or at night,
hands tied behind the back, eyes blindfolded or the whole face hooded
to prevent recognition of their captors or the place they were being
taken, at this particular stage detainees were not informed of the
charges against them.
During the last three decades torture was used by the military
services of the Polisario with the aim to forcing detainees to confess
to being agents to foreign countries, or involved in any forms of
conspiracy. According to the independent committee of inquiry into
violations of human rights by the Polisario, it is in possession of a
detailed list of 43 people who died under torture, or as a direct
consequence of the ill-treatments suffered. This list needs to be
completed, and up dated as the figure seems to be higher than what it
is disclosed. A number of witnesses who fled to Morocco described the
phenomenon of “summary executions” without any legal procedures,
detainees who were spared from being executed, were not informed of
their conviction or any charges. They were in most cases subject to
forced labour, during the period of torture, prisoners could easily
experienced days without food. Medical care is in practical terms
inexistent.
THE DIVERSION OF HUMANITARIAN AID
Sahraoui refugees in the Tindouf camps depend on humanitarian aid
donated by
Numerous UN organizations, in addition to international non-
governmental
Organizations. It is believed and even proved that much of the
humanitarian aid does
not reach the refugees, instead it is In most cases sold on the black
market in
neighbouring countries by the Polisario. In this Respect the
international community
have called in numerous occasions for the Implementation of a census,
and an audit
system to make sure that the management of the Humanitarian aid is
transparent. Both
Algeria, and Polisario has refused to allow independent Oversight of
its management of
humanitarian assistance. Important quantities of diverted
International humanitarian
aid sent for refugees in Tindouf camps have been found on the Markets
in Algeria, and
Mauritania, but also in Mali and Niger, some still in their original
Packaging. The sums
recovered would be used to finance the front, and also its leader’s
way Of life, at the
expense of sahraoui refugees. These diversions according to the report
of the US
Committee for refugees published in year 2000 “Humanitarian workers
have reported
that more than 30% of the children from 5 to 12 years old were
underfed, more than
70% of the Children of less than 5 years old suffered from anaemia”,
in its 2001 report
the committee announced “more than 15000 children are in need of
shoes”, and finally
in its 2003 report, its Said “some donors in private, have asked for
a control of the
distribution of food to Make sure that the political and military
leaders were not
diverting the aid”
HUMAN RIGHTS ASPECTS AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
The Polisario is severely accused of human rights abuses : the
detention, killing ,and the abuse treatment of Moroccan prisoners of
war from late 70’s to 2006, other accusations are that a big number of
sahraouis are kept in the Tindouf camps against their will, and do not
enjoy freedom of expression. In a report published in 2003; Amnesty
International concluded that “freedom of expression, association, and
movement continued to be restricted in the camps controlled by the
Polisario near Tindouf in south western Algeria”.
The Polisario remains a totalitarian military and political movement,
with single party system, from inside the Polisario reports are
talking about more than 6000 sahraoui children, and adolescents are
currently living in Cuba, in most of the cases against the will of
their parents, and under the pretext of schooling, some of them are
subject to obligatory military training.
A full and comprehensive report of an independent committee of
inquiry into allegations of violation human rights,
crimes ,abuses ,and various other irregularities brought against the
Polisario front, was submitted to the special political and
decolonisation committee (fourth committee) of the United Nations on
the 4th of October 2006.This 40page documented report deals with the
following aspects:
• The condition of detention, the use of torture, the absence of even
the minimum level of judicial process, malnutrition of prisoners, and
the absence of medical care.
• Forced labour , rape ,and The abdication of Moroccan citizens within
the international recognized frontiers of Morocco
• An education system more concerned with indoctrination than learning-
Allegations of deportation of sahraoui children to Cuba
• Allegations of misdirection of humanitarian aid by the leadership of
the polisario
• The separation of families.
Freedom of movement
To make sure that Sahraoui refugees, whether they are free or not to
leave the camps in Tindouf Human rights Watch interviewed tens of
Sahraouis , and asked them questions such as whether they used the
official border crossing or took a clandestine route ; whether they
told others of their plans or intended destination . according to the
latest report of Human rights watch, of December, 2008, under the
title “Human rights in western Sahara and the Tindouf refugee camps”
former camp residents now living in western Sahara region confirmed
that when they left the camps they concealed their ultimate
destination, fearing that Polisario would block their departure if it
became known"(human rights report , december , 2008) these same
individuals for the most part said they kept their plans secret from
others in the camps. They said they did so not only out of fear that
the Polisario might prevent them from leaving, but also because the
prevailing feeling in the camps is that is shameful to opt for life "
under Moroccan occupation" "They taught us to hate Morocco from when
we were young, that the Moroccans would torture and mistreat you" said
a former Polisario official who left the camps by the end of 2006 and
settled in Al-Ayoun , and this is how he left according to a statement
he made to Human rights watch : " I left my wife , child, and six
other relatives , in a truck . The owner of the truck is an officer in
the security forces. When we reached the border post, he talked to the
guards, and there was no problem; my parents and brothers are still in
the camps, they have suffered no reprisals, because we left. The
authorities came to my father and asked where i went, and he answered
Mauritania, and that was it. (human rights watch interview, El –Ayoun,
march 8, 2008 . The source asked to remain anonymous, fearing
reprisals against family members who where still inn the refugee
camps)
Hamra checkpoint, the main Algerian- Mauritanian border point, is a
long drive on extremely difficult roads from the main cluster of
refugee camps in Tindouf. Polisario and Algerian guards the
checkpoint, registering the ID’s of drivers and passengers, sahraouis
told human rights watch, if the guards asked the reason for their
travel, sahraouis leaving for Moroccan controlled areas have to lie,
explaining that they were travelling to Mauritania to visit relatives
or for other purposes. The guards then allowed them to pass. Some
Sahraoui refugees in Tindouf said that they have to obtain an
authorization from the Polisario leadership headquarters in Rabouni
camp to leave only to Mauritania; others said they got the approval at
the border, provided they mention that they are actually going for a
visit to Mauritania.
Yeslim Ould Ismail Ould el-Melkhi, a pharmacist, who left the Tindouf
camps in April 2007, put it this way: “ it is pretty chaotic situation
in the camps . Everybody is preoccupied with trying to provide for his
basic needs, if you want to leave, you just make the necessary
arrangements, and you head for the Hamra checkpoint. You show your ID,
they write your name down, and they let you pass. They understand the
problems that people face in the camps. You must not tell them you are
going to Morocco, but otherwise they do not care if you leave “(human
rights watch interview with Yeslim ould el-Melkhi, foum el –oued ,
march 5, 2008)
Abdellah Mala’ainine, who left the camps for Morocco in 2006, also
said that leaving was not hard, provided you keep being discreet about
your destination: “you keep the fact that you might want to go to
Morocco to yourself, otherwise you might be seen as inciting
others” ( human rights watch interview with Abdullah Mala’ainine, El –
Ayoun , march 5, 2008)
Another possible way to leave the Tindouf refugee camps is the UN –
administered program of family visits. This program involves flying
Sahraoui families from the Western sahara region to the Tindouf
refugee camps and vice versa, for visits lasting five days. According
to statistics provided by the UNHCR, the program arranged visits for
6638 sahraouis between its launch on March 2004 and October 3, 2008.
Almost half of this total traveled from the Tindouf camps to the
Moroccan –controlled territory, had chosen to remain rather than
return, according to the UNHCR. (Human rights watch telephone
interview with Sergio call- Norena, UNHCR chief of operators for the
Western Sahara, may 9, 2008 . Calle- Norena left this post later
2008).
The process of defection from the Tindouf camps and rallying to
Morocco started in practical terms at the end of the fighting,
hundreds of sahraoui refugees have decided to leave Tindouf and to
return to Morocco, among them political and military leaders, head of
tribes, and hundreds of Polisario army officers of all levels. This
situation, which is due in part to the failure to reach a settlement
as well as the realities of the four refugee camps in the Tindouf
area, has led to what many Sahraouis denounce as the concentration of
power in thee hands of few political stagnation, and lack of
transparency , freedom of speech and movement, in this respect the
brother of El Ouali Ould Mustapha Sayed, the Polisario’s first
secretary general expressed on 31 October 2006 serious misgivings
about the current leadership : “ many sahraoui officials alongside of
simple soldiers, fled to Morocco because they could no longer stand
the chaotic, static, and unjust status quo …. Some even say that this
exodus towards Morocco and other destinations suits the Polisario’s
leadership and that, in some ways, they encourage it. This because the
Polisario’s leadership refuses to change its practices, reviews its
policies and positions, or responds to the totality or at least to the
majority of its critic’s claims”( see “arretons l’hemorragie” at
www.arso.org/opinions/baba Sayed38.htlm)
Due to the increasing number of Sahraoui refugees who decided to go
back to Morocco after an over three decades of sufferings, and making
use of the late king Hassan ii appeal “the homeland is clement and
merciful”. Polisario has prevented the Sahraoui populations from
fleeing the four Tindouf refugee camps, following an order issued by
their leader Mohammed Abdelaziz, during November 2007. According to
the European committee in charge of the Western Sahara issue, this
blockade was ordered by Abdelaziz on the pretext that “if the return
movement to Morocco continues at the current pace, the camps will be
emptied”
Although the Polisario is making sure that no refugee is allowed to
flee the Tindouf camps particularly to Morocco, it seems that the
number has increased over the five years or so , in this respect it
is worth mentioning the following among others , as nearly one
hundred Sahraouis have returned to Morocco during the last week of
February 2008 to Morocco from Tindouf camps , three groups consisting
of several persons that took part in Gjijimat congress held during
December 2008 in Tifariti region, in the Sahara, these refugees
accompanied with 20 children, arrived in the border town of El Karkrat
( 380 km south of Dakhla), in response to the late Hassan ii call “
homeland clement and merciful”, convinced , according to their
statements, that the Moroccan autonomy initiative in he region of the
Sahara under Moroccan sovereignty offers promising prospects that meet
the aspirations of the region’s people and the consecration of unity
and development . Some of these of people expressed their joy and
happiness to have returned to the motherland and their support to the
autonomy project proposed by Morocco. They said that their return to
the motherland is part of the renewal of their allegiance to his
majesty king Mohammed vi ( a French- speaking daily “ aujourd’hui le
Maroc” reported on Wednesday 27/12/2007)
The number of sahraoui political, military and tribe leaders in
addition to hundreds of families who opted to regain Morocco is
increasing; according to the Chairman of the royal advisory council
for Saharan affairs Khali Hena Ould Errachid around six thousands
sahraouis have regained Morocco. Reports coming on daily basis from
the Tindouf refugee camps describe the deteriorating social and
economic situations in addition to the lack of freedom of expression
and movement , in this context the chairman of CORCAS made it clear
that Morocco is determined to bring back home all refugees .
(see:www.corcas.com)
Western sahara and terrorism
In terms of the Salafi-Jihadists residing in the Maghreb and Sahel
region, the prospects for peace in the Western Sahara are viewed as
anathema to their goals. As long as Algiers and Rabat are at odds and
Morocco is not a member of the African Union, these groups are able to
traverse the region with near impunity.
Why Salafis Thrive on the Status Quo?
In October 2004, the African Union established its African Center for
the Study and Research on Terrorism in Algiers. In essence, this
center is intended to serve as a medium for cooperation among all
member states in the continent's fight against its endemic terrorist
threat. Since its formation, however, the center has been plagued by a
number of deficiencies, not the least of which is its inability to
secure an individual to assume the directorship. Aside from the usual
troubles the AU has in establishing such centres, the fundamental
obstacle is membership. As Kurt Shillinger states, the center's
effectiveness is contingent on its ability to build "strong
cooperative ties between the center in Algiers and the key states
where concerns about terrorism and capacity to respond converge… This
requires resolving the conflict over Western Sahara in order to
integrate Morocco—the only African state not in the AU—into
continental counter-terrorism strategies" (Business Day
(Johannesburg), October 7, 2005).
The non-involvement of Morocco is excellent news to the Salafi
insurgents operating in the Sahel. Not only is intelligence not being
circulated among key interlocutors, such as Algeria and Morocco, but
these same countries would remain unlikely collaborators in counter-
terrorism operations. This point was underlined by U.S. Ambassador for
Counter-Terrorism Henry Crumpton when he made a number of very
poignant remarks toward the end of his February 2006 speech in
Algiers, noting Morocco's absence from the AU and the crucial role the
kingdom can play in helping resolve regional security issues.
The Madrid commuter bombings may prove to be the single event that
brings about the resolution to the Western Sahara issue. The attacks,
perpetrated by North Africans residing in Spain raised awareness—both
in Spain and Morocco—of the threat posed to Spain by North African
Salafi-Jihadists. In response to this and the almost daily news
reports of illegal North Africans migrating to Spain from the Western
Sahara, Madrid will likely advocate a just and widely acceptable
solution to help stabilize its southern border.
Although close cooperation between Algiers and Rabat cannot be assumed
initially, a widely acceptable Western Sahara resolution will
significantly contribute to a thawing of relations between these two
capitals. In any case, Maghrebi security is certain to be the primary
beneficiary; with Morocco integrated into regional counter-terrorism
operations and intelligence-sharing, Salafi-Jihadist groups will be
faced with a united front. No longer will they be able to operate
across the region's borders with impunity, or access weapons, finances
and auxiliary personnel with the same level of ease.
Algeria and to a far lesser extent, Morocco were hard hit by waves of
terror attacks carried out by AQIM, al-Qaida in the Maghreb.
Developing and promoting stability and security in each country and
enhancing prospects for greater political freedoms and broader
economic growth will be a n important step towards the fight against
terrorism .The issue of terrorism remains vital to the economic and
development of the region's future to promote inter-Maghrebi
cooperation, trade and unity. With some foresight the leaders of the
region should seriously look into launching a 'Benelux' type model
that would permit the five countries to excel from trade, business,
education and even defence.
In 1989 the Arab Maghreb Union (UMA) was created. However, it was
frozen in 1994 as a result of diverging political views between
Morocco and Algeria over the Western Sahara,
Based in neighbouring Algeria, the Polisario has been at the core of
tense relations between the Algerians and the Moroccans. The need to
resolve the conflict over the Western Sahara is the key to the door of
regional cooperation, and the fight of terrorism which should be
eradicated.
CONCLUSION
It is notable that many statements put forward by the report by the
Sahraoui journalists and writers union (UPES) that claim to be
Independent has no basis in history and international law. Therefore
I
Would like to remind the members of the Sahraoui journalists and
writers,
and particularly those who have written the answer to the report by
the
Potomac institute and John Hopkins the following:
1- the Polisario can not be the sole and legitimate representative of
Sahraouis , especially
if we take into account that two third of sahraouis live under
Moroccan sovereignty and most of them fully support the substantial
autonomy project . At the same time , some of those living as refugees
in Tindouf, south west of Algeria back the autonomy seeing it a
solution that guaranties political , economic and social rights of
sahraouis
2- Since the war brought about no solutions, the UN tried to organize
a referendum
Based upon identification. Nevertheless the UN became aware of the
fact that the referendum is impossible to carry out since sahraouis do
not live only in Morocco, but also in Algeria, Mauritania, and Mali.
This means that they should be a change of these borders, in order to
organize a just and fair referendum is impossible politically and
technically.
3- The Moroccan proposal meets international standards, transfers
competences, and
Creates local institutions (legislative and executive) within the
framework of Moroccan sovereignty, while leaving room for
negotiations, it is notable that autonomy is an advanced form of self-
determination
.
- Prev by Date: > Democrat's Failure - Iraq Sez No Extension of US Pullback Date From Cities
- Next by Date: > Buckwheat's Failure - Fears of Yemen Turning Into Another Afghanistan
- Previous by thread: > Democrat's Failure - Iraq Sez No Extension of US Pullback Date From Cities
- Next by thread: WHY THE TRUE FACTS MATTER
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
