Morocco's Prime Minister Saad-Eddine El Othmani. (Photo by BERTRAND GUAY/AFP via Getty Images)
US Poised to Flout Int'l Law as Part of Potential Morocco-Israel Normalization Deal
With such a decision, the United States, and the world at large, would face serious repercussions—the erosion of international norms regarding the right to self-determination.
Reports that Morocco would be willing to follow the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in normalizing relations with Israel in exchange for U.S. recognition of Moroccan control of Western Sahara are deeply concerning.
The United States has a responsibility to uphold international law, including the U.S.-supported referendum that would give Western Saharans a voice in deciding their future. Giving all that away just to score political points before the U.S. general election would be shameful and a stain on American foreign policy.
This radical shift in U.S. policy would set a dangerous precedent and call into question the integrity of the United States and its commitment to international efforts to find multilateral political solutions.
While largely off the radar for Western audiences, the 45-year-long conflict between the Polisario -- a local Sahrawi independence movement -- and Morocco over Western Sahara, a region bounded by Mauritania, Morocco, and the Atlantic Ocean, has pitted regional powers against each other and challenged policymakers and diplomats searching for a solution.
The conflict over Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony rich in natural resources, began in earnest after Spain withdrew from the region in 1975 and Morocco took the opportunity to occupy much of the disputed territory. Despite a ceasefire declared in 1991, the conflict over Sahrawi independence has continued to simmer, with Morocco claiming de facto sovereignty over 70 percent of the land that many locals view as the foundation of a future state.
As a result, Western Sahara is frequently considered to be the "last colony in Africa" and remains classified by the United Nations as a "Non-Self Governing Territory." Since the ceasefire, the U.N. has been working to organize a referendum to allow Western Saharans a vote on their future. To date the conflict has forced more than 90,000 Sahrawi refugees to flee into makeshift camps in the southern Algerian desert where most rely on the U.N. for nearly all basic necessities. Meanwhile, the Sahrawis who remain in Morocco-controlled Western Sahara have been subject to widely-reported human rights abuses.
A decision to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara may, on its face, seem an appealing way to end the conflict. But in reality, U.S. recognition of Moroccan claims to Western Sahara would preempt any opportunity for Western Saharans to determine their own political future and would delegitimize the work of the U.N., whose primary mandate in Western Sahara is to "organize and ensure a free and fair referendum."
This mandate is supported by a landmark advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice as well as repeated affirmations by the U.N. General Assembly. A decision by the United States to override these efforts would undermine the ability of the U.N. to play a constructive role in any conflict elsewhere.
Such a decision would also be a repudiation of Washington's own long-sought goals for the region. The United States has played a key role in helping to build support for a mutually agreeable political resolution to the conflict. This radical shift in U.S. policy would set a dangerous precedent and call into question the integrity of the United States and its commitment to international efforts to find multilateral political solutions.
With such a decision, the United States, and the world at large, would face serious repercussions -- the erosion of international norms regarding the right to self-determination, the weakening of the U.N.'s ability to resolve conflicts, as well as the diminished ability of the United States to play a leadership role internationally.
Whether the people of Western Sahara choose greater autonomy under Moroccan leadership or independence, it should be their choice, not something bargained away in hopes of boosting the current U.S. president's domestic political chances.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Reports that Morocco would be willing to follow the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in normalizing relations with Israel in exchange for U.S. recognition of Moroccan control of Western Sahara are deeply concerning.
The United States has a responsibility to uphold international law, including the U.S.-supported referendum that would give Western Saharans a voice in deciding their future. Giving all that away just to score political points before the U.S. general election would be shameful and a stain on American foreign policy.
This radical shift in U.S. policy would set a dangerous precedent and call into question the integrity of the United States and its commitment to international efforts to find multilateral political solutions.
While largely off the radar for Western audiences, the 45-year-long conflict between the Polisario -- a local Sahrawi independence movement -- and Morocco over Western Sahara, a region bounded by Mauritania, Morocco, and the Atlantic Ocean, has pitted regional powers against each other and challenged policymakers and diplomats searching for a solution.
The conflict over Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony rich in natural resources, began in earnest after Spain withdrew from the region in 1975 and Morocco took the opportunity to occupy much of the disputed territory. Despite a ceasefire declared in 1991, the conflict over Sahrawi independence has continued to simmer, with Morocco claiming de facto sovereignty over 70 percent of the land that many locals view as the foundation of a future state.
As a result, Western Sahara is frequently considered to be the "last colony in Africa" and remains classified by the United Nations as a "Non-Self Governing Territory." Since the ceasefire, the U.N. has been working to organize a referendum to allow Western Saharans a vote on their future. To date the conflict has forced more than 90,000 Sahrawi refugees to flee into makeshift camps in the southern Algerian desert where most rely on the U.N. for nearly all basic necessities. Meanwhile, the Sahrawis who remain in Morocco-controlled Western Sahara have been subject to widely-reported human rights abuses.
A decision to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara may, on its face, seem an appealing way to end the conflict. But in reality, U.S. recognition of Moroccan claims to Western Sahara would preempt any opportunity for Western Saharans to determine their own political future and would delegitimize the work of the U.N., whose primary mandate in Western Sahara is to "organize and ensure a free and fair referendum."
This mandate is supported by a landmark advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice as well as repeated affirmations by the U.N. General Assembly. A decision by the United States to override these efforts would undermine the ability of the U.N. to play a constructive role in any conflict elsewhere.
Such a decision would also be a repudiation of Washington's own long-sought goals for the region. The United States has played a key role in helping to build support for a mutually agreeable political resolution to the conflict. This radical shift in U.S. policy would set a dangerous precedent and call into question the integrity of the United States and its commitment to international efforts to find multilateral political solutions.
With such a decision, the United States, and the world at large, would face serious repercussions -- the erosion of international norms regarding the right to self-determination, the weakening of the U.N.'s ability to resolve conflicts, as well as the diminished ability of the United States to play a leadership role internationally.
Whether the people of Western Sahara choose greater autonomy under Moroccan leadership or independence, it should be their choice, not something bargained away in hopes of boosting the current U.S. president's domestic political chances.
Reports that Morocco would be willing to follow the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in normalizing relations with Israel in exchange for U.S. recognition of Moroccan control of Western Sahara are deeply concerning.
The United States has a responsibility to uphold international law, including the U.S.-supported referendum that would give Western Saharans a voice in deciding their future. Giving all that away just to score political points before the U.S. general election would be shameful and a stain on American foreign policy.
This radical shift in U.S. policy would set a dangerous precedent and call into question the integrity of the United States and its commitment to international efforts to find multilateral political solutions.
While largely off the radar for Western audiences, the 45-year-long conflict between the Polisario -- a local Sahrawi independence movement -- and Morocco over Western Sahara, a region bounded by Mauritania, Morocco, and the Atlantic Ocean, has pitted regional powers against each other and challenged policymakers and diplomats searching for a solution.
The conflict over Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony rich in natural resources, began in earnest after Spain withdrew from the region in 1975 and Morocco took the opportunity to occupy much of the disputed territory. Despite a ceasefire declared in 1991, the conflict over Sahrawi independence has continued to simmer, with Morocco claiming de facto sovereignty over 70 percent of the land that many locals view as the foundation of a future state.
As a result, Western Sahara is frequently considered to be the "last colony in Africa" and remains classified by the United Nations as a "Non-Self Governing Territory." Since the ceasefire, the U.N. has been working to organize a referendum to allow Western Saharans a vote on their future. To date the conflict has forced more than 90,000 Sahrawi refugees to flee into makeshift camps in the southern Algerian desert where most rely on the U.N. for nearly all basic necessities. Meanwhile, the Sahrawis who remain in Morocco-controlled Western Sahara have been subject to widely-reported human rights abuses.
A decision to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara may, on its face, seem an appealing way to end the conflict. But in reality, U.S. recognition of Moroccan claims to Western Sahara would preempt any opportunity for Western Saharans to determine their own political future and would delegitimize the work of the U.N., whose primary mandate in Western Sahara is to "organize and ensure a free and fair referendum."
This mandate is supported by a landmark advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice as well as repeated affirmations by the U.N. General Assembly. A decision by the United States to override these efforts would undermine the ability of the U.N. to play a constructive role in any conflict elsewhere.
Such a decision would also be a repudiation of Washington's own long-sought goals for the region. The United States has played a key role in helping to build support for a mutually agreeable political resolution to the conflict. This radical shift in U.S. policy would set a dangerous precedent and call into question the integrity of the United States and its commitment to international efforts to find multilateral political solutions.
With such a decision, the United States, and the world at large, would face serious repercussions -- the erosion of international norms regarding the right to self-determination, the weakening of the U.N.'s ability to resolve conflicts, as well as the diminished ability of the United States to play a leadership role internationally.
Whether the people of Western Sahara choose greater autonomy under Moroccan leadership or independence, it should be their choice, not something bargained away in hopes of boosting the current U.S. president's domestic political chances.