Western Sahara’s Decolonization

The Sahrawis Are at a Crossroads After 50 Years of Occupation

On November 6, 1975, King Hassan II organised the Green March (la Marche Verte), a non-violent protest where approximately 350,000 Moroccans crossed into Western Sahara, which was then a Spanish colony. This event marked the beginning of Morocco and Mauritania’s occupation of the territory after Spain withdrew, following the signing of the Madrid Accords. This action is considered the start of the ongoing dispute and conflict over Western Sahara despite the Sahrawis request for independence. Photo credit: Public domain

On 6 November, the Sahrawis marked 50 years of occupation by the Moroccan kingdom, and continued resistance by activists, risking street violence, arrests, custodial torture, forced disappearances, and rapes by the occupation’s security forces.

The anniversary came at an ominous time for the cause of Sahrawi liberation. The US, UK, and Europe, especially France, are bringing ever more pressure on the international community to legitimise the illegal occupation of Western Sahara by Morocco, which in turn is handing over the occupied resources for Western countries to loot.

Intensifying armed resistance, the Sahrawi People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) of the Polisario Front (PF), the sole UN-recognised representative of the Sahrawi people, has been launching daily attacks on the occupation forces from the liberated territory in the east.

On Saturday 8 November, the SPLA bombarded the command, control, and communications center of the Moroccan occupying army in the Haouza sector, in a fourth consecutive day of attack, after hitting its artillery positions and a supply base in the Guelta sector on 6 and 7 November. Earlier on 5 November, the SPLA targeted the entrenchments of Moroccan soldiers in the Mahbas sector.

The attacks have inflicted “heavy losses in lives and equipment,” according to the Defense Ministry of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), the official name of Western Sahara. Its government, headed by the PF, which led the independence struggle against Spanish colonisation, controls only a fifth of its territory in the eastern edge, wrested back in 1979 from Mauritania, which had occupied it in collusion with Spain in 1976.

However, the Moroccan occupation of 80% of this phosphate-rich land along the fishery-rich Atlantic coast is protected by a 2,700 km-long berm built by US companies Northrop and Westinghouse. The world’s second-longest wall, reinforced with the longest minefield, it is among the largest military infrastructures on the planet, built to protect the occupation forces from guerrilla attacks by the Polisario.

“A very dangerous and unprecedented departure”

Firing by the SPLA across this wall has intensified over the last days in the wake of what the PF described as “a very dangerous and unprecedented departure” from “the international status of Western Sahara as a decolonisation issue” in the UN Security Council’s resolution on 31 October.

The resolution was adopted to renew the mandate of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO). However, the resolution undermines the very purpose of the mission: to organize a referendum to allow the Sahrawis to exercise their right to self-determination. Instead, it speculates that the Moroccan proposal of autonomy under its sovereignty “could represent a most feasible outcome”.

It went on to call on Morocco and the PF to negotiate “without preconditions, taking as basis Morocco’s Autonomy Proposal, with a view to achieving a final and mutually acceptable political solution that provides for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara.”

The statement is self-contradictory, as the “Autonomy proposal” cedes sovereignty over Western Sahara to Morocco, while “self-determination” leads to the sovereign state of SADR.

The resolution was drafted by the US. Its UN representative called it a “historic vote,” describing Morocco’s proposal for autonomy under its sovereignty as “the only basis for a just and lasting solution to the dispute”.

Representatives of the UK also chimed in, describing it as “the most credible, viable and pragmatic basis for a solution”. The French delegate went on to insist that “Autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty is the framework within which this issue must be resolved.”

“I am pleased to share with you my satisfaction with the content of the latest Security Council resolution,” King Mohammed VI said in a speech soon after, thanking the US president Donald Trump, and “also” the “friends in” the UK, Spain, and “in particular, France”.

“We are living through a pivotal moment and a decisive turning point in the history of modern Morocco,” he declared. “From now on, there will be a before and an after 31 October 2025.”

The date has been declared a public holiday in Morocco. Minutes after the resolution was passed, celebrations erupted across Morocco. However, the flag-waving, car-honking, the blaring speakers, and sloganeering on the streets of several cities in Morocco may have been premature.

While indeed a diplomatic boost for the Moroccan occupation, the King grossly exaggerated when he claimed in his speech: “The time has come for a united Morocco, stretching from Tangier to Lagouira, where no one will dare to violate its rights or transgress its historical borders.”

Morocco’s claims to sovereignty over Western Sahara rejected by international law

There are no such rights or historical borders recognised in international law. “The materials and information presented … do not establish any tie of territorial sovereignty between the territory of Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco or the Mauritanian entity,” the International Court of Justice (ICJ) had opined in 1975, dismissing claims by the two neighbours.

While its opinion was advisory, its finding has since been upheld, including in several recent rulings. In multiple rulings since 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has deemed the inclusion of Western Sahara’s resources in Europe’s trade deals with Morocco illegal, because Morocco has no sovereignty over Western Sahara’s territory.

Similarly, the United Kingdom High Court of Justice (UKHCJ) ruled in 2019 that the preferential treatment given by the UK’s Revenue and Customs Service to goods coming from Western Sahara under the EU’s agreement with Morocco violated international law.

In 2022, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights reiterated that “both the UN and the AU [African Union] recognise the situation of SADR as one of occupation and consider its territory as one of those territories whose decolonisation process is not yet fully complete.” It added that “although Morocco has always laid claim on the territory it occupies, its assertion has never been accepted by the international community.”

SADR is a full and founding member state of the African Union (AU), and was welcomed into its predecessor, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), in 1984. After withdrawing from the OAU in protest, Morocco unsuccessfully applied for membership of the European Communities, which later evolved into the European Union (EU). It was only in 2017 that Morocco joined the AU.

Its admission into the union, however, was without any recognition of territorial rights over SADR. The UN continues to include Western Sahara in the list of “non-self-governing territories” that are yet to be decolonized.

None of these facts of international law has changed or been overridden by the self-contradictory resolution passed by the UNSC on 31 October. By calling on the PF to negotiate on the basis of Morocco’s Autonomy Proposal, and speculating that it “could represent a most feasible outcome,” the resolution biases the negotiation in favor of Morocco.

However, it clarifies that the end goal of the negotiations is “a final and mutually acceptable political solution that provides for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara,” which is at odds with Morocco’s sovereignty claims.

In its response, the PF reaffirmed “its continued readiness to engage constructively in the UN-sponsored peace process”. It added, however, that “it will not be party to any political process or negotiations based on any proposals … which aim to ‘legitimize’ Morocco’s illegal military occupation of Western Sahara and deprive the Sahrawi people of their inalienable, non-negotiable … right to self-determination and sovereignty over their homeland.”

Effectively, the PF has refused the UNSC resolution’s call to negotiate on the proposal of autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty. The fact that such a resolution was passed unopposed at the UNSC does not indicate that its 15 members support Moroccan proposals.

Algeria, which has consistently supported the PF and the struggle for liberation of Western Sahara, did not take part in the voting. “By this absence, and with full responsibility, Algeria wished to demonstrate its distance from a text that does not faithfully reflect the UN doctrine on decolonization. Yes, we are speaking of decolonization,”said its Permanent Representative to the UN, Ben Jamaa.

Complaining that the final text of the resolution “falls short of the expectations and legitimate aspirations of the people of Western Sahara, represented by the Polisario Front,” he insisted, “This people, who for more than 50 years has resisted … must have a say over its own destiny.”

While three of the five permanent members of the UNSC (the US, UK, and France) are united in their attempts to legitimise the Moroccan colonisation of Western Sahara, Russia and China abstained from voting.

“We could not support such an unbalanced text,” said Russia

“We could not support such an unbalanced text,” representing “a backtrack on the UN’s established guiding principles for the Western Sahara settlement,” namely one of self-determination and decolonisation, said Russian ambassador Vassily Nebenzia.

Criticizing the US for using “the Security Council to advance” its own “national agenda,” he expressed hope that “the cowboy approach of our American colleagues will not … reignite the conflict that is smoldering for a couple of decades”.

However, he explained that Russia chose not to vote against the resolution in order to not block the extension of the mandate of MINURSO, “so as to give one more chance for the peace process to prevail.”

Among the remaining 10 non-permanent members, Pakistan also abstained on the grounds that the text did not fully address the fundamental principle of self-determination. The remaining nine who voted in favor of the resolution also clarified that their vote did not mean an endorsement of Morocco’s claim of sovereignty.

South Africa: “We will support any final decision that is taken by the Sahrawis on this issue”

Reaffirming that “the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara is paramount,” South Africa’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Marthinus van Schalkwyk, said, “We will support any final decision that is taken by the Sahrawis on this issue.”

He went on to express disappointment that, in deviation from the past UN Security Council resolutions which, since 2007, have “recognized and acknowledged both the Moroccan Autonomy Proposal, and that of the Sahrawi people, the latest resolution has taken the unfortunate step of support for conducting negotiations based only on the Moroccan Plan, while neglecting the self-determination and proposals of the Sahrawi people.”

While voting in favor of the resolution to renew the mandate of MINURSO, South Africa insisted that through this mission, the UN “must take urgent steps towards holding this long-promised referendum on self-determination so that the Saharawi people can determine their destiny. This is their fundamental right under international law.”

The final settlement should be “one that provides for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara,” stressed the representative of Guayana. Somalia and Greece also highlighted that the solution should be mutually acceptable.

Not a recognition of Moroccan sovereignty

“We are also clear that we do not interpret the text adopted today as taking any decision regarding the question of sovereignty,” added Slovenia’s ambassador, Samuel Žbogar. “The right to self-determination, put simply ‘the freedom to choose for oneself,’ is enshrined in the UN Charter. It is a right that cannot be taken from any people, not by the Security Council, and not by Member States,” he insisted. “Slovenia voted in favour of the Resolution… because of our steadfast support for MINURSO and for the role of the United Nations,” Žbogar clarified.

Denmark’s Permanent Representative Christina Lassen also clarified that its vote in favor of the resolution “does not constitute a recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, as any solution should be agreed among the parties and in accordance with the UN Charter and principles, including the right to self-determination.”

The Collective of Sahrawi Human Rights Defenders (CODESA) explained that the “primary motivation of the majority of Security Council member states who voted in favour of the resolution is the extension of the MINURSO mandate, rather than the resolution text itself.”

Such a resolution, extending the mandate of MINURSO while simultaneously undermining the mandate to conduct a referendum by weighing down on the side of Morocco’s autonomy proposal, was possible because the US is the penholder on the file of Western Sahara.

US continues to sabotage the referendum, due since 1992

It is one of the absurdities of the international order, given that it was the US that armed and funded the occupation of Western Sahara from the start. It was the US that arm-twisted Spain to split the country’s territory between Morocco and Mauritania, instead of fulfilling its legal responsibility as the former colonizer to hold a referendum to allow for self-determination.

It is the US that has been helping Morocco sabotage MINURSO’s mandate to hold a referendum. Established in 1991, when a ceasefire was agreed between Morocco and the PF, MINURSO was originally tasked with holding the referendum in 1992. By 2007, when Morocco proposed autonomy for Western Sahara under its sovereignty, MINURSO had been reduced to a peacekeeping force.

But it was not able to keep the peace either. The ceasefire fell apart in 2020 when Moroccan troops crossed the occupied territory into the UN-patrolled buffer zone in the southeastern town of Guerguerat to remove unarmed Sahrawi demonstrators blocking an illegal road that Morocco had built to Mauritania.

Neither was the MINURSO able to hold violations of the human rights of occupied civilians to account. Nevertheless, renewal of its mandate remains an imperative to keep open the possibility of a peaceful resolution.

However, holding the pen to write the resolution to renew MINURSO’s mandate, the US, the main sponsor of the occupation, continues to undermine the possibility of a referendum, this time by explicitly biasing the resolution in favor of the occupier.

Simultaneously, the US has also set into motion a process of diplomatic legitimisation of the occupation. Despite funding and arming the occupation, the US had not officially recognised Morocco’s claim to sovereignty over Western Sahara until 2020. In December that year, the first Trump administration proclaimed that the US “recognizes Moroccan sovereignty over the entire Western Sahara territory,” after Morocco signed the Abraham Accords to normalise diplomatic relations with Israel.

In turn, Israel recognized Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara in 2023. Spain also followed suit in 2022, and France in 2024. In June this year, the UK extended support for Morocco’s autonomy plan.

“The West” is blatantly violating “the international laws they themselves have written,” said CODESA’s President Babouzeid Lebbihi. “Imperialism no longer needs a veneer of legality to justify its “exploitation of peoples and plunder of their resources. It is living in a stage of absolute barbarism.”

“This situation represents a critical juncture” not only for the future of Western Sahara but “for the credibility” of the UN itself, CODESA said in a statement, adding, “the Western Sahara issue will serve as a final test case for the UN”.