Who dusted it off and took it out of the archives? Everyone is pointing fingers at Steffan de Mistura, but did the UN envoy for the Sahara really present it to the Moroccans and Algerians? Officially, there is no evidence that he did so. Neither the statements issued by him, nor by the countries concerned with the Sahara conflict during his many tours of the region, have revealed this. The leak, published a few days ago by Reuters, and later by AFP, regarding the minutes of the closed session held by the UN Security Council last Wednesday on the Sahara issue, stated that the veteran Italian diplomat confirmed that he had ”in complete secrecy resumed and revived the concept of dividing the territory with all concerned parties”, and that he believes that the division project “would allow, on the one hand, the establishment of an independent state in the southern part, and on the other hand the integration of the rest of the territory as part of Morocco whose sovereignty is internationally recognised”, before adding, as the two media sources mentioned, that “neither Rabat nor the Polisario Front” showed the slightest indication of their willingness to move forward in discussing this proposal”, expressing his regret at the end.
Therefore, in light of the refusal of de Mistura, or any UN official to comment on it, it was in need of either an official confirmation by the two main parties to the conflict, namely Morocco and Algeria, or a complete denial by them. Although the Algerian authorities did not issue any position on this, the Polisario Front was quick to post on X, through one of its members, expressing its complete rejection of any proposals of this kind, considering them “inconsistent with the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination”.
READ: France backs Moroccan autonomy plan for Western Sahara
However, the statements made by Moroccan Foreign Minister, Nasser Bourita, last Monday, during the press conference he held with his Estonian counterpart, confirmed in a definitive manner that the idea was, indeed, presented to at least one of the parties. Bourita stated in that press conference that the UN envoy had presented the proposal to the Moroccans during his last visit to Morocco last April, noting that the Moroccan delegation responded to him saying “these ideas are rejected and are not at all on the table”, and that “Morocco has not and will not accept even to begin hearing them, because they contradict the principled position of the Kingdom of Morocco and the position of all Moroccans that the Sahara is Moroccan and an integral part of Moroccan territory.” He recalled that Rabat had previously expressed the same position in 2002, “when the same idea was proposed by James Baker, who was the then UN envoy to the Sahara, at the suggestion of Algeria, as his report stated at the time”, before confirming that “Morocco is not negotiating over its Sahara, but rather over a regional dispute with a neighbouring country that disputes Morocco’s sovereignty over its land.” The question that arose, based on this, is why did de Mistura’s statements about dividing the Sahara appear at this particular time, if the main party to the conflict, Morocco, had rejected them in their entirety when they were presented to them last April? Is it because at least some of the international media intentionally exaggerated it and deliberately took it out of context, to serve a certain party? Or because it actually reflected a personal conviction that the UN envoy had acquired that, after three years of his appointment in that plan, he was unable to bring the parties to the Sahara conflict to the negotiating and dialogue table, in order to reach a just, lasting and mutually agreed upon political solution, as stipulated in the UN Security Council resolutions, and this is what prompted him to try to place the responsibility for his failure on the shoulders of all parties, by presenting them as unwilling to make any concessions to each other in order to end that conflict?
In any case, the leak did not appear by chance; as I have said before, the conflict in the Sahara may now have entered its final and decisive chapters. There is no doubt that several parties and regional and international powers are preparing for what will happen in the region in the coming period and are looking forward to the situation that North Africa will be in, after the file is finally closed. This raises the question about the real purpose behind reviving the idea of partition, at a time when Morocco is committed to the plan of self-rule for the Sahara under Moroccan sovereignty, as the only solution to the conflict, and the Polisario Front, along with Algeria, are demanding a referendum for self-determination, which the US has recognised as impossible to organise there for several reasons? Did any party want to pressure Rabat, or bargain with it in one way or another, for example, so that it would make some concessions in exchange for its support for the self-rule proposal, making the launch of the idea of partition merely a test balloon to get a sense of whether this was possible?
Olympics: mayor closes Moroccan fan zone after singer makes statement on Sahara issue
As for Morocco, it seems clear from what its Foreign Minister said last Monday, and in the press conference, that the matter may be related to its neighbour, Algeria. Although Bourita did not explicitly refer to this, his questions in which he said, “Who gave De Mistura this idea; the idea of dividing the Sahara and where did it come from? Who are the parties that encouraged him to present it last April? Did he initiate the initiative, or did it come from other parties that inspired him to re-propose it?” Perhaps it indicated that he might be hinting in some way that neighbouring Algeria had some influence in pushing de Mistura to propose dividing the Sahara to Rabat.
Perhaps what draws attention here are two things. It is not yet known whether the UN envoy made the same offer to the Algerians and, if so, how they dealt with it, and whether they accepted it or not? We also do not know what prompted de Mistura to make a sudden and completely unexpected move last February to visit a country that does not seem to have any connection to the Sahara file, namely South Africa, and what the results were of that visit. At the time, the South African Foreign Minister said that “the discussion was useful” and included “studying some approaches related to Western Sahara”, before saying he could not go into more details, saying, “These are confidential questions.” The leaks published about the minutes of the Security Council session on the Sahara did not show any reference to the role of South Africa or to the approaches that de Mistura was said to have discussed with the leaders of that country regarding the Sahara. If the idea of dividing the Sahara does not hasten the emergence of a final solution to the Sahara problem, has it only emerged to limit the speed of the birth of another solution on the horizon? I do not believe we will wait too long before knowing the answer to this question.
READ: Algeria’s support for Polisario pushed Morocco to normalise ties with Israel, says former MP
This article appeared in Arabic in Al Quds on 22 October, 2024.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.