Conflict resolution in Western Sahara: analysis between the UN Fourth Committee's position and the Security Council's strategy
- Algeria's proactive approach to the Sahara conflict in the Fourth Committee
- The practices of petitioners in the Fourth Committee
- From stalemate to strategy: the Security Council's new impetus in the Western Sahara peace process
- Overcoming ineffectiveness: the Fourth Committee and the search for solutions in Western Sahara
- Conclusions
Over the past fifty years, tensions between international law and realpolitik have marked the actions of the UN. Created to ensure peace and security, the UN has evolved in step with global changes and different types of conflicts. Within it, the Fourth Committee manages decolonisation and peacekeeping, guided by the Special Committee on Decolonisation (C-24), created in 1961 following the 1960 Declaration on the Independence of Colonial Countries.
The C-24, composed of 29 members, oversees decolonisation and reports to the Fourth Committee, which drafts resolutions and recommendations for the General Assembly in plenary session, reflecting the UN's continuing role in global governance and conflict oversight.
Historically, and in the interests of justice, on the recommendation of Morocco, Western Sahara was included in the UN's decolonisation efforts in 1963, with the UN Special Committee on Decolonisation (the Fourth Committee), with the aim of recovering the territory from Spanish occupation, and subsequently the UN passed resolutions urging Spain to negotiate the liberation of the territory.
This led to a series of resolutions by the United Nations General Assembly calling for negotiations between Spain and Morocco. Ten years later, amid ongoing territorial disputes, the Polisario Front was born. In 1965, the General Assembly called on Spain to negotiate with Morocco for the liberation of Sidi Ifni and Western Sahara. The 1969 Treaty of Fez formalised the return of the enclave of Ifni to Morocco, ending 34 years of occupation. Finally, in 1975, Morocco completely regained its territory, Western Sahara, through the Madrid Agreement.
Algeria's proactive approach to the Sahara conflict in the Fourth Committee
The 1975 Madrid Accords redefined the Western Sahara conflict, transforming it from a question of decolonisation to a political dispute between the parties concerned. The Fourth Committee and the United Nations General Assembly recognised the agreements through Resolution 3458, adopted on 10 December 1975, which amounted to their de facto acceptance. Although the conflict could have ended on that date, Algeria's support for the Polisario Front prolonged it, transforming it into a regional rivalry that destabilised the Maghreb and Africa in general.
On 26 February 1976, Spain's Permanent Representative to the UN informed the Secretary-General that Spain had officially ended its presence in the Sahara (A/31/56-S/11997), a position repeatedly reaffirmed by successive Spanish prime ministers. Algeria opposed the 1975 Madrid Accords, denouncing them as a political coup.
Consequently, the Algerian junta began to support the Polisario Front militarily, diplomatically and financially, transforming the Western Sahara issue into a protracted regional conflict.
Furthermore, Algeria has selectively invoked the principle of self-determination to challenge Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara, while ignoring similar cases affecting the northern regions of Morocco, Tarfaya and Sidi Ifni, territories that were once colonised by Spain.
To support the Polisario Front, Algeria used UN Resolution 1514 as justification, interpreting paragraph 2, which emphasises self-determination, and ignoring paragraphs 6 and 7, which defend the territorial integrity of states. Subsequently, the UN General Assembly clarified in Resolution 1541 (1960) that self-determination should not threaten territorial unity and reaffirmed the right of states to reclaim territories separated by colonialism. The Hague Convention of 1907 and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 affirm that the concept of occupation applies to existing states, whereas Western Sahara has never been a state.
Despite these principles and the historical, political and legal evidence linking Western Sahara to Morocco, Algeria has continued to manipulate the doctrine of self-determination in the United Nations Fourth Committee to further its regional ambitions and has systematically ignored United Nations calls for a negotiated political solution, insisting instead on a referendum, a mechanism that is not supported by either Resolution 1514 or 1541.
The practices of petitioners in the Fourth Committee
The Fourth Committee of the United Nations General Assembly plays an important role in decolonisation, as it monitors the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and offers recommendations on their progress.
Hearings on the Western Sahara conflict attract the largest number of petitioners, including representatives of civil society, international experts, Member States and Sahrawis who support Morocco's position. Western Sahara is unique among non-self-governing territories because it has lacked an official administering power since Spain's withdrawal under the 1975 Madrid Accords. Morocco has legally reclaimed these regions. This situation highlights a significant shortcoming in the Fourth Committee's approach, as the issue of Western Sahara is now a political dispute rather than a matter of decolonisation.
During the Fourth Committee's oral hearings, the parties present opposing views on Western Sahara: Algeria and the Polisario Front frame it as a decolonisation issue, while Morocco considers it a matter of peace and security. Algeria mobilises Moroccan officials, parliamentarians and dissidents to promote self-determination and independence, concepts that do not appear in United Nations Security Council resolutions. It selectively invokes a paragraph of Resolution 1514, while ignoring Resolutions 1541 and 2625, which uphold territorial integrity. In this way, Algeria obstructs the political process supported by the Security Council under Resolution 2414, even though the legal status of the territory was established in the 1975 Madrid Accords.
Most of the discussions in the UN Fourth Committee focus on achieving a political solution through negotiations between the parties, as urged by the Security Council. The Committee's openness to Morocco's Autonomy Plan reflects its potential to grant substantial self-government while preserving Morocco's territorial integrity. Former UN Secretaries-General Pérez de Cuéllar, Boutros-Ghali and Kofi Annan considered this plan to be the most viable resolution. In April 2025, UN envoy Staffan de Mistura reaffirmed autonomy as key to progress, emphasising France, the United States and the United Kingdom's recognition of Morocco's sovereignty, developments that provided significant momentum towards a lasting solution to the conflict.
From stalemate to strategy: the Security Council's new impetus in the Western Sahara peace process
Since the decolonisation of Western Sahara by Spain and the annulment of the referendum in all United Nations Security Council resolutions, Morocco has fought a fierce battle at the UN to exclude this conflict from the Fourth Committee, asserting that the Security Council is the only body authorised to oversee this dispute under Article 12 of the United Nations Charter. Furthermore, the Security Council does not consider Western Sahara to be a question of decolonisation, but rather one of peace and security within the framework of Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter.
UN Security Council Resolution 1754 (2004) aimed to shift the focus of the Western Sahara conflict from a referendum to negotiations, complemented by Morocco's 2007 Autonomy Plan, which transferred administrative, legislative and judicial powers to the Sahrawis under Moroccan sovereignty. Over the past two decades, United Nations General Assembly resolutions have consistently urged all parties to participate in the United Nations-led political process based on the guidelines of the Security Council. A key aspect of these resolutions is the insistence on negotiations to reach a just, lasting and mutually acceptable solution.
The Fourth Committee frequently refers to Morocco's Autonomy Plan, reflecting a practical approach to the resolution, supported by many UN Member States that advocate political dialogue and the resumption of roundtable talks. To this end, Morocco places more emphasis on the genuine work of the Security Council than on the Fourth Committee, as the latter takes note of and reaffirms all Security Council resolutions.
Overcoming ineffectiveness: the Fourth Committee and the search for solutions in Western Sahara
Several observers argue that the United Nations Special Political and Decolonisation Committee has little influence and that its activities are counterproductive to the resolution of the Western Sahara conflict. The main criticisms are as follows:
First
In the Fourth Committee, some countries make intemperate and outdated statements, particularly Algeria and South Africa, which claim the right to independence and self-determination for Western Sahara and strive to convince the international community that this conflict is a matter of decolonisation, which contradicts Security Council resolutions.
Given the extreme wording and language that these countries seek to incorporate into their calls for action, the C-24 risks losing its credibility, as it would not comply with UN Article 12.1. Therefore, in its attempt to legitimise decolonisation, the Fourth Committee may delegitimise itself.
Second
Technically, the Fourth Committee should focus on practical measures rather than rhetoric. A key step would be to review countries whose disputes have already been resolved, such as Western Sahara, which was transferred from Spain to Morocco under the 1975 Madrid Accords and is now under the political authority of the Security Council. The United Nations Security Council is the only body responsible for resolving this dispute. The often-cited “gap between United Nations bodies” reflects both the lack of commitment from the major powers and the difficulty of conducting meaningful investigations into specific policies.
Many governments, NGOs and experts have criticised the continued presence of Western Sahara on the C-24 agenda, considering it a waste of time and resources, as the Fourth Committee's resolutions merely echo the Security Council's calls for pragmatic political solutions, rather than promoting new outcomes.
Third
The main controversy concerns the Fourth Committee's treatment of so-called liberation movements, in particular the Polisario Front. The Polisario has never been elected by the inhabitants of Western Sahara and lacks recognition by the UN or the EU as a legitimate representative or liberation movement. It cannot act on behalf of an independent territory. Furthermore, Polisario members cannot access the UN building unless they are provided with a UN identification card through Algeria. Meanwhile, 73% of Sahrawis participate in Morocco's political system.
By engaging primarily with these movements, the Fourth Committee complicates territorial disputes and conflicts with member states that recognise historical legitimacy. The Committee should move beyond providing platforms for radicals and adopt broader conflict resolution mechanisms to address long-standing disputes.
The United Nations cannot operate at two different speeds, with the Fourth Committee and the Security Council dealing with the resolution of this regional conflict. The diplomatic dynamics surrounding the Western Sahara conflict have paved the way for the major powers (France, Spain, the United States, and the United Kingdom) to declare Morocco's sovereignty over its Western Sahara.
In addition, more than eighteen European countries support the autonomy plan and more than 30 countries have opened consulates in Laayoune and Dakhla, demonstrating de facto Morocco's historical claims. Therefore, a request by Morocco or one of its international allies to remove an item from the Fourth Committee's agenda could accelerate the resolution process. There have been numerous cases at the United Nations where territories have been removed from this list following changes in circumstances, including Hong Kong, Macao and Greenland. This confirms that the procedure is legitimate, legal and unprecedented.
Conclusions
Today, Morocco no longer limits itself to making demands, but exercises its sovereignty, invests, develops and builds an unprecedented development model in Western Sahara, in light of the national consensus and growing international support, especially following the qualitative change in the major powers, which explicitly and unequivocally support the proposal for autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty.
Dr. Yasmine Hasnaoui expert in North Africa Affairs