The Mauritanian army stands firm against the Polisario in Lebriga

1. Operational context: the interception on 3 June 
2. The closure of Lebriga: a strategic decision 
   • Operational measures 
   • Diplomatic pressure 
   • Strategic alert 
3. Geopolitical implications 
   • Mauritanian security doctrine 
4. Regional dynamics 
5. IHL recommendations 

Operational context: the interception on 3 June 

On 3 June 2025, a Mauritanian patrol neutralised an infiltration attempt by ‘several dozen Polisario members’, according to specialised media sources (1). Key elements of this operation: 

• Decisive use of a BZK-005 military drone to locate and track the convoy 
• Deployment of vehicles with Mauritanian number plates forged by the infiltrators 
• Forced return of the convoy to the Tindouf camps without direct confrontation 

Key point: 

This operation illustrates the growing importance of drones in Saharan border security, as Mauritania acquired BZK-005 drones from China in 2024, according to open sources (4). 

The closure of Lebriga: a strategic decision 

Operational measures 

Since 21 May 2025, the Mauritanian army has maintained the closure of the border region of Lebriga, located on the border with Algeria (2). This decision is in response to: 

• The alleged resurgence of Polisario activities in this sector 
• The security of a strategic corridor for Mauritania's stability 
• The clear desire to exercise full control over the border areas 

Diplomatic pressure 

According to several specialised media outlets, this closure is causing tensions with Algeria and the Polisario (3): 

The Polisario has officially requested the reopening of the area, a request that has been rejected by Nouakchott. At the same time, media sources speak of Algerian diplomatic pressure, which to date has had no effect (6). The IGH notes that this closure comes in a regional context marked by the fragmentation of the G5 Sahel. 

Strategic alert 

Mauritania's determination in the face of external pressure sets an important strategic precedent. Any escalation in the Lebriga region could destabilise the trans-Saharan security balance and exacerbate rivalries between Algeria and Morocco through third parties. 

Geopolitical implications 

Mauritanian security doctrine 

The IGH notes that, since 2024, Mauritania has been refining a doctrine of ‘proactive defence’ characterised by: 

• The acquisition of offensive/defensive capabilities with drones 
• The preventive closure of sensitive border areas 
• Growing rejection of foreign interference in its security decisions 

Regional dynamics 

According to the IGH's analysis, this stance could: 

• Increase friction with Algeria, a traditional supporter of the Polisario 
• Strengthen security cooperation with Morocco (not explicitly stated in the sources consulted) 
• Position Nouakchott as a key player for stability in the Sahel and the Sahara 

IHL recommendations 

1. For the international community: provide technical support for Mauritania's border surveillance systems through transparent bilateral channels. 
2. For regional actors: engage in an inclusive dialogue on concerted security in the border areas of the Sahara. 
3. For the African Union: activate preventive mediation mechanisms to calm tensions related to the Tindouf camps. 

Footnotes 

1. Media source: ‘Army uses drones to arrest Polisario elements,’ CRIDEM, 3 June 2025. 
2. Media source: ‘Mauritania closes the border region of Lebriga,’ Maroc Hebdo, 22 May 2025. 
3. Media source, ‘Mauritania maintains closure of the Lebriga border area,’ Hespress, 28 May 2025. 
4. Media source, ‘The army uses drones to arrest Polisario elements,’ CRIDEM, 3 June 2025, technical description of the drones. 
5. Media source, “Mauritania rejects Polisario’s request to suspend closure”, Atlas Info, 29 May 2025. 
6. Media source, “The Algerian regime and the Polisario openly threaten Mauritania”, Le7tv, 3 June 2025. 

IGH methodological note 

This analysis is based on specialised regional media sources (level 3 of the IGH hierarchy), cross-checked to ensure consistency. Specific operational data (exact number of people intercepted, precise geographical coordinates) could not be verified with primary Mauritanian sources. The strategic implications are the result of the IGH's own analysis, based on recurring conflict patterns in the region.