Morocco denounces lack of impartiality in UN report on Western Sahara
A segment of the Security Council report on the Moroccan character of Western Sahara has generated strong opposition from Rabat due to its bias against the principles established in the political process by the Security Council.
- ‘Impartiality and lack of credibility’
- ‘It is disrespectful to the Security Council’
- ‘Avoid nationalist approaches’
- Politicisation of the conflict
According to Omar Hilale, Morocco's permanent representative to the UN, the report is ‘misleading’ on the Moroccan character of the Sahara, as it ignores the more than 100 countries, recently joined by the United Kingdom, which recognise that the Autonomy Plan proposed by the King of Morocco, Mohammed VI, in 2007 is the most ‘serious, credible and viable’ solution to the conflict.
This lack of impartiality has led to a complaint by the Moroccan and Sierra Leonean authorities, which has been supported by France, the United Kingdom and the United States, and rejected by China, Russia and Algeria, increasing the discrepancies within the Council on how to deal with the Sahrawi dispute.
‘Impartiality and lack of credibility’
Hilale argues that the terms used in the report are erroneous and misleading. According to the document, Western Sahara is divided into ‘two parts’ instead of the four highlighted by the Security Council in 2018, which are attributed to Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania and the Polisario Front.
As part of Morocco's diplomatic vigilance against any attempt to modify UN resolutions, the country already rejected last October a suggestion by the UN Special Envoy for Western Sahara, Staffan de Mistura, who sought to establish a division of Western Sahara into two parts: Morocco and the Polisario Front.
Omar Hilale argues that the paragraph in question assigns the Security Council an ‘incorrect political stance’ that reflects only ‘the nationalist opinion of a non-permanent member of the Council’.
‘The biased paragraph jeopardises the credibility of the Security Council before the General Assembly. It is this type of wording that strongly undermines the Council's efforts to find a just political solution to this regional conflict and departs from the usual approach of previous reports’
For this reason, in an official document addressed to the President and members of the Security Council, the Moroccan ambassador emphasised ‘Morocco's firm rejection of any political manipulation in UN reports and the importance of maintaining the impartiality of these reports, especially on the issue of Western Sahara’.
‘It is disrespectful to the Security Council’
In the document sent, both the Sierra Leonean authorities and their Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Michael Imran Kanu, stressed that the report was a ‘disrespect to the Security Council’, a fact more than sufficient for the document to lose all its ‘credibility’, describing the report as ‘seeking to distort reality’. In addition to rejecting the report, Sierra Leone called for it to be reviewed with the support of France, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Various academics and specialists in the field have expressed similar views, such as Hisham Moatad, an academic and specialist in strategic affairs, who maintains that the Moroccan character of the Sahara is a latent fact that will not be affected, either internally or externally, by the report issued by the UN.
‘The United Nations must adapt to the momentum surrounding the Moroccan character of Western Sahara.’
The expert in strategic affairs indicated that in recent years Morocco has changed its strategy, previously based on UN reports, to seek support from the rest of the world for the validity of the Autonomy Plan, which has the notable support of Washington, London and Paris in the Security Council, mainly due to their view of Rabat as a ‘worthy and reliable’ partner.
‘Avoid nationalist approaches’
Omar Hilale emphasised that this biased paragraph undermines confidence in the Security Council vis-à-vis the General Assembly, warning of attempts by certain members to promote their nationalist approaches in UN reports, rather than adopting a neutral stance. The representative of Washington expressed his support for this view, while the representative of Paris stated that the comments made were valid and should be taken into account, emphasising that his country had sent written comments on this matter.
He went on to stress that the report sought to confuse the General Assembly through bias and subjectivity regarding the principles and foundations of the political process established by the Security Council. These foundations are based on: encompassing the criteria for a political solution; identifying the four parties involved; and the validity of the Autonomy Plan to definitively resolve this regional conflict.
Politicisation of the conflict
The representative of Sierra Leone stated that this paragraph should be amended, as it includes a misinterpretation of the Security Council's work on the Moroccan Sahara, ‘unnecessarily’ increasing the politicisation of a conflict that has been going on for more than five decades.
Morocco's defence, supported by the aforementioned countries, is based on various reports issued by the Security Council and the latest proposal issued by the Fourth Committee of the United Nations General Assembly, which refers to the territory as an area of conflict generated by Algeria, moving away from the terms used by the UN, which referred to Western Sahara as a ‘colonised and occupied territory’.
At the same time, Morocco and Sierra Leone pointed out that the United Nations should consider Algeria as a key player in the search for a solution to the conflict and value the progress, investments and important projects at all levels that are strengthening the cities of Laayoune and Dakhla, which reflect the new political realism that Morocco is implementing and promoting in the region.
This is of vital importance, as it is the driving force behind the support of the international community and the more than 100 countries that recognise the Moroccan character of the Sahara, as well as the more than 20 consulates that exist in the main cities of the region.