Sahara, between dialogue and war
The Algerian military oligarchy is precipitating new dynamics by stepping up its provocations against the Kingdom of Morocco. The Polisario's call for war has been followed by verbal and threatening hostilities from the Algerian General Staff.
If in politics one usually chooses between bad and worse, in the case of the Moroccan Sahara, the choice is between dialogue and war. The geopolitical equation, thus posed, is not as complex as it seems if we consider the significance of a war in the area.
Morocco, potentially well-positioned, faces a technically bankrupt Algeria, which, armed to the teeth, is kicking against a background that resounds with the drums of war.
While the Hirak is insistently calling for responsibility and radical changes culminating in the disappearance of the military government and its fickle ways to focus on a civilian government of national salvation, President Tebboune, in his latest statements, insists that his position on the Sahara remains unchanged, thus marking the line to be followed by the Polisario. The country is bleeding precisely because it has mortgaged all its wealth, present and future, on armaments and made the Sahara its national cause, compromising its own political, economic and social stability. In fact, Algeria is in a serious crisis (without resources, without liquidity and without a vaccine) and, above all, without knowing how to justify its failure to a population in permanent protest. The youth of the Hirak shout "No to the corrupt military", "Yes to a civilian government", "Independence", "Moroccan Sahara", "Polisario out", etc., also ridiculing the military for their sophistry as the region's leading power and Africa's leaders. The change from Bouteflika to Tebboune was a mirage. And this time, Hirak seems determined to subvert the status quo. Not even the recent announcement of the dissolution of parliament and new elections for June 12 has satisfied the masses. And as if that were not enough, the exiled Kabylia separatist leader Ferhat Mehenni has just called for a referendum on self-determination for the Berber region on 20 April 2021.
Runaway inflation, widespread corruption, repression, shortages and extreme poverty have undermined the de facto power of the 'Generals'. The capital market denies it credit. France, fed up with the military, offers only goods in return, but not liquidity. The Gulf states decline to help it because of its political violence and its alignment with Iran. Its traditional partners, China and Russia, limit themselves to offering ad hoc and humanitarian aid (donation of vaccine, Sinopharm and Sputnik). Let us not forget that we are talking about a country with resources unable to cope on its own and included in the WHO's COVAX programme for the anti-COVID-19 vaccine, intended especially for poor countries.
Thus, the Algerian regime, which is living through the worst possible scenario, is helplessly watching how it is being overtaken by a Morocco that has managed to position itself on the geopolitical and geo-economic chessboard of the African continent. In response, the 'Generals' have chosen to raise the tone against their neighbour, accusing it of all its ills. The Algerian press, with unanimity, has not ceased to launch 'fake news' that goes beyond the deontological ethics of the profession. The repeated defamatory accusations and verbal transgressions come from the entire Algerian establishment. Their intimidatory antics also extend to the United States, France and Israel.
Recently, an Algerian television programme attempted to mock Mohammed VI by showing his puppet show, something that is not common in Arab countries. An offensive act, for Morocco, that has set social networks ablaze. Paradoxically, a young Algerian Internet user, Walid Kechida, was sentenced on 4 January 2021 to three years in prison for "crimes against the president" after publishing his cartoons on Facebook.
But Morocco is being drawn into a warlike confrontation without wishing to do so. For it is possible that the 'Generals', wounded in their pride, are willing to die killing, in a desperate flight forward, by getting militarily involved in the Moroccan Sahara. Thus, open war in the region remains a more than likely option. The latest provocation, on 18 March 2021, consisted of dispossessing Moroccan farmers who had been exploiting their crops for more than half a century in Algerian territory near the border with Figuig. This brings to mind the tragedy of the expulsion of more than 50,000 Moroccans from Algeria in 1975, just after the Green March.
To avoid a war in the Mediterranean basin, the miracle of a dialogue between the parties would have to work. It is obvious that Algeria is actively involved in the conflict and is already mentioned in the latest UN resolutions. The weakened and divided Polisario Front is nothing more than an instrument under Algerian orders but with no role to play. In this respect, Morocco has always shown itself to be open to dialogue, holding out its hand to Algeria on several occasions. It has not yet picked up the gauntlet.
The Algerian military never ceases to appeal to the spirit of its revolution, hoping that a confrontation would divert attention away from the Hirak and heal the social rift. For they seem to need some success to justify their economic catastrophe and failed policy in the Sahara. In this regard, it is worth noting that the Kingdom of Morocco has shown its restraining power in keeping the peace through effective proactive diplomacy, where it has proved lethal.
A war scenario would be disastrous for the contenders, for the region and for the continent. And nothing would ever be the same again. Both Morocco and the international community, especially the US, France, the EU and Israel, as well as Algerian society itself, would not tolerate the continuation of a threatening military oligarchy, without a national project and increasingly 'Iranised'. Nor would it allow the formation of a Sahrawi republic, monitored by Algeria, on the Atlantic coasts and in the midst of an area plagued by uncontrolled terrorists. In this hypothetical context, the question of the huge arsenal held by the 'Generals' would necessarily arise. More specifically, the priority would be to prevent it from falling into the hands of the terrorists of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM, whose leader is an Algerian) and DAECH (whose leader is a Sahrawi from the Tindouf camps), who are very active in the Sahel.
The international community, which is inclined towards autonomy for the Moroccan Sahara on the terms proposed by Morocco, will have the task of forcing the Algerian regime to engage in dialogue and Morocco not to allow itself to be dragged into an open war with Algeria. The banality of evil cannot silence the word or inhumanly prolong the agony of the Sahrawi hostages in Tindouf.
Abdel-Wahed Ouarzazi, Professor of Economic Sciences