Albares, Blinken, De Mistura and moral imperatives

This week we learned that US Under-Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, one of Antony Blinken's closest subordinates, has been touring Spain and Morocco, as well as other Maghreb countries.

Sherman recalled that they would support the efforts of the UN Special Envoy for Western Sahara, Staffan de Mistura, and that she would collaborate with Spain in the search for a solution to the conflict, affirming that both countries would work "as hard as we can" to achieve a peaceful solution to the problem in question.

On the other hand, it was confirmed that Morocco continues to have the backing of the United States in its proposal to resolve the dispute through a broad autonomy for the territory, which has been rejected by the Polisario on countless occasions. In fact, Blinken's envoy affirmed that this plan for the region is "serious, credible and realistic".

This visit is an extension of the latest moves in this direction at the international level, which both Blinken and the special envoy De Mistura himself have been making in recent times, with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, José Manuel Albares, as an ally and interlocutor.

What was beginning to be discernible in the new Minister Albares was a clear distancing from his predecessor González Laya, not only in his aptitudes, especially after the folly and subsequent political earthquake that the Ghali case represented, but also in the different gestures he has been making. The question is whether these will be enough. On the one hand, Albares recently stated that Spain wants to unblock this conflict and offer hope to thousands of people who are waiting for it, because according to him, "it is politically necessary and it is also a moral imperative".

As for Spain's position to facilitate a solution to the conflict and the re-establishment of relations with Morocco, Albares has also recently stressed that "what it seeks is a political solution, mutually acceptable and within the framework of the UN". Along the same lines as the Security Council resolutions of recent years.

In this regard, it should also be noted that a few months earlier, shortly after taking office, the minister himself responded in parliament to PNV deputy Aitor Esteban about Spain's status in the Sahara, denying that Spain continues to be the administering power in Western Sahara, and tacitly and publicly validating the Madrid Agreements signed between Spain, Mauritania and Morocco on the ceding of the administration of the Spanish provinces of Western Sahara to the latter two countries. On that occasion, Albares said that "Spain is not an administering power. Neither in the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories, nor in the United Nations list, nor in any resolution does it say that Spain is. It ceased to be in 1975". Finally, Albares himself also recently stated that "Spain alone cannot resolve the conflict in Western Sahara, we will follow the plan set out by Staffan de Mistura".

On the other hand, former minister Arancha González Laya had been stubbornly sticking to her initial position, stating that Spain's stance on the problem "had not changed and would not change", further sharpening differences with Rabat, with the issue of Ghali's entry into Spain as a backdrop, the withdrawal of the ambassador from Madrid and the subsequent migration crisis. This contrasted with recent positions taken by countries such as France and Germany. 

France had already made its position known at the end of 2020 through its Ministry of Foreign Affairs, stating that 'the French government has advocated the search for a fair, lasting and mutually acceptable political solution for Western Sahara', insisting that the Moroccan autonomy plan is 'a serious and credible basis for discussion' on which to work. In fact, just over a year ago, France was the only European country to participate in the "Ministerial Conference in Support of the Autonomy Initiative under Moroccan Sovereignty", organised by Morocco and the United States, and attended by 40 countries represented by members of their respective governments, 27 of which were at ministerial level.

In the German case, the Moroccan ambassador in Berlin, who was recalled for consultations at the time, ended up returning to Germany - unlike the ambassador accredited in Madrid. In a note issued by the Foreign Ministry of the new German federal government in the new post-Merkel era, welcomed in Rabat, the autonomy proposal was seen as an important Moroccan contribution to resolving the Sahara dispute. It also mentioned that 'Germany supports the personal envoy of the UN Secretary-General in the search for a just, lasting and mutually acceptable political solution on the basis of Security Council Resolution 2602'.

In the case of both countries, words similar to those pronounced by Minister Albares, a just, lasting and mutually acceptable political solution within the framework of UN resolutions, were enunciated. The question is, will these words be accompanied by more significant actions or gestures from Spain? For the moment, it seems that they will not. Contradictions of politics, the only thing that is certain at this point is that Rabat continues without an ambassador in Madrid and that Albares has not managed to be received in Morocco. And this has to do with taking a step forward, a step in which, in addition to the above, the Moroccan proposal for a broad regional autonomy for the Sahara would be given a green light as a basis for any further agreement or negotiation, some kind of official declaration recognising the Sahara region as an autonomous territory attached to the Kingdom of Morocco, a gesture that would help to unravel this journey to nowhere that has been going on for half a century. At this point, and as long as this does not happen, relations between the two countries are unlikely to improve, at least in the short term.
Proof of this were the words of Mohammed VI himself in his November speech to commemorate the Green March, when he recalled that "we are within our rights to expect bolder and clearer positions from our partners on the issue of the territorial integrity of the Kingdom".

With regard to Staffan De Mistura's recent visit as UN Special Envoy and his first official visit to the region (Spain, Morocco, Mauritania, Mauritania, Algeria and the Tindouf camps), despite the apparent goodwill, these meetings have so far only served to further fix the contenders' positions, which are difficult to reconcile. In fact, Morocco reaffirmed "Morocco's commitment to the resumption of the political process conducted under the exclusive aegis of the UN, in order to reach a political solution on the basis of the Moroccan Autonomy Initiative, within the framework of the round-table process, in the presence of the four participants".

This issue of the round tables is categorically rejected by Polisario and Algeria, complicating the implementation of Security Council Resolution No. 2602 of 29 October 2021, in which the Council renewed its call to all parties to continue their participation "in the same format of round tables, with realism and a spirit of compromise, to ensure a satisfactory outcome, in order to reach a realistic, practical and lasting political solution".
 

Thus, Morocco having made its position clear, it is clear that by rejecting the round-table format, Algeria and the Polisario are complicating and obstructing the task of the new UN special envoy from the very beginning, trying to impose new conditions on the Council resolution, changing the format of the UN negotiations by wanting to limit them only to meetings between Morocco and the Polisario. What we have no doubt is that this first visit or contact with the region will have helped De Mistura to identify on future occasions those actors who systematically obstruct the proposals and decisions that come from the United Nations, even those that come from the resolutions themselves, such as the aforementioned 2602, as we have just detailed.

Not in vain, during their visit to the Tindouf camps, both Brahim Ghali and Sidi Mohamed Omar were adamant in this regard, stating that they would be willing to "open direct negotiations with Morocco on the basis of the right to independence", but warning that "there will be no ceasefire if Morocco insists on continuing to occupy the Saharawi territory. Our position is very clear, regardless of the special envoy's agenda, we will continue as long as there is no peace plan that includes a referendum on self-determination". On the other hand, a rapprochement with the different realities that make up the Saharawi population, which we hope will take place in future visits, would not be out of place. Among them are those formed by the Sahrawi Movement for Peace, which reflects the feelings and weariness of many Sahrawis with the political leadership of the Polisario and its policy of "infinite stalemate", as the MSP itself has come to define on some occasions.

Finally, I will end with a final digression in reference to Staffan de Mistura's visit to the Tindouf camps, recalling an abominable act perpetrated by the Polisario during the visit, which we have already denounced on previous occasions. I am referring to the participation of "child soldiers" in some of the events that took place during the UN leader's visit. We knew that the Polisario was capable of something like this, as it has regularly demonstrated, but not that it would reach the height of brazenness and baseness of consummating it in front of none other than the new UN special envoy for the Sahara. This is something to which we in Spain have become somewhat accustomed, due to the political manipulation of children participating in the summer "Vacaciones en Paz" programme, using them in demonstrations, rallies or propaganda activities in favour of their movement, in front of all sorts of local politicians who look the other way in the face of such attitudes. But this is another level of obscenity, one that reaches unimaginable heights, heights that violate international humanitarian law, which categorically prohibits their recruitment, enlistment and direct participation in hostilities under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Rights that should be untouchable and of the utmost respect, especially when it comes to minors.