One year later in the Sahara: A swerve or a change of direction?

It is one year since the Spanish government announced its support for the Moroccan proposal on the Sahara, declaring that "Spain considers the Moroccan autonomy initiative as the most serious, realistic and credible basis for the resolution of the dispute".
It is increasingly common to hear all kinds of allusions to this event using the term "volantazo", used with a certain negative or pejorative connotation. Perhaps the more measured and equanimous thing to do would be to call it a turn or change in foreign policy. But since we are getting creative in labeling, it might be more appropriate to call it a "coup de rudder".
According to the RAE, the definition of volantazo would be "an abrupt and sudden turn given to the steering wheel of a moving vehicle", usually a car. It is true that on some occasions a sudden swerve may occur in order to avoid an accident, but if it is made without such a clear and precise purpose, it could appear to be something done in a reckless or imprudent manner. Transposed to the field we are dealing with, it could be defined as a quick and unexpected change in policies, guidelines, measures, etc., although carried out in an unthinking or incompetent manner.
A rudder strike is more associated with adverse sea conditions. It is used when the ship is heading for the stranding and it is inevitable to give that, a rudder blow, which would be an abrupt and definitive movement to change the course and save an extreme situation.
Perhaps they may be similar expressions, except that one is used for land and the second for the sea. But while the former denotes the above, the latter conveys sobriety and a sense of responsibility to change a complex scenario in an urgent and necessary manner.
While it is true that the ways and times in which this recognition took place a year ago could have been improved, it is no less true that this move, which many criticized as unexpected and irresponsible, is no more and no less than the same move that has already been made by twelve countries around the European Union. Were these also somersaults? Apparently, of these 12 countries, only Spain is dedicated to reckless driving and the rest, Germany and France among them, do not make sharp and reckless turns when trying to bring to a successful conclusion a situation that has been going on for half a century for the benefit of a few and the tragedy of many back in the Tindouf camps.
It should be recalled that this list of support is progressively increasing, the latest being Austria a few days ago. It is true that this recognition has been asymmetrical and has gone at different speeds, being more or less emphatic or unconditional depending on the country, but recognition, after all. A massive endorsement of the EU countries to the Moroccan autonomy proposal that only continues the endorsement that year after year, in the same terms, the United Nations Security Council makes in its successive resolutions.
On the other hand, logic tells us that, if an increasing number of EU countries support this position - and among these are the most relevant ones - the EU itself will end up being the one to make a move by joining this proposal as an entity. No one should be surprised, at this rate of adhesions it is something that could happen in the short-medium term. In fact, only three days after the famous "volantazo", the European Commission itself expressed itself willingly to this change of position of Spain through its spokeswoman for Foreign Affairs, Nabila Massrali, who said that this decision benefited the relations of the twenty-seven with Morocco.
Let us be serious, supporting this proposal in such terms is not the crime that the traditional immobilist sectors in favor of an early autonomous resolution, at the time, the classic unconditional supporters of the Polisario's position, want to sell us.
The only reality is that such a wide autonomy, as the proposal states, is the only realistic solution in the short term, so that after half a century, an artificially prolonged situation, which should have been corrected years ago, can be definitively put to an end. A solution that must be above dogmatism or romanticism comfortably exercised from the living room of their homes by those who support the Polisario in the Canary Islands and Spain, the usual ones, just to satisfy and fatten their militant ego. All this while a part of the Saharawi population, the most minority in number it must be said, suffers and dies in life in the desert, hostages of the eternal journey to nowhere in which a few, their privileged leaders, have embarked them chasing utopias.
In bilateral terms, and as opposed to the apocalyptic and belligerent discourse of the usual, with dystopian allusions to future invasions or theft of territorial waters, Spain in general, but the Canary Islands in particular, by proximity, historical relations and the African projection it shares with the territory of the Sahara, would occupy a prominent place in a future mutual cooperation. The Islands have always maintained a closer relationship with the Sahara than other territories, with ties that date back to the time of the Spanish colony and that last until today. Autonomy is beneficial for all parties involved, but especially for the neighboring countries which, as in the case of Spain, will thus be able to strengthen their relations with Morocco on a politically solid basis.
We are in an election year, and it is worth remembering the real probability of a change of government in favor of the Popular Party. But if anyone expects a change of position on the issue and a return to the previous situation, they can sit back and wait. Despite the fact that all this hullabaloo has come in handy for more than one opposition party during the last year to stir up internal politics (a classic, by the way), we already know the story. In fact, Rajoy held two high-level meetings with Morocco during his term in office, in 2012 and 2015, and the joint statements of both advocated a consensual and mutually acceptable political solution for the Sahara. Not far from the current PSOE position, which Zapatero had been advocating since 2007. These are two examples that the volantazo was not so much.
Not even Podemos, which likes so much to boast of its unconditional support to the Polisario, has been able to intervene minimally in this. The words of a dwarfed Pablo Iglesias still resonate when he was questioned on this issue while he was still vice-president, when he said that "when we talk about foreign policy, I always have to say that the foreign policy position is set by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the President of the Government. As a matter of loyalty and respect for each one's competences".
It would seem that those who denounce other people's volte-faces also seem to like to give them from time to time. That is where some friends of the Polisario forget their principles and cling to electoral calculations or not to lose their seat. It will always be better to swerve than to crash.