Resolution 2797: misinformation in the service of a dying cause

In Spain, the news has received little coverage in terms of the amount of information provided in relation to its importance, especially given that this is a country with historical ties to the territory. This is particularly true in the mainstream media, where domestic political news dominates the headlines. The resolution received initial coverage, but quickly faded from the spotlight without generating any significant debate, leaving the Spanish public somewhat confused about the real implications of a resolution that, on the other hand, consolidates the international framework for resolving the Sahara conflict. This is not surprising, since despite the aforementioned historical links, it is not a topic that arouses much interest in the media, beyond those who, for ideological or personal reasons, have an emotional or professional connection to the issue. 

Among the latter are those who, professionally, devote themselves to this issue with unusual frequency and aversion to anything that might be favourable to Morocco, and who, since the appearance of this resolution, have redoubled their efforts and multiplied their attacks. Working almost full-time, they constitute a unique group that spends hours and pages rambling on with all kinds of conspiratorial and biased theories about the consequences and implications of this resolution. 

These sources are as diverse as they are revealing of the desperation now gripping those who cling to obsolete narratives. And to a certain extent, they are nodes that communicate with each other: most of them have or have had some recent or past interaction in common, showing an unprecedented transversality, despite the differences they may have in other areas, as we shall see below.

We are talking about established journalists with a certain amount of experience in the field — an experience that is always uncritical, politically militant, belligerent towards Morocco and completely lacking in objectivity — as well as various opinion makers such as former military personnel with delusions of grandeur, a university professor who is an excited Alvise fanboy on Twitter — embarrassing, to say the least — to self-proclaimed experts in Maghreb geopolitics, who coincidentally only talk about Morocco and the Sahara. There are also some militants of Sahrawi origin who have been living in Spain since before they can remember, who demand resistance in Tindouf, but who have never set foot in the desert or even in the Monegros. Many of the above are figures more or less linked to the Spanish far right (not institutional), who, although irrelevant in electoral terms, have a relatively significant presence on social media through various forms of hate speech and agitation. In this case, they distribute Polisario or anti-Moroccan propaganda for subsequent viralisation.

They roam freely from cesspools like Telegram to what used to be called Twitter, passing through WhatsApp and its endless, cursed forwarded messages full of nonsense, very useful for duping older users. They make money in their groups with Cryptobros advertising banners, or by cajoling you into subscribing to their Substack accounts. Not to mention the famous YouTube streams and channels with characters of a singular nature, eager to cash in by deceiving thousands of unsuspecting people devoted to ultra-conspiracy theories, with the calculated aim of swelling their accounts through their monetised viewing statistics. Among other attractions, they use apocalyptic previews or thumbnails full of flames as if the end of the world were approaching.

Fear sells, and they know how to exploit and capitalise on it well, as well as using it conveniently as a weapon on a national level, employing a supposed Moroccan plot. In reality, that was always their goal, not the welfare of the Sahrawi people. It is clear that they have their audience, ideologically aligned, eager for the next post and even willing to dig into their pockets to consume rubbish that, incidentally, reeks of being written by AI. And of course, they take advantage of it; that's the world we live in today. Social media has become a human dumping ground.

The most hilarious are their most recent complaints, in which they denounce alleged Moroccan control in Spain of the narrative on social media, to the detriment of the Polisario, by ‘recruiting Spaniards’. Yes, you read that correctly: in Spain. The country where, historically, the Polisario has received the most political and media support – just ask the Gran Canaria Council or Basque institutions, for example – almost since its inception. Even so, in the height of impudence, they persist in complaining that they do not receive enough help in our country. They also complain that this is happening on social media, where Polisario's friends in Spain dominate the field and are in their element. Do they believe their own lies? Seeing is believing, but it is impossible not to take it as a joke.

If profit is their goal, the strategy of these ‘social climbers’ to achieve it in a matter such as this, which never really interested them — where were they 10-15 years ago, for example, when this issue had little or no impact on public opinion? — is identical: manipulate language, distort facts and spread ambiguity where there is increasingly clear legal clarity, following this latest resolution 2797.

Within this “Circus of Horrors” of Polisario friends described above, some of these characters are old acquaintances known for their role as spokespeople for the anti-vaccine and denialist movement during the pandemic, or as Putin's mouthpieces during the invasion of Ukraine from their thousands of followers on Telegram or YouTube. In some cases, there are even loyal admirers of the Ayatollahs' regime. In other cases, there are self-confessed Falangists and anti-Zionists (more because they are anti-Semitic than because they care in the slightest about the Palestinians). And in several cases, a compendium of all of the above. When one of these items ceases to be profitable and yields fewer benefits, they jump to the next one that is in vogue, as has been the case with the Sahara in recent years. They even enjoy space in media outlets sympathetic to the Polisario. We assume that none of the above is done for the love of art. I will not name names, that would be the last thing I would do, giving them free publicity at my expense. But if you dive into the networks, it will not be difficult to find them.

The paradox is that the Polisario Front, historically supported since its inception by the far left and independence movements, has found new friends from the opposite side of the political spectrum. Given this premise, it is not surprising to see even the Polisario's top representative in Spain, Abdullah Arabi, appearing on television channels affiliated with that side (El Toro TV). This happened last summer after the events in Torre Pacheco, when he sought to take advantage of the turmoil by accusing Morocco of ‘using immigration for political purposes or to finance terrorism with its drugs’, thereby covertly justifying the violent summer attacks against the Moroccan working population that has been settled in that town for decades.

These have been the Polisario's new travelling companions for some time now, and it is worth remembering this. If anything unites them, it is their hatred of Morocco, and their aim is to stir up fear of the ‘evil Moor’ in reference to our southern neighbour in all its aspects (migration, culture and even the threat of war) in a feverish and unrestrained manner. It may seem surprising at first glance that there is hardly any reference in their ramblings to the recent waves of migrants arriving across the Mediterranean from Algeria, but given that their only target is Morocco and they make no secret of it, the double standard – presumably remunerated – is less surprising. The Polisario's shift towards this bunch of unpresentable individuals reveals the fragility of a political cause in irreversible decline and a moral standing that is at an all-time low.

But they are not the only ones aligned with this discursive strategy of fanning the flames of hatred. In recent weeks, we have also encountered unusual statements from supposedly moderate professionals who present themselves as experts on the subject, but who give free rein to their basest instincts on social media by aligning themselves with the theory of silent invasion, claiming that ‘Morocco's next unredeemed step after the Sahara will be the Canary Islands, Ceuta, Melilla, Spanish airspace and territorial waters’. The rage unleashed in them after Resolution 2797 exposes their false moderation and shows the true face of these people, who indulge in Twitter ‘hooliganism’ whenever they have the chance.

Using a strategy of scheming and suspicion towards our neighbour, their real purpose is to sow panic through their platforms and networks in order to delegitimise an international resolution that has massive international support, and well in advance of it, through successive recognitions of the proposal for autonomy. At least they have the decency to recognise UNSC Resolution 2797 as a Moroccan diplomatic success. They have been at this for years, they know what is at stake and they act accordingly. That is why they are now going all out.

They have also tried to portray as anomalous and suspicious the fact that the resolution took a few days to be officially published, as if it were the work of a hidden hand, a stupid argument that makes no sense. The draft that was finally voted on had even circulated on social media beforehand, and anyone with the slightest interest could have obtained it. Obviously, the official UN publication, available for download in PDF format in several languages, was not going to be available within a few hours of being approved. Or the crazy theory that there was a Moroccan UN translator who tried to manipulate the final text of the resolution. The Polisario's media friends in Spain devote their time to this nonsense. One thing after another, it's non-stop.

These people also resort to an argumentative strategy of ambiguous language, claiming that the resolution does not constitute recognition of Moroccan sovereignty but only a ‘narrative, not normative victory’. This distinction is misleading and reveals a deliberate confusion between completely different legal levels. In other words, the bunch of enlightened individuals I have been referring to throughout this article falsely circulated the idea that Morocco was celebrating UN recognition of its sovereignty, when nothing could be further from the truth. The Security Council is not a body competent to recognise territorial sovereignty de jure, although it does have the power to establish the binding normative and political framework that should guide the resolution of conflicts that constitute a threat to international peace. This is what actually happened and how it was celebrated.

When the Council establishes that Moroccan autonomy is ‘the basis’ for negotiations, it is not simply mentioning one option among several, but mandating in a binding manner the legal structure within which internationally legitimate negotiations can take place. To claim that this does not constitute a significant normative change is to deliberately distort how Security Council resolutions work. Furthermore, they insistently repeat that ‘the status quo remains unchanged,’ ignoring the fact that Resolution 2025 explicitly introduces for the first time that negotiations must be based on the Moroccan proposal—something that appeared in much less categorical terms in previous resolutions. The truth is that Morocco continues to move forward step by step, and it is omitted that this ‘step-by-step progress’ is precisely the result of the 2025 resolution, which consolidates as a mandatory basis what was previously a formally mentioned proposal. 

Likewise, during these days, many of these opinion makers and pseudo-media outlets adopted a strategy of terminological manipulation based on a sophism that deserves specific refutation: ‘MINURSO remains the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara. Not for autonomy.’ This argument is a semantic deception of the first order that deliberately confuses nominal mandate with operational mandate. It is correct that MINURSO stands for ‘United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara’ — the name has not changed — but the operational mandate has gradually been transformed. 

For example, the UN had a ‘Stabilisation Mission in Mali’ (MINUSMA), which does not mean that it was limited to ‘stabilising’ in the literal sense. Mandates can be modified without changing acronyms, and the truth is that MINURSO does not seem to be involved in organising any referendum today. And the fact that it must be reviewed in six months, as included for the first time in Resolution 2797, may be a sign of further changes, even if the name formally remains the same. The name of the mission is a nominal relic from 1991, not an indication that this mechanism remains internationally viable. And just because the mission is called ‘for the Referendum’ does not mean that this option has to remain open or, at the very least, be realistic. The gradual replacement of ‘referendum’ with ‘realistic, mutually acceptable political solution’ since 2007 has meant precisely that the Council has been ruling out the viability of the referendum. Anything else is to ignore how Security Council resolutions work and to sell smoke. 

On the other hand, when some of these information gurus argue delusionally that the resolution does not ‘approve’ autonomy, but only “mentions” it, another sophism is committed. Of course, the Council's resolution does not enact autonomy as a kind of ‘international law of immediate application’; they do not have the power to do so. But operationally, a Security Council resolution ordering the parties to negotiate on a specific basis is de facto approving that framework as the only viable one. And when they emphasise that Russia, China and Pakistan abstained, presenting it as a ‘rejection’, we are talking about pure and simple disinformation. Russia abstained because it negotiated amendments on Algeria, China because of its usual position of diplomatic caution, and Pakistan for domestic reasons. None vetoed the resolution, which shows that even those who oppose it recognise the legitimacy of what has been decided. 

The reality that these critics are trying to hide is clear: the resolution of 31 October 2025 represents an unprecedented radical legal and political change. There is a binding redefinition of the international framework for conflict resolution. For the first time in 34 years of MINURSO, the Security Council explicitly orders the parties to negotiate on the basis of the Moroccan autonomy proposal. Eighteen years of consistent, patient and systematic Moroccan diplomacy have transformed a political proposal into an almost binding mandate from the international community. This is a diplomatic victory of historic magnitude. Similarly, the request for a ‘strategic review of the mandate in six months’ is unprecedented and conveys a sense of urgency: if there is no progress in negotiations on Moroccan autonomy, the Council could reconsider the very viability of continuing MINURSO. The Security Council also strongly reiterates, for the twentieth consecutive year, the request for a census of refugees in Tindouf. The Polisario's chronic refusal constitutes an implicit admission of misappropriation of humanitarian aid. 

Ultimately, the intransigent stance of sectarian and dogmatic figures from the world of communication and social media across the ideological spectrum, who for personal or financial gain remain indefinitely, or have recently burst onto the scene in this debate, fits perfectly into this ecosystem of chameleon-like disinformation that has turned the Sahara into mere propaganda ammunition in the service of their own cause, not that of the Sahrawi people. As we have already said, some are the usual suspects: they are greying and appear frequently on prime-time television, displaying a feigned serious and professional demeanour – with mediocre acting skills – only to then mutate on social media into something quite different, perverse and unscrupulous, at the expense of trampling on the necks of those who refute their “confidential” narrative. Needless to say, with whatever lies are necessary.

Not so far away are the others: radicalised, arrogant, manipulative. But above all, ignorant social climbers at the beck and call and on the payroll of those who believe they see in them an authoritative mouthpiece. They will continue until they tire or a new issue arises in international politics that increases their expectations of profit. We, on the other hand, will continue to be here, as we have been for almost 20 years, supporting a realistic solution and not an impossible one. The Sahrawi population will also remain there, suffering and living in poor conditions in the camps, waiting for real solutions for half a century, because impossible solutions only benefit a few, those who govern them. And, incidentally, also those who support them in Spain, whether permanent or temporary.