|
INSIDE AFRICA
The Road to Peace the Peace Process in Western Sahara by Karen Cecilie Sjetnan USAfrica Correspondent
Western Sahara can be named the last African colony. When the Spaniards withdrew from Western Sahara in 1975, the country found itself occupied by another foreign power; the Moroccans. According to the Moroccan government, their occupation of Western Sahara is legitimate. The words of consent, they claim, can be found in the Madrid agreement of November 4, 1975. They maintain that through this agreement parts of Spanish Sahara rightfully became Moroccan territory. Further, Moroccan officials assert that the Madrid agreement was recognised by the UN and approved by the Jemaa council (the assembly of the people's representatives). To speak back, it can only be said that these statements are not fully true and that the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara is far from lawful. The Madrid agreement is in itself illegitimate. It was negotiated in complete silence and secrecy against the advisory opinion of the International Tribunal in the Haag dating from October 1975. According to judges in the Haag, neither Morocco nor Mauritania have any historic claim to the territory. Regarding this matter, it is also interesting to note that the borders of Western Sahara have remained the same since they were decided upon early this century. Further, it is a well-established rule in international law that no occupation of territory is legitimate, even when certain groups of the population are favourable to the occupation. Concerning the UN, the Madrid agreement was never sanctioned by their officials and is thereby not sanctioned by the UN as Moroccan officials claim. Ever since 1975, some effort has been made to find a fair and permanent solution to the situation in Western Sahara. But so far, no luck. Western Sahara is still ruled from the Moroccan capital of Rabat. There was a clear lack of involvement on the part of the UN during the years following the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara. It was not until the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) formally recognised the existence the Western Sahara Republic in 1984 that things started to happen. The OAU recognition of Western Sahara caused strong opposition in Morocco, leading to their withdrawal from the OAU, a situation which remains today. On this occasion it is important to note that the Arabic state of Western Sahara has received strong support from the African continent. Other Arabic states, on the other hand, have been loyal to and shown support towards Morocco. In 1988 the UN and the OAU started co-operating in order to develop a peace plan for Western Sahara and the surrounding region. The peace plan was finalised in 1991 at the same time as the parties to the conflict agreed on a cease-fire. The cease-fire is still in force. The drive to find a permanent solution to the conflict, however, seemed to vanish during the 1990s. The UN has yet to succeed in implementing the 1991 peace plan. Nevertheless, the new Secretary-General of the UN, Mr. Kofi Annan, has shown strong commitment to solving the conflict in Western Sahara. In September 1997 a "Settlement Plan" was adopted under the auspices of former US State Secretary Mr. James Baker. The plan was negotiated through and agreed upon by representatives of the people of Western Sahara together with Moroccan, Algerian, Mauritania, and UN officials. This Settlement Plan puts fourth practical guidelines to the reduction of armaments in the conflict-area. It also states the necessary steps in order to successfully carry out a referendum for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara, that is whether the conflicting area will become independent or whether it will be integrated with the existing Morocco. The referendum is planned for December 1998. More specifically, the Settlement Plan states that the UN will take over the jurisdictional responsibility of the area occupied by Morocco until the referendum has taken place. It is also the UN that will carry out the registration of those who are entitled to vote in the area. Outside Western Sahara, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) will assist refugees so that they, too, can vote in their home country (about 165.000 refugees are to be found in Algerian refugee-camps alone). The UNHCR will also execute preparatory work for the repatriation of Western Saharan refugees. The number of Moroccan military personnel in Western Sahara is to be reduced by 60.000 and will then count a mere 120.000 people. Moreover, prisoners of war and political prisoners are to be exchanged between the two states. Again, it is important to note that the parties to the conflict have committed themselves to co-operating with the UN delegation, MINURSO, in the area by the signing of the Settlement Plan. As a result of this, plus the content of the Settlement Plan, there are great expectations that the conflict in Western Sahara can and will be solved in a peaceful manner within the turn of the century. Obviously this will have important consequences for the people of Western Sahara. Furthermore, finding a peaceful solution to the conflict between Western Sahara and Morocco may lead to positive repercussions in the area surrounding the conflicting parties. If solved successfully, the situation in Western Sahara may prove that peaceful problem-solving methods can be effective and lead to better results than those obtained through offensive methods. Moreover, there are two important elements to point out regarding the peace process in Western Sahara. First, if the Settlement Plan does not lead to a fair and just situation for the people of Western Sahara, this will be in clear breach of international law. The countries involved in the conflict agreed, by the signing of the Settlement Plan, to fulfil the prescriptions of international law and the specific advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the right to self-determination for Western Sahara. Second, it is important to stress that the Settlement Plan involves specific decisions for the Western Sahara conflict. The Plan can therefore not be applied to other conflicts in other parts of the world. Deriving from the above we can gather that it is important both for Western Sahara, Morocco and the surrounding nation-states that the Settlement Plan and peace process will be followed and kept to. Consequently, an appeal goes out to all states, to their leaders and to all the people who may in any way influence the direction the Western Sahara conflict may take: The UN should be supplied with all the necessary personnel and funds to successfully carry out its role described in the Settlement Plan. Further, support should be given to every organisation, public or private, that show interest in and willingness to take part in the humanitarian side of the settlement process. Last, Western Saharan and Moroccan officials need outside support and pressure in order to make them aware that there exists an unanimous international desire that they fulfil the obligations they have committed themselves to.
Creating peace and solving disputes are arduous tasks, especially for
the people directly involved. Those of us who are not directly involved
in the process should therefore do what we can to the make the task
slightly less strenuous: put pressure on our respective governments, put
pressure on Morocco, support the people of Western Sahara in whatever
decision they may make, and finally put resources in the hands of the
UN! (Some research source for this report came from the Church of Norway
Council on Ecumenical and International Relations) (copyright, March 1998)
Back to: Inside Africa Index |