SPS RASD/ESPAGNE/FORUM
The Sahrawi Intifada highlights “the urgency” of a solution to the
conflict, affirms Président Abdelaziz in the Europe Forum in
Madrid
13.07.05
Madrid, 12/07/2005 (SPS) The
Intifada currently lived in the occupied territories of Western Sahara
highlights “the urgency of a fair and definitive solution” to a
conflict prevailing since thirty years, failing which “the
action-reaction dynamic would degenerate into bloodshed,” the Saharawi
Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) president Mohamed Abdelaziz stressed
Tuesday in Madrid.
Such bloodshed would make “extremely precarious peaceful perspectives”
for the settlement of the conflict, Abdelaziz considered in a
conference on the recent political and economic developments of the
Saharawi issue, organised by the Forum Europe.
Here is the complete text of the President’s intervention:
"Statement of President Mohamed Abdelaziz in Forum Europa
Madrid, 12 July 2005
Organised by NUEVA ECONOMIA FORUM
First of all, I would like to extend to you my thanks for having
invited me to take part in this event and to talk about the question of
Western Sahara from the perspective of international politics and
economy.
At the outset, I would like to clarify our staring points. Therefore, I
will give an assessment of the latest political and economic
developments of the conflict in Western Sahara.
It seems to me that both experience and theory have demonstrated an
undisputable fact. If power becomes an end in itself, it becomes doomed
to failure. It is widely acknowledged that the only sustainable form of
government is the one based on the consent of the subjects. It is also
well-known that unless the political power is subjected to certain
rules it leads to engendering a climate of insecurity, despotism and
political nihilism.
These rules consist in what is called “the rule of law” when it comes
to states and “international law” with respect to international
relations.
The same thing also applies to economy. If economy becomes an end in
itself, it is probably that it would lead to failure. It is well-known
today that those companies that, in addition to their endeavour to gain
more profit, seek to benefit society remain strong because they
eventually stimulate trust. This is what we call “social and trade
union responsibility”.
In view of these ideas in which we believe firmly, I would like to
present an assessment of the current situation in Western Sahara.
The latest events related to what could be called the Saharawi Intifada
have underlined clearly the urgent need for finding a rapid, just and
definitive solution to this conflict before the dynamics of action and
reaction leads to bloodletting that may make it much more difficult to
explore the prospects of a peaceful and negotiated settlement as we
have been seeking so far.
In order to avoid any ambiguity in this respect, I have to tell you
honestly that the Moroccan obstruction of all peace plans that were
elaborated and approved by the United Nations, such as the Settlement
Plan of 1990 and Baker’s Plan of 2003 as well as the brutal repression
against the Saharawi citizens in the occupied territories, are two
factors that have confronted the Saharawi leadership with a difficult
dilemma.
The elements of this dilemma consist, on the one hand, in the absence
of any prospects of peace owing to the lack of any appropriate response
by the international community to the long-lasting Moroccan
intransigence. In this context, Morocco’s violation of international
legality and of human rights in Western Sahara due to its illegal
occupation of a state member of the African Union is something that
should no longer be tolerated by the international community.
On the other hand, if this is added to the justifiable disappointment
amid the Saharawi people after long years of waiting for the advent of
a peaceful solution in which they believed, the ongoing cease-fire will
be put under further pressure.
In other words, we cannot remain idle at a time when we cannot see any
prospects of implementing all the proposals that were proposed by the
United Nations and of which some were formally accepted by Morocco.
We should all agree that violence and war are things that no one
desires, especially the Saharawis. No one except the Moroccan present
leaders who continue to give the impression that they prefer to be
locked into the old doctrine that stipulates that maintaining an
absolute power is to be hinged on a repressive policy internally and on
creating conflicts and tension with the neighbours. History has
demonstrated this. For them, future is to live and remain locked into
the past.
At the same time, we should also agree that the continuation of the
status quo, which is a consequence of Moroccan obstruction of the
various proposals for achieving a just and definitive solution to the
conflict, can only lead to an escalating brutal oppression or to the
resumption of hostilities or to the two things together.
I am confident that this does not represent the real interest of a
power like Spain or the interests of its peoples and its political and
economic elite. However, in view of experience and what events have
demonstrated during the past thirty years, we have to say that Spain
and other European countries, especially France, have all continue to
pursue a policy with regard to Western Sahara and North Africa and the
Maghreb, which have proven unproductive.
That policy has sought to establish, outside of the framework of
international legality and sometimes in contradiction thereof, a
relation with the region on the basis of some trade arrangements that
were given rise to by the conflict and some of which are illegal such
as the fisheries agreements while others were generated by the climate
of tension itself such as the arms sales.
This vision is locked in its own logic that provides that tension and
conflict are to continue indefinitely. The loudly declared commitment
to finding a peaceful, just and lasting solution is sacrificed for some
narrow economic calculations that on the long run could prove
unproductive not only for those benefiting from them but also for the
country that encourages them and believes that it can reap some
benefits from them as is the case of Morocco. Although it continues to
occupy Western Sahara and to exploit its natural resources, Morocco
today is not more stable, secure, democratic and prosperous than it was
in 1976.
In the context of this neighbouring relation there emerged interests of
groups and companies of autonomous regions close geographically to the
region which accepted the offer to implicate its companies and
businesses in the same logic that prescribes the continuation of the
tension and conflict and therefore the prolonging of the suffering of
the Saharawi people and the violation of international legality.
The Saharawi just and legitimate cause has been somehow sacrificed by
this vision and those interests on the cruel alter of rapid profit that
was made possible by the violation of international legality and human
rights.
On the long run, this vision will only prove unproductive. Economic
relations established on this basis of this logic are bound to be
unsustainable for four reasons:
First, this can only add to tension in the region by endorsing the
intransigent position exhibited by Morocco.
Second, it does not take into consideration not only the position of
the Saharawi Republic and other political actors in the region with
regard to the conflict of Western Sahara but also the security and
economic relation that can be forged tomorrow with the Saharawi
Republic and the other states of the region, whether at bilateral level
or at the level of an economically integrated Maghrebian region.
Third, sooner or later this will put the companies, which are involved
in the plundering of other’s natural resources, into a situation in
which they will lose the trust of other economic actors, a fact that
may lead to their eventual ruin.
Four, that conflictive logic may lead to the enrichment of some in
Morocco especially the mangers of ONA (Ominium Nord Africa) and other
generals of the gendarmerie and the army, but it does not ensure a
convincing response to the increasing socioeconomic demands by the
Moroccan people, considering the great number of boats systematically
sailing towards European coasts.
Morocco, which was ranked by the UN as 162 on the general scale,
continues to suffer from an economic crises resulting, among other
things, from the heavy burden incurred as a consequence of a war that
it waged to occupy a land—a war that it has never been able to win
either militarily or in the framework of international institutions.
Despite its unrestrained exploitation of the Saharawi resources,
especially fish, phosphate and sand, Morocco’s crises is still on the
rise. It is an open secret that the crises puts Morocco in a situation
fraught with real dangers that may lead the country to a political and
social catastrophe as those endured by Indonesia and Haiti and the
eventuality of having thousands fleeing towards the coasts of the
neighbouring countries.
If we are concerned about the interest of the region and that of
Morocco itself and about the credibility of the United Nations as the
ideal framework for settling present and looming conflicts, we need to
do a profound reconsideration that has not been done yet. A genuine
concern about peace and an objective vision of the future should be the
key reasons for such reconsideration.
Spain and its economic and political elite may play the role of a
catalyst. In our view, there are four key elements that should guide
any vision of the future. I will briefly mention them in the form of
indicators meant for generating a possibly later and detailed
discussion.
First, in the first place comes the search for a just and lasting
solution to the Saharawi-Moroccan conflict. If this element is
convincing enough, we should dot our i’s and cross our t’s. We should
acknowledge that there is only one way that may lead us safely to that
goal. This way is the one determined by international legality in that
there is only one formula whereby the conflict could be settled justly
and definitely and with a win-win outcome. This formula consists in the
holding of a UN-supervised self-determination referendum in which the
Saharawi people can choose their future. At any rate, the victory will
be that of international legality. If Morocco claims to be democratic,
then it should not object to this principle. Moreover, it is even
unconceivable to talk of the democratic Morocco unless it has shown its
respect for this principle.
For an historical fear of the neighbouring country, which has not been
overcome yet, and seeking to reap profits through the conflictive logic
prompted by Morocco, some quarters in Spain have sometimes sought to
endorse and even to propose other formulas for solution, while knowing
that they would be violating the essential element according to
international legality, namely the principle of self-determination, in
a case established by the United Nations as a question of
decolonisation.
In this context, it should be recalled wisely and reasonably that the
international community unanimously considers the Settlement Plan and
Baker’s Plan as the two optimum formulas for implementing the dictates
of international legality with regard to the question of Western
Sahara. Even Morocco has accepted this proposal. Therefore, now it is
not a matter of asking for something new, but one of honouring the
commitments that it has already undertaken.
Second, a lasting peace is what can ensure a lasting stability in the
region. At the same time, lasting stability that is based on peace is
what can contribute to establishing long-term security and economic
relations with the grouping of the region and with its individual
components. A comprehensive and balanced relationship with the grouping
will diminish the risks involved in a unilateral approach that has long
been pursued by European countries in the context of the old policy
based on creating tension and mistrust among the countries of the
Maghreb. Furthermore, this comprehensive and balanced relationship
involves elements that are conducive to achieving harmony and
integration among our countries both vertically and horizontally.
Third, a just peace that leads to the establishment of a solid
relationship with the regional grouping must encourage the urgent
demand for instituting and, in some cases, promoting democratic regimes
that rely on a civil society organised in political parties and NGOs,
given that it remains an essential element that provides the political
power with legitimacy and acts as a watchdog of its management of
national issues. This will certainly contribute to furthering peace.
With regard to its economic aspect, we all believe in the principle of
a free market that also allows states to play a key role in the
development process, particularly by establishing clear rules of the
game for all actors. It is clear that we, as Southern countries subject
to increasing globalising pressures, should orient our economies
towards a regional integration in all possible fields (such as NEPAD
and MERCOSUR for example), and harness all possibilities offered by our
huge natural resources in order to ensure the involvement of foreign
public and private capital. We need each other in order to move forward
towards the establishment of a common, productive, solid and durable
relationship. This can only be conceivable with the establishment of
peace.
Fourth, Western Sahara represents for Spain something different from
the rest of the countries of the region. We are the only country in the
Maghreb and the Arab world that used to be a Spanish province. The
others were temporary protectorates of which nothing were left except
some memories, while we were a colony and a province, regardless of
whether that was a good or a bad thing, because we cannot unmake
history. This history is very present there and we, the Saharawis, do
accept it without any complex.
The Spanish dimension is what explains, among other things, the special
ties that exist today between Spain and Latin America, and we are
attached to this dimension despite the Spanish indifference in this
respect. Spanish is one of our teaching languages along with Arabic. It
was thanks to the Saharawi Arabic that, last year, the African Union
admitted Spanish as a working language. However, with the aim of
ensuring that our students have their university studies in Spanish, we
have to send hundreds of them to Cuba and Mexico—to which I express our
profound gratitude for their generosity—in order not to go farther than
that geographically.
Preserving and promoting this Spanish dimension is an extra value and
is of great political and economic importance for establishing
bilateral and particular relations between the two countries whose
peoples are bound by ties of friendship and trust that the two peoples
have been able to maintain throughout the past thirty years.
In addition to the cultural dimension, we should also touch on the
geographical aspect. It should be recalled that the land that lies at a
distance of less than an hour from Canary Islands is not some “desert”
of the Sahara but a country claimed by the Saharawi Republic that has
vast beaches and coasts rich in fish, phosphate, oil, gas and uranium.
Economy, culture, geography … but also security without which all the
former becomes a nightmare. Spain must reflect deeply when it comes to
its neighbour on the other side of the Atlantic, in terms not only of
trade and investment but also of security.
Options are crystal clear. Spain may choose to have as its neighbour
only Morocco extending its dominion by dint of military force. However,
this option may involve risks. On the one hand, there are the risks
involved in the military expansion that started in 1975 and those that
result, if it were, from historical relations of mistrust, tension and
confrontation that have not been overcome yet. On the other hand, there
are risks resulting from the encouragement that may be accorded to the
expansionist party when it sees that the response to its expansionism
is blessing and not punishment. Evidently, this does not mean that we
ask that the Saharawi Republic should be the only neighbour on the
other side, because even if this is an ideal thing for us, it is not
possible nor advisable.
We are not claiming to be the only interlocutor, but why not try to
conceive of many actors with the existence of two states within their
internationally recognised borders?
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Western Sahara represents for Spain an indelible fact. It cannot be
deleted from the past since the decolonisation process of Western
Sahara that was interrupted by Spain still represents a political and
moral debt that has not been convincingly paid back. Besides, it cannot
be deleted from the present or the future. For the Spanish civil
society, Western Sahara is today an established fact. Western Sahara is
a project for a future in peace. It is high time to embrace history and
to acknowledge the present and to fashion the future. I do wish that
this meeting would serve these objectives for which we, the Saharawis,
highly aspire and deserve as a people and a state.
SAHARA
PRESS SERVICE