Africa Ignores the Western Sahara Conflict
Mohammad El Ashab Al-Hayat - 04/07/08//
It is not by ignoring them that problems can be solved. The African Union Summit in Sharm El-Sheikh represented a golden opportunity for a fresh start in the regional organization's approach to the Western Sahara issue. It is no longer acceptable, at least legally and politically, to allow such a paradox to continue to impede the role of the African Union in dealing with the crisis taking place north of the continent.
It is true that the matter is being handled by the UN, which, along with the Security Council, possesses prerogatives allowing it to hasten the process of reaching a political solution. However, a large number of African countries have resorted to suspending their bilateral recognition of the Sahrawi Republic, which was unilaterally established by the Polisario Front. This in turn represents a precedent in international relations. The fact of the matter is that there is nothing within the Charter of the African Union that allows a collective suspension of membership, except in the framework of imposing economic sanctions and a political siege. This requires abiding by the political dimension of solving such a paradox. Indeed, Morocco, from the legal point of view, remains outside of the African Union and has refused to join it. However, it has at the same time established multifaceted bilateral relations with African countries. The Polisario, on the other hand, is a member of the African Union, yet its relations with African countries are limited. This means that the present paradox is inconsequential to the pursuit of a solution. In the future, when all of the parties concerned reach the final, consensual and acceptable formula for a solution, it will affect the situation in the African Union.
Such an exit seems morbid, and at the very least not annoying. However, it limits the efficiency of a regional organization, which could have played a key role in supporting the UN's efforts. Indeed, African countries follow one of three trends regarding this issue: one, which supports Morocco's suggestion that the Western Sahara province be granted widened autonomy; one, which limits itself to declaring its support of the Security Council's efforts; and a third, which clings to the independence of the province. Nevertheless, what reinforces the position of this or that party is to abide by the rules of international legitimacy, which speak of self-determination. The notion of such a choice compels us not to anticipate the expression of will, regardless of whether it concerns the option of autonomy or any other content of a political solution.
The Polisario Front cannot negotiate with Morocco in the light of its ongoing unilateral declaration of the establishment of the "Sahrawi Republic", because this means that it has determined the fate of the province in advance. The fact is that Morocco similarly cannot cling to the final annexation of the province in any negotiations. Consequently, the most likely solution would be one of consensus, which neither includes complete annexation nor complete independence, but rather autonomy, which comprises both options.
There is a precedent repeatedly mentioned by the Africans, which is that the countries concerned with the Western Sahara conflict did not place the issue on their lists of concerns at Maghreb Summits, and that what Arab countries of Africa have failed to find a solution for will not prove simple for the African Union. In as much as such a stance seems somewhat pessimistic, it places responsibility on the Maghreb states, and at least breaks with the widespread notions that the Arab countries are transferring their disputes to the African scene. However, assumption of the presidency of the African Union by Egypt, which had once voiced its desire to join the Arab Maghreb Union before its relapse, may help bring the issue back to political realism.
|
