Tags: Western Sahara, Frente Polisario, Morocco, MINURSO, Staffan de Mistura, United States, Massaad Boulos, autonomy,
The meeting between U.S. Presidential Adviser for Africa, Massad Boulos, and UN Envoy Staffan de Mistura shattered one of the biggest lies the Moroccan Makhzen has been spreading for some time: MINURSO has neither been dissolved, nor replaced, nor has its mission ended. On the contrary, it was at the center of discussions between Washington and the United Nations regarding the renewal of its mandate.
This alone is enough to demolish the propaganda pumped out by the regime’s media to mislead Moroccan public opinion into believing that “MINURSO is a thing of the past.”
The truth is that the UN mission is still in place, and its future is being discussed at the highest levels ahead of the Security Council meeting this coming October.
As usual, the Makhzen bets on lies and deception, trying to convince Moroccans that the Sahara issue has been “settled” and that the international community has abandoned MINURSO. But the facts say the opposite: the UN remains committed to its mission, and the United States recognizes it as the sole legitimate framework in place.
The message of this meeting is crystal clear:
-MINURSO can only end by a decision of the Security Council.
-There is no such thing as an “alternative mission” as the regime claims.
-The Western Sahara issue remains one of decolonization, and it cannot be erased by press releases or articles bought and paid for in the Makhzen’s media.
However, the U.S. statement did not stop at MINURSO. It included a notable phrase that deserves a careful breakdown: “genuine autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty.”
This is not a blank check for Morocco, as the Makhzen’s mouthpieces will attempt to portray it, but rather a phrase loaded with significant meaning.
First, the emphasis on the word “genuine” implies that the current Moroccan proposal falls short of even the minimum standards of autonomy. It lacks real substance that would grant Sahrawis legislative, executive, and judicial powers. If Morocco’s offer were serious and sufficient, Washington would not have felt the need to add this qualifier.
Second, the United States is playing a double-edged linguistic game. On the surface, it gives Morocco political cover by using the term “autonomy.” At the same time, it sends a veiled message that what is currently on the table will never gain international legitimacy unless it becomes a formula with real content, rather than a decorative façade designed to perpetuate Makhzen control.
Third, in international law, autonomy is not meant to serve as a final arrangement to close a decolonization file, but rather as a transitional stage towards the people’s exercise of their right to self-determination. Linking it to “Moroccan sovereignty” is a blatant contradiction that exposes the political and self-interested nature of Washington’s stance.
The context of these statements is highly significant. They were made in the course of discussing the renewal of MINURSO’s mandate, not in any announcement of its termination. This is yet further evidence that the United Nations has not abandoned the case, nor its mission, nor the legal framework that defines Western Sahara as a decolonization issue.
In the end, what the Makhzen wanted to present as a “diplomatic victory” has in practice turned into a political and media slap in the face. The U.S. statement reveals that Morocco’s project is not acceptable as it stands, and that the world still demands modifications before it can acquire any credibility. As for the claim that MINURSO has ended and that a new phase has begun, it is nothing more than a propaganda illusion that collapsed the moment it was confronted with reality.
In conclusion: MINURSO remains, and only the lies come to an end.
Qandyl Mohamed – Blogger, Human Rights and Independent Political Activist from Morocco