Why the World Needs to Know about Western Sahara’s
Seemingly Endless Struggle for Independence
An interview with a Sahrawi Journalist and Activist.
By Amira Ali.
May 3, 2017
In 1975, Morocco, under King Hassan II, invaded
Western Sahara; and since, the Sahrawi people —
female-dominated society of Arab and Berber descent
— have been in an unflagging resistance struggle,
committed to self-determination without exception.
Today, Western Sahara remains the African
continent’s (overtly) occupied territory — a Moroccan
colony.
The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (a full member
of the African Union) is governed by the Polisario Front
(a national liberation movement), and controls about
20% of Western Sahara while claiming sovereignty
over the entire territory of Western Sahara.
The Sahrawi people (Sahrawi is an Arabic word for
Ṣaḥrā’ meaning desert), despite decades of struggle
against colonization and several failed efforts of
conflict resolution and decolonization, continue to live
ambiguously. Second to Palestine, the Sahrawi people
(regarded as some of the most courageous and
principled people) are the longest suffering group of
refugees in the world — more than 165,000 Sahrawi
people have been living in refugee camps since 1976.
A protracted state of affair, Morocco, “sponsored and
protected by the French,” ceaselessly carries on its
occupation, impinging on the Sahrawi’s rightful
independence. Insisting on “autonomy within the
Kingdom of Morocco” and struggling to control its
neighboring country, it continues to avoid any
referendum or agreement, preventing the possibility of
any wide-ranging and durable political settlement.
Morocco’s defiance toward the Sahrawi people’s call for
self-determination is further highlighted in its absence
from the African Union 668th meeting on the situation
in Western Sahara held on 20 March 2017.
Four decades later and after fifty-four years of failed
attempts to fully decolonize Western Sahara, the way
forward remains uncertain. The Kingdom of Morocco
remains unbending with its colonial program, all while
the Sahrawi people resiliently stand their ground,
affirming, “no political solution would be accepted
unless it gives justice,” and justice would mean
“Morocco withdrawing from Western Sahara and
respecting Western Sahara’s borders.”
To learn more about the situation in Western Sahara
— the shape and state of Western Sahara’s resistance
struggle, Morocco’s recent interests to rejoin the
African Union and its further intentions in Western
Sahara, the illegal exploration and plundering of the
territory’s natural resources, and the impasse in the
peace process — we spoke with Malainin Lakhal, a
journalist and advocate of Western Sahara.
Q: How long has Western Sahara been in a resistance
struggle with attempts to decolonize and gain its
independence?
Lakhal: Western Sahara has always been a target of
European colonial attempts of invasion since the
15thCentury, or maybe even prior, because of its
strategic position for the old European merchant
movements. During various periods, the Sahrawi
population fought against many attempts of invasions
by the Portuguese, the British, the Dutch, French and
the Spanish. After the notorious Berlin Conference of
1884-85 that launched the Partition of Africa, Spain
was “awarded” Western Sahara (that included what is
now known as the Southern zone of Morocco). But from
day one, the Sahrawi resistance, though small,
scattered and not really aware of the danger of
colonization, started attacking the Spanish (few)
positions on the coasts of Western Sahara. So it can
rightly be said that the Sahrawi resistance against
colonialism officially started in 1885-86.
In modern history, a prominent Sahrawi political
Leader, Martyr Mohamed Sidi Brahim Basiri, formed
the Sahrawi politically organized resistance in 196667. He was a Sahrawi who studied political science and
journalism in Morocco, Cairo and Damascus, prior to
returning to his country to start a political party for the
liberation of Western Sahara (The Vanguard
Movement for the Liberation of Saguia El Hamra & Rio
De Oro). Between 1967 and 1970, this political
movement adopted peaceful means of struggle against
the Spanish colonization, but in 1970 the Spanish
colonial authorities harshly oppressed a popular
uprising organized by this movement in the Capital
city of Western Sahara, El Aaiun, killing dozens of
civilians and imprisoning the majority of the
leadership of the movement including Mohamed Sidi
Brahim Basiri. To this day, the Spanish government
refuses to reveal the truth about what happened to
Basiri, though we have testimonies from some of the
survivors who state that he was cowardly assassinated
by his torturers because he refused to surrender or
compromise with the colonial power.
This blow to peaceful resistance pushed hundreds of
Sahrawis, including Sahrawi students (in the
universities of Morocco, Mauritania, Algeria, Spain
and elsewhere), former militants in various armed
resistance groups, victims of the Spanish oppression
and the remaining militants of the recently crashed
Vanguard movement to join force and form groups of
secret political organizations that will unite on 10 May
1973 to constitute the Frente Popular de Liberación
de Saguia-El-Hamra
y Rio
de Oro
(Frente
POLISARIO- Popular Front for the Liberation of the
Saguia-El-Hamra and Rio de Oro).
But this time, the new political organization adopted
armed struggle. It learned from the experience of the
Vanguard movement that the colonizer only
understands the voice of fire and Iron, as Polisario’s
anthem stresses. The armed struggle against Spain
officially started on 20 May 1973. So this is a very brief
chronology of the commencement of the Sahrawi
resistance against colonialism.
Q: How committed are the Sahrawi people (today) to
carry on the fight for self-determination?
Lakhal: Just try to imagine how committed a people
that have been resisting colonization since 1884 to date
must be, refusing to be swallowed by Spain first and
now Morocco. The Sahrawi people are so committed to
their cause that they have refused, at least for the last
41 years to submit to the Moroccan attempts to impose
a colonial fait accompli on them. For 41 years,
Sahrawis have chosen to live as political exiles in
refugee camps, in a very harsh part of the planet (in
terms of weather conditions) and face all sorts of
sufferings, rather than surrender to the Moroccan
colonial will.
Thousands of Sahrawis have been victims to forced
disappearances, illegal imprisonments, iniquitous
trials, summary executions, and all sorts of colonial
oppressive methods, but they still continue with the
struggle, participation and demonstrations. They still
loudly say: “We are not Moroccans! We want our
freedom back!”
Q: What is the driving force behind Morocco’s
occupation of Western Sahara?
Lakhal: There are various and complicated motives
behind the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara.
One, Morocco is a very poor country (in terms of natural
resources) with a big population (over 35 millions),
while Western Sahara is very rich in all sorts of
renewable and non-renewable resources.
Two, geographically speaking, half of Morocco’s
territory is completely useless because of Mountains
and arid regions. The only useful regions are the
coastal ones while the entire zone in the middle, the far
North, and South of Morocco are difficult to live in
because of Mountains. So, Western Sahara presents a
big and wide-open territorial expansion for Morocco.
Third reason is the outcome of the expansionist dogma
of the kingdom. Morocco has historically been a chain
of kingdoms that varied in territorial sovereignty.
Absolutely none of them have ever ruled or owned
Western Sahara. In fact, their Southern borders have
been some 300 to 400 km far from the current Northern
border of Western Sahara. But, most of these
Kingdoms, and especially the actual Family have
always had expansionist tendencies and territorial
ambitions and claims in all the neighboring countries
(Algeria, Mauritania and Spain). It should be recalled
here that the Moroccan King tried to invade parts of
Algeria (the famous Sands War in October 1963) a few
months after Algiers gained its independence. The
Kingdom also refused, for 9 years, to recognize the
independence of Mauritania.
Four, the crucial reason that ignited the late King
Hassan II’s decision to invade Western Sahara in 1975
was nothing less than fear of his army, after he was a
victim of two dangerous military coups in July 1971
and August 1972. In fact, the rule of Hassan II, who
can be considered the real builder of the modern
Moroccan Kingdom, has been threatened by more than
20 political or military coups, according to recent
reports by Moroccan Press. The king needed to find a
way to get rid of his army by keeping it busy with a
colonial adventure in Western Sahara, and at the same
time try to impose a colonial fait accompli and exploit
the rich neighboring territory.
Five, most of us often forget that the Moroccan
Kingdom and the current Monarchic Family is and has
been the protégé of France since 1912. In fact, the
throne of this family was threatened by various
Moroccan revolutions since 1911. The Moroccan people
were then criticizing the complicity of the ruling family
with the French colonial power. The Moroccan elite
even dethroned one of the grandfathers of the current
king, who immediately handed over the country to
France for protection. This is why France didn’t
colonize Morocco; rather, it was a Protectorate. It was
France that built the roots and bases of the modern
Moroccan Monarchy. Morocco was and is still a country
under the political, economic and even cultural
influence of France.
Six, within this same plot of complicity with the West,
it was the duty of Morocco to never let the newly
independent and revolutionary state of Algeria become
a dominant power in North Africa. This is one of the
geo-strategic reasons France supports the Moroccan
invasion followed by the occupation of Western Sahara.
To this date, the French political class has never been
able to overcome the chock of total independence of
Algeria from the French colonial Empire. And by the
way, the politics of what is well known as the FranceAfrique is still dominating huge parts of our continent,
and many French-speaking countries are still under
the influence and authority of Paris.
These are, more or less, some of the main motives for
the Moroccan invasion and occupation of Western
Sahara. This occupation not only hinders my people’s
emancipation and prosperity but it also hinders all the
efforts and dreams of the North African States to join
forces and form a strong and unified region (within the
African Union). Knowing that if North Africa really
unified it can compete with the South European
countries, and become even more developed given that
we have everything in the eight countries of North
Africa
(Morocco,
Algeria,
Sahrawi
Republic,
Mauritania, Tunis, Libya and Egypt). But of course,
France and the West will never let us unite, neither in
North Africa nor the Continent as a whole.
Q: How much of the 266,000 square kilometers
(130,000 sq. mi) of Western Sahara’s surface area does
the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic control?
Lakhal: The Sahrawi Republic controls a liberated
zone of more than 90,000 sq km (East and South of the
Moroccan military separation wall), the remaining
176,000 sq
occupation.
km
are
under
Moroccan
military
A lot of people including Moroccans often say as an
argument that we cannot be a State because our
territory is small and our people do not make up a
million (around 600.000 Sahrawis all over the world,
maybe more). Worldwide, the territory of Western
Sahara is bigger than 180 sovereign states and
dependencies. In terms of population, we are bigger
than 74 sovereign states and dependencies. So, I see no
relevance to that argument of size or population.
Q: The Polisario Front, the leading front of the Sahrawi
Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) is considered “a
legitimate government in exile.” What does that mean
in real terms?
Lakhal: The Polisario Front is in fact considered the
legitimate political representative of the people of
Western Sahara (UN’s General Assembly’s resolution
34/37 of 1979). As a liberation movement, Polisario
represents the Sahrawis in the UN and in all European
countries. It is the official interlocutor and negotiating
party in the UN facing Morocco as the colonial party in
the conflict.
But on 27 February 1976, to avoid the administrative
and political vacuum, Spain was going to create by its
unilateral withdrawal from Western Sahara, the
Polisario Front, as a unique representative of the
Sahrawi people, decided to constitute and proclaim the
Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic as the legitimate
and sovereign government in Western Sahara. After
that, the Sahrawi Republic became the government
and official authority running the country. The State
has a semi-presidential system with a President, a
prime Minister and a fully operational government. It
has a Parliament composed of elected representatives.
It has an independent judiciary with various levels of
courts, and all the ministries and institutions. Same as
any African country.
In fact, and though the Sahrawi population
(administrated by the SADR) are still in exile, the
administrations and institutions of SADR are far
advanced in democracy. For example, the Sahrawi
Republic in exile succeeded to raise the level of
analphabetism since the eighties and nineties from
around 10% to 90%. Violence against women is almost
insignificant; women participation in political spaces
and public life is very high. The women dominate
positions of leadership at the local and administrative
levels, and in sectors of education and health.
So to sum-up, the Polisario Front and the Sahrawi
Republic are succeeding in governing a country despite
the fact that they’re fighting against colonization and
do not have full access to the resources of the country.
The Sahrawi people have managed, for more than 40
years, to operate the only refugee camp in the world
administered and organized by refugees themselves.
Q: What is the current situation on ground? How long
have the Sahrawi people been living in refugee camps?
How are the camps managed, and who funds them?
Lakhal: The Sahrawi people have been living in
refugee camps since 1976. The Sahrawi Republic and
its different ministries and institutions manage the
camps. There are currently six camps — one
administrative camp and five camps where the
majority of the refugee population settle. Each of the
five camps has a Governor, with an administration
where all ministries and institutions are represented
as directorates. Each of the five camps are sectioned
into 6 to 7 Dairas (like municipalities), and each Daira
is parted into 4 Hay (neighborhoods). The Government
has police services, courts, and the necessary
directorates to serve the citizens. And the camps have
hospitals, schools, and other administrations like any
other country in the world. The only difference is, these
are refugee camps.
Politically speaking, every four years the population
votes to elect its representatives in parliament and the
highest political bodies of the Polisario. Also, there are
active civil society groups in the camps. There are
many sectoral unions and NGOs that cover various
sectors of civil society. The Sahrawis usually say
they’ve had 40 years of preparation. Since they’ve built
all their institutions in exile, once the country gains its
freedom, they only have to take what they’ve already
built and implant it in the country, with full access to
their country’s resources.
Currently, everyday survival of Sahrawi refugees is
dependent on international aid, which is not sufficient
(the Sahrawi refugees only receive the minimum
emergency aid though their case is ongoing for more
than 40 years now). But, because this aid is not
sufficient the refugees are creating small businesses
and operating private services to assist their families
(informal and sub-economies).
President Jacob Zuma and President Brahim Ghali,
President of the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic
addressing the media at the Sefako Makgatho
Presidential Guesthouse in Pretoria. 06/01/2016
Kopano Tlape GCIS
Q: How does the younger generation, especially those
who were born and raised in the camps, view their
socio-political condition, and how do they respond to it?
Lakhal: The Sahrawi youth is now in a serious state of
unrest because of the long period of passive struggle in
the country. Since 1991, they see nothing progressing.
Morocco is still colonizing and oppressing our brothers
in the occupied zones. The UN is moving nowhere with
the point at issue; we are still waiting for its promise of
organizing a referendum that never comes. The
international community is only attentive to war zones
and bloody conflicts, and time is running. Babies who
were born in 1991 when the UN intervened and
brokered the Settlement Plan are now 26 years old. So,
I can understand their unrest and anxiety.
This situation creates a generation that wants the
leadership to resume to war, to end the colonization.
They see, and they are somehow right that Morocco
and the so-called international community only listen
to the sounds of guns. Yet, they are very active in
various social movements in the camps and
internationally. They are struggling now though… in
human rights, unions, universities, in the streets of the
occupied zones, etc.
The older Sahrawi generation fear for the day when
their patience ends. No one can predict what would
happen then; personally, I think it will be violent.
Q: In 1984, Morocco withdrew from the AU after the
organization accepted the membership of the Sahrawi
Arab Democratic Republic into the AU. Since, Morocco
refused to join the AU unless membership of SADR was
revoked. Earlier this year, Morocco was admitted back
into the AU with reports indicating that 30 out of 54
African Heads of States voted in favor of its re-
admittance. What triggered Morocco’s interest to rejoin
the AU? What do you think influenced the shift in
political position?
Lakhal: In my humble opinion, those African States
who supported the admission of Morocco, no matter
what their reasons are, made a historical mistake that
the African Union will pay for the coming 5 to 10 years.
The admission of Morocco into the AU is very similar
to the deliberate injection of dangerously cancerous
cells in an already weak body.
We will soon see what Morocco’s next moves are.
I said it before and I’ll repeat, Morocco will do its best
to stop the African Union from supporting the
decolonization of the remaining occupied zones of
SADR. If it fails to achieve that goal, then Rabat will
create divisions in the AU thanks to its influence on
many French-speaking member States. It absolutely
has no problem wrecking all of what we’ve achieved so
far. In fact, Morocco has always created parallel bodies
and institutions that compete with the OAU/AU. So,
why do you think Rabat would care about the unity of
Africa? It wouldn’t.
I strongly believe that the Moroccan change of strategy
and application to join the AU without putting
conditions on revoking SADR’s membership is a
strategy built and plotted by France to recuperate the
AU, which has became an important player in the
international arena. We will hear many who say this is
just another conspiracy theory. My response to people
who say so is: go back and read our history. Who killed
Sankara, and why? That’s just one example out of
many. How does France still control the economies and
politics of more than 14 countries through an unjust
colonial pact? Rebelling against them will result in
coups, wars and civil wars as well as direct
intervention. The French army never left Africa; it is
still present in many countries, and even in many
African military staffs.
As for how many countries accepted the admission of
Morocco, the numbers are not accurate at all. It was an
open discussion that ended up with a sort of Add
slider agreement between supporters and those who
were suspicious about the Moroccan move. But in the
end, the majority said that Morocco is an African State
and should be admitted so as to deal with its occupation
of Western Sahara in house. We will see where this
argument will lead, though, personally, I know that
Morocco is a bandit state that has never respected or
honored its commitments in the UN and elsewhere.
Q: What does Morocco’s re-admittance (allegedly by a
majority vote, without an excoriation) into the African
Union — without ratifying the Constitutive Act —
mean to the Sahrawi people and their struggle for selfdetermination? How are the people responding to the
splintering and contradictory messages? And what
may this do to ongoing efforts of promoting continental
integration?
Lakhal: Morocco signed and ratified the AU
Constitutive Act without a single condition or
reservation. In fact, the AU made it clear in its contacts
with Morocco before the 2017 January Summit
stressing that if it wants to join the organization it
must ratify the Constitutive Act with no comment,
conditions or reservation. Morocco will have to deal
with its contradictions since it has adhered to the AU
Constitutive Act that clearly stipulates in its objective:
“b)- Defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and
independence of its Member States.” And the AU will
have to deal with Morocco about defending the
sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Sahrawi
Republic, which is a founding member State.
More significantly, there are 16 relevant principles of
the Union enshrined in the Constitutive Act. And I
stress Principles, not just any articles but the very
foundation of the Union. Morocco is violating 7 of these
principles, just by being the occupying power in
Western Sahara.
We will therefore wait and see how the AU will deal
with Morocco on all the violations, knowing that the
Sahrawi Republic has complete right to ask for the
intervention of the Union to resolve the issue, in
accordance with the African Union Principles.
As for the Sahrawi people’s reaction to the admission
of Morocco to AU, there were different views. There are
some who felt really sad to see such a colonial and
brutal regime admitted in our continental
organization. Others are saying that the admission is
an opportunity to put Morocco in the corner and it face
our officials directly in the AU meetings. So, in general,
a lot of Sahrawis and non-Sahrawi followers of the
issue see the Moroccan adherence to the AU as a legal
and political recognition of the Sahrawi Republic. No
matter how Moroccans may try to deny it, they are
sitting as members in the same organization that our
Republic
founded
with
other
African
Nations.
Q: Efforts to find a solution and/ or facilitate resolution
to the conflict have failed in the past, and most recently
reached an impasse. Do you believe the UN and/ or the
AU have the political will to apply pressure on Morocco
in order to protect Western Sahara’s integrity as a nonself-governing territory, and more importantly to move
toward an agreement for the referendum of Western
Sahara?
Lakhal: The only resolution that has been
implemented is the resolution 690 of 1991, which
approved the OAU/UN Settlement Plan “for the
Organization and the supervision, by the UN in
cooperation with the OAU of a referendum for selfdetermination of the people of Western Sahara”. The
same resolution also decided, “to establish a UN
Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara
(MINURSO),” and resolution 725, which confirmed
these same decisions.
The process of implementation found a lot of ups and
downs. It was always due to the Moroccan colonial
authorities delays, rejections of previous agreements,
violations of agreements, etc. And unfortunately, no
one can do anything to this Bandit State! Why?
Because it’s powerfully and unconditionally protected
by the French Veto.
Now, I do not know if the UN and AU have the political
will and consensus to not necessarily exercise pressure,
but to apply international law. We’re not asking the AU
to put pressures on Morocco, we just want it to respect,
implement, and apply all the principles and objectives
of the Constitutive Act and the different AU
instruments like: “The African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights,” and other principles that are
applicable.
Africans have invested time, energy, and resources for
the last 60 years to come up with all these laws,
conventions, and brilliantly elaborated principles. It’s
now time to implement them. This is what the
Sahrawis are asking for.
Same thing goes for the UN. If you read all the treaties,
conventions and legal instruments adopted by the UN,
you will say that all the problems of humanity can be
resolved. But no! It’s not. Not because those
instruments are bad — absolutely not. It’s because we
have few powerful states that play the role of bully
against other nations, and hinder the implementation
of laws, unless it suits their interests and the interests
of their protégées.
Q: Besides Morocco, which countries, institutions, and/
or corporations are benefiting (profiting) from Western
Sahara’s occupation through the illegal exploration
and exploitation of the territory’s natural resources?
Lakhal: I do not want to say everyone except Sahrawis,
but it seems to be the truth. The main countries that
exploit and benefit from the occupation of Western
Sahara are Morocco of course, but also France and
Spain. There are lots of other so-called democratic
states that also benefit from making business with
Morocco, especially in the exploitation of our natural
resources. The countries, sometimes represented by
multinational companies or national firms are:
Australia, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, China,
Colombia, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland,
Netherlands, Greece, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy,
Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Mauritania, Mexico, New
Zealand, Norway, Panama, Portugal, Romania, Russia,
Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea,
Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey and UK, among
others.
These countries whose firms are still operating inside
the occupied zones of Western Sahara, with the help of
the colonial power, are exploiting our fisheries, our
phosphate, sand, salt, and exploring for oil, gas,
diamond, gold, iron and many other resources. For
more information on these companies, you can access
interesting stories and data here: www.wsrw.org.
Q: Can you give us examples of how these countries
(and companies) are threatening and/ or suspending
the independence of the Sahrawi people through their
exploitative operation?
Lakhal: These companies are all signing contracts with
a bloody colonial power to exploit the resources of a
colonized nation. Just like the Moroccan regime, they
are simply thieves and criminals wearing nice suits.
This is how we see them. We absolutely have no respect
for these companies; they are feeding their clients blood
resources.
These activities are fueling and providing the
Moroccan colonial regime with money to keep the
occupation ongoing. We are talking about billions
yearly. Meanwhile, for the last 40 years, we’ve had
more than 200 Sahrawi refugees who can barely
survive on some 25 million US dollars of aid, which is
often cut or delayed. So basically, those countries,
through their companies plunder billions of profit from
our resources, and hardly contribute to the
humanitarian aid, despite the few thousands that they
give and see themselves as doing us a favor. Can you
imagine this dishonesty?
Same thing for the Moroccan regime. Tt’s profiting
from the exploitation of our resources, making billions
every year. It has built nothing in the occupying
territory. During the 41 years of occupation, Morocco
didn’t build a single university in the whole territory,
no single theatre, no single economic sector or factory
that would help, in at least the employment of the
Sahrawi people under occupation. For example, the
unemployment rates in the occupied zones of Western
Sahara are higher than those in the Moroccan cities.
Our students are targeted, harassed, imprisoned,
tortured, and even killed by the police. The Sahrawi
women are the main targets of the ill-treatment of
Moroccan police. And still we hear some misled African
brothers and sisters that say that Morocco is an African
country. Well yes, Moroccan peoples are Africans, but
the Moroccan regime is just a puppet regime, a proxy
to the French colonial greed in Africa. The Moroccan
regime is not, and has never been African. It has never
served Africa. It has always served the French FranceAfrique policy in the continent. That is what it really
is.
Q: Thus far, soft power has been applied to end the
colonial occupation over Western Sahara. Do you think
it’s time for hard power? What do you recommend the
AU, international bodies, civil society organizations,
and the African states do to unlock the deadlock in the
peace process and actualize complete decolonization of
the Western Sahara territory?
Lakhal: I am not a big fan of violence. I have always
called, in my actions, my writings and my interaction
with my compatriots, for peaceful and well-targeted
activism. I believe that soft power is a very strong
weapon to achieve goals. It only needs a widely spread,
worldwide backing to achieve results.
And in Western Sahara, we’ve come a long way from
having completely no voice in the international arena
to becoming a sort of hot topic on the table in the UN,
EU, AU and other international entities. Our activists,
civil society organizations, and official diplomacy have
done a lot to make the issues well known
internationally. But we still need more visibility in
Africa. We need to have an African popular and official
support as it was once granted to the ANC and South
African freedom fighters. That is what will make our
case even hotter.
On the other hand, I cannot blame the Sahrawis who
see the resumption of armed struggle as a solution.
They are in a way right that the colonial powers only
recognize power. Through history we know that the
colonialist never gives up its greed and violence, not
until the last moment. It’s a pity. If you just go back in
history, in Africa, you’ll see the price many African
Nations have had to pay for their freedom.
So in the end, if the Sahrawis decide to resume to war
with all the legitimate and internationally recognized
methods including armed struggle, it will be in total
accordance with their legitimate right in order to gain
their freedom.
What I recommend to international bodies is to quickly
and urgently intervene to impose and enforce the
International Law in Western Sahara, and give justice
to the Sahrawi people who have been suffering from
foreign intervention for the past 133 years. It is not a
simple political dispute, as some would like it to appear
(especially Morocco and a few French-speaking and
Arab countries). It’s a struggle for freedom. It’s a
nation’s fight for its right to be, live freely and
independently on its rightful land. It’s a nation’s
struggle for dignity and national sovereignty. And no
political solution would be accepted unless it gives
justice to this nation. Morocco should simply withdraw
from our country and respect its borders. That’s the
only reasonable and just solution we would accept.
Q: Based on the name Sahrawi “Arab” Democratic
People, do the Sahrawi people identify themselves as
Arabs or African, or both? What is the historical link
and/ or significance behind adopting the “Arab”
identity?
Lakhal: The Sahrawi people are a mixture of Amazigh,
African, Arab, and even European (Spanish in
particular) intermingled through centuries of intermarriages. So the Republic was named Sahrawi (which
is the bigger ethnic umbrella that all Sahrawis identify
with), while Arab is a more political inclination that
stems from the influence the Arab revolutions of the
seventies had on the founding fathers of the Sahrawi
revolution; in addition to the feeling of belonging to the
Islamic/Arab world.
Concretely, we feel more African than Arab due to all
the suffering and enmity we’ve faced from the Arab
world. Except for Algeria, Libya under Gadhafi, Syria,
and South Yemen, all the remaining Arab countries
militarily and financially supported Morocco in its
invasion and colonization of our country.
Q: What are the next steps for Western Sahara and its
people?
Lakhal: I see two main scenarios in the future.
The first scenario: Sahrawis resume war against the
Moroccans. The war will disturb all the existing plans
in the region. I can see the Moroccan regime fall and
collapse due to a strong possibility of a revolution in the
North of Morocco.
The second: The Sahrawis decide to keep up and scale
up their peaceful resistance. The AU will be a very hot
scene where Sahrawis and Moroccans will be
confronting each other, just like in the early eighties.
And hopefully (and why not), the UN and AU will
finally succeed in implementing the law and justice in
Western Sahara.
Photo credits: Sahrawi Supporting Activists.