Amid new American opposition to some of its points, the United Nations Fourth Decolonization Committee adopted a new resolution that concerns conflict issues across the world, including the Moroccan Sahara file.
Among the points of the resolution was the so-called “Implementation of the Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,” which was rejected by the United States of America’s representation at the United Nations, which said, “Washington is appalled at the approval of this point, which is considered outdated.”
According to the same source, “The United States of America will vote ‘no’ on the resolution that continues to ignore the correct policy and legal concerns of Washington.”
Washington’s representation at the United Nations affirmed that “self-determination for any population must be practiced by everyone and not just a specific group,” indicating that “what comes in this resolution is not binding, and never reflects or stipulates international law.”
At a time when the United States of America rejected the contents of the resolution, the Polisario Front came out, through its so-called “representative at the United Nations,” to “welcome the decision of the Fourth Committee, especially the point of ‘implementing the Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples’,” ignoring “the absence of the referendum thesis again.” .
In a related context, the aforementioned resolution called on “all parties to the artificial conflict (Morocco/Polisario/Algeria/Mauritania) to cooperate with the Secretary-General of the United Nations and his personal envoy to find a political solution.”
The rule of law, not slogans
Al-Bashir Al-Dakhil, a former leader of the Polisario Front, believes that “the American rejection reflects that the United States of America is a state of institutions and law, not a state of slogans.”
Al-Dakhil added to Hespress, “Since the 1970s, the United States of America has been refusing to implement the declaration granting independence to colonial countries and peoples without fully answering the questions, which is the case with the Moroccan Sahara.”
The former leader of the Polisario Front pointed out that “Washington is well aware that the rejection of the referendum is due to the absence of a census process in the Tindouf camps.”
“This problem is primarily political, and it involves four parties, not two as the Polisario claims, while the solution comes by attending round tables through a political discussion that satisfies everyone,” the same spokesman says.
Al-Dakhil stated, “This decision is in favor of the Moroccan position, as many of the decisions that Polisario is still denouncing have been rejected, and the latest decisions have been adopted that stress Algeria’s responsibility and call for a realistic solution.”
Finally, the aforementioned speaker considered that “this problem has become political and not colonial, and withdrawing it from the Fourth Committee is absolutely necessary.”
The embodiment of American recognition
For his part, Mohamed Salem Abdel Fattah, head of the Sahrawi Observatory for Media and Human Rights, recorded that “the American position is consistent with the decisions previously taken by the American administration regarding the artificial Sahara conflict, especially the issue of recognizing the Moroccan status of the Sahara.”
Salem Abdel Fattah told Hespress, “This rejection is also consistent with the United States’ preference for the autonomy plan presented by Morocco in 2007 over the unrealistic proposals of the separatist front.”
The aforementioned spokesman stated that “this decision is in the interest of the Kingdom of Morocco, because it refers to Security Council resolutions since 2007, which praised the autonomy plan.”
“The decision neglects to mention the referendum, which the separatist front seeks to promote vigorously, and which the United Nations has previously suppressed in its resolutions, in exchange for its call for a realistic political solution,” says the head of the Sahrawi Observatory for Media and Human Rights.
The same spokesman considered that “withdrawing the Sahara file from the Fourth International Committee is important, especially in light of the decline in separatist propaganda.”
Salem Abdel Fattah concluded that “the security developments that have consolidated Moroccan sovereignty, and the international positions that recognize the southern Moroccan provinces, are accelerating the pace of closing the file and the exposure of the separatist project that threatens stability in the region.”