Thursday, April 26, 2012
Dr Baba M. Sayed commente la résolution 2204 sur le Sahara occidental
Dr Baba M. Sayed commente la résolution 2204 sur le Sahara occidental
“Le Conseil de sécurité a fait preuve d'une indifférence coupable”
Par : Hafida Ameyar Baba Mustapha Sayed, président du Centre sahraoui de la recherche et des études stratégiques et politiques (CSRSP), également docteur en sciences politiques, s’exprime sur la résolution 2204 relative au Sahara occidental, adoptée le 24 avril par le Conseil de sécurité.
Liberté : Le Conseil de sécurité de l'ONU vient d'adopter une nouvelle résolution sur le Sahara occidental. Quel est votre commentaire ?
Baba M. Sayed : La résolution 2204 a innové par rapport aux précédentes, en demandant plus de liberté de mouvement aux effectifs de la Minurso et en formulant le vœu que leurs communications soient désormais protégées contre les “curiosités” des services de renseignement marocains. Mais le Conseil de sécurité a gravement “fauté” en continuant de faire la sourde oreille aux appels de détresse des populations civiles sahraouies des zones occupées par le Maroc et aux appels des nombreuses organisations des droits de l'homme et de la société civile à travers le monde, qui refusent que la Minurso, mission de l’ONU pour un référendum au Sahara occidental, reste la seule mission qui ne s’intéresse pas aux droits des hommes et des femmes qu'elle est censée protéger.
Il faut dire que depuis 1991, date du déploiement de la Minurso dans le territoire sahraoui, les Nations unies se sont montrées incapables d'amener le Maroc à honorer les engagements contractés dans le cadre du plan de paix et contenus dans la résolution 690 du Conseil de sécurité, à respecter, en tant que puissance coloniale, les obligations qui en découlent en vue de l'organisation du référendum d'autodétermination. Aujourd'hui, tout espoir d'obtenir la décolonisation du Sahara occidental par les voies pacifiques, du moins celles que l'on a empruntées jusqu'ici, est une illusion et une pure vue de l'esprit.
Cette résolution répond-elle aux préoccupations exposées par le Secrétaire général de l’ONU dans son dernier rapport ?
Non, malheureusement. Sur les deux requêtes essentielles de M. Ban Ki-moon, que sont la nécessité de redonner à la Minurso les moyens pour préparer activement le référendum d'autodétermination et élargir ses prérogatives pour défendre les populations civiles sahraouies contre l'arbitraire de l'occupant marocain, le Conseil de sécurité a fait preuve d'une indifférence coupable.
En somme, la résolution 2204, comme celles qui l'ont précédée, ne fait qu'étaler au grand jour la mauvaise foi et l'hypocrisie de certaines puissances occidentales qui, lorsqu’il s’agit du Sahara occidental, n'hésitent pas à armer le bras du bourreau marocain et à absoudre les crimes dont il se rend régulièrement coupable contre les civils. Des puissances occidentales qui, en Libye et en Syrie par exemple, essaient de se donner le beau rôle des protecteurs des “révolutions” et des défenseurs désintéressés des droits des peuples et des citoyens arabes…
Pensez-vous tout de même que la situation va s'améliorer pour le peuple sahraoui, en matière de respect des droits de l'homme et de décolonisation ?
Tant et aussi longtemps que la Minurso n'aura pas retrouvé son rôle essentiel, celui qui lui a été assigné par le Conseil de sécurité, en 1991, à sa création, c'est-à-dire organiser dans les meilleurs délais le référendum d'autodétermination pour permettre au peuple sahraoui de choisir librement son avenir, la situation du peuple sahraoui ne fera qu'empirer. Ce qui, du coup, ne fera qu'augmenter les risques d'instabilité et de désordre régionaux.
J’ajouterais aussi que c'est le Maroc, avec sa funeste vision expansionniste, qui est la cause réelle de l'échec de toutes les tentatives entreprises par l’ONU, l'Union africaine et les autres organisations et instances internationales. Pourtant, tous ces efforts sont destinés à faire triompher la légalité internationale et le droit au Sahara occidental et, partant, à aider à jeter les bases saines et durables d'une coopération régionale qui profiterait à l'ensemble des peuples de la région et, au-delà, à son environnement sahélien et méditerranéen.
C'est cette politique irresponsable et de courte vue de la monarchie marocaine qui nourrit, par ailleurs, depuis des lustres tous les démons de déstabilisation de toute la région, en l'exposant chaque jour un peu plus aux multiples et graves dangers d'émiettement et de balkanisation
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
The Western Sahara: forgotten first source of the Arab Spring
The Western Sahara: forgotten first source of the Arab SpringIt's time the US and the UN stopped looking the other way while the west's ally Morocco occupies and abuses the Sarahawis
Share 105
Comments (28)
Carne Ross
guardian.co.uk , Tuesday 17 April 2012 20.30 BST Article history
Aminatou Haidar, the Western Sahara independence activist, speaking to press during her 2009 hunger strike, in Lanzarote, Spain. Photograph: Jose Rueda/AP
The Arab Spring began in the Western Sahara . In late 2010, the indigenous Saharawi population of this territory demonstrated against the occupying Moroccan authorities. Their demonstrations were violently put down. Eleven Saharawis were killed.
But this is one part of the Arab Spring that western governments don't want to talk about. And their silence, and the UN's complicity in it, is why that repression continues, and a terrible injustice is perpetuated.
Western Sahara was invaded by Morocco in 1975. Its indigenous population was, in contemporary parlance, ethnically cleansed. Around 150,000 of those driven out remain in isolated refugee camps in the Algerian Sahara: in tents, in the middle of the desert (I have been there; it is grim). The Saharawis, fought back in a guerrilla war that lasted until a ceasefire in 1991. The centerpiece of that ceasefire, repeatedly endorsed by the UN and international community, was that there would be a referendum for the people of Western Sahara to decide the future of the territory, and in particular whether it would be a independent state.
That referendum has never taken place. Western Sahara remains Africa's last colony. Morocco successfully delayed and manipulated the UN organization of the referendum until it ground to a halt. The UN attempts to get "the parties" to agree on a way forward. There has been no progress: Morocco refuses even to discuss a referendum. For this obstruction, Morocco pays no price whatsoever.
There have been systematic human rights abuses by Moroccan forces in the occupied Western Sahara, documented by Amnesty International (pdf) , Human Rights Watch (pdf) and the UN high commissioner for human rights (pdf) . This last report, never published at Morocco's insistence, recommended in 2006 that there be a permanent human rights monitoring presence in the territory. Despite this clear recommendation, Morocco's allies at the UN – in particular, France – have successfully blocked its implementation.
Western governments have, in recent months, paraded their new-found support for human rights and democracy in the Middle East. France's President Sarkozy has pressed the flesh in Libya and Tunisia, reveling in his status as liberator of the downtrodden. But you won't see him in the Western Sahara, and he won't mention the plight of the Saharawi people when he shakes hands with Morocco's king, his ally, Mohamed VI.
This week, the whole imbroglio will be discussed again at the UN security council. It's important to observe the subtle but pernicious ways in which injustice is perpetuated at the UN.
For instance, it has been revealed in recent weeks that the UN allows its own reports on Western Sahara to be doctored by Morocco, its occupier. No one, from Ban Ki Moon downwards, lifts a finger to stop it. The UN released successive and different versions of the report, explicitly indicating Morocco's "editing", including its removal of references to the Moroccan flag flying over the UN mission headquarters (a figurative symbol of what is really going on) and any reference to the mission's original mandate to organize the referendum.
Recently, the UK and South Africa, to their credit, have led efforts to institute human rights monitoring, and try to push for resolution to this long-lasting dispute. France continues to block. Its obstruction is unreported; it is carried out in small rooms at the UN, where French diplomats softly declare that they will not permit human rights "language" in the resolution. Their press spokesman tries not to answer questions about it from the few journalists who take an interest ("where's the story?" they ask, "it's been going on for years").
Morocco has been a good ally of the US, including by receiving prisoners for torture under the program of "extraordinary rendition": one of them a British resident, whose genitals were cut with razors by Moroccan government torturers . Today, Morocco has been quick to put itself on the right side of the Arab Spring, by supporting Nato in Libya. The kingdom has bought substantial lobbying muscle in Washington, including the former US ambassador to Rabat.
Hillary Clinton walks an awkward path on this issue, to put it politely, although the US, as this month's president of the UN security council, could play a decisive role. She has made speeches applauding the bravery of women who fight for human rights around the world. But she never mentions Aminatou Haidar , an extraordinary 42 year-old, who has been tortured, held in solitary confinement for years, and has endured 32 days of hunger strike in support of freedom for the Saharawi people. If Hillary Clinton were to meet this extraordinary and heroic woman, who has won numerous human rights prizes, I wonder if she would maintain the laissez-faire US policy that allows continuing repression and the suffering of thousands of refugees waiting for justice in the Sahara desert.
The personal is political. It is ordinary human beings like Aminatou Haidar who suffer in the Western Sahara. And the policies that maintain their suffering are decided by women like Secretary Clinton and the diplomats whom I know to be, at heart, decent people. Why this decency is suspended in Western Sahara is a case study in how diplomacy remains in many ways a morally corrupt business. It does not have to be this way.
• Disclosure notice: Independent Diplomat , the non-profit diplomatic advisory group, which Carne Ross heads, advises the Polisario Front, the representatives of the Saharawi people
Share 105
Comments (28)
Carne Ross
guardian.co.uk , Tuesday 17 April 2012 20.30 BST Article history
Aminatou Haidar, the Western Sahara independence activist, speaking to press during her 2009 hunger strike, in Lanzarote, Spain. Photograph: Jose Rueda/AP
The Arab Spring began in the Western Sahara . In late 2010, the indigenous Saharawi population of this territory demonstrated against the occupying Moroccan authorities. Their demonstrations were violently put down. Eleven Saharawis were killed.
But this is one part of the Arab Spring that western governments don't want to talk about. And their silence, and the UN's complicity in it, is why that repression continues, and a terrible injustice is perpetuated.
Western Sahara was invaded by Morocco in 1975. Its indigenous population was, in contemporary parlance, ethnically cleansed. Around 150,000 of those driven out remain in isolated refugee camps in the Algerian Sahara: in tents, in the middle of the desert (I have been there; it is grim). The Saharawis, fought back in a guerrilla war that lasted until a ceasefire in 1991. The centerpiece of that ceasefire, repeatedly endorsed by the UN and international community, was that there would be a referendum for the people of Western Sahara to decide the future of the territory, and in particular whether it would be a independent state.
That referendum has never taken place. Western Sahara remains Africa's last colony. Morocco successfully delayed and manipulated the UN organization of the referendum until it ground to a halt. The UN attempts to get "the parties" to agree on a way forward. There has been no progress: Morocco refuses even to discuss a referendum. For this obstruction, Morocco pays no price whatsoever.
There have been systematic human rights abuses by Moroccan forces in the occupied Western Sahara, documented by Amnesty International (pdf) , Human Rights Watch (pdf) and the UN high commissioner for human rights (pdf) . This last report, never published at Morocco's insistence, recommended in 2006 that there be a permanent human rights monitoring presence in the territory. Despite this clear recommendation, Morocco's allies at the UN – in particular, France – have successfully blocked its implementation.
Western governments have, in recent months, paraded their new-found support for human rights and democracy in the Middle East. France's President Sarkozy has pressed the flesh in Libya and Tunisia, reveling in his status as liberator of the downtrodden. But you won't see him in the Western Sahara, and he won't mention the plight of the Saharawi people when he shakes hands with Morocco's king, his ally, Mohamed VI.
This week, the whole imbroglio will be discussed again at the UN security council. It's important to observe the subtle but pernicious ways in which injustice is perpetuated at the UN.
For instance, it has been revealed in recent weeks that the UN allows its own reports on Western Sahara to be doctored by Morocco, its occupier. No one, from Ban Ki Moon downwards, lifts a finger to stop it. The UN released successive and different versions of the report, explicitly indicating Morocco's "editing", including its removal of references to the Moroccan flag flying over the UN mission headquarters (a figurative symbol of what is really going on) and any reference to the mission's original mandate to organize the referendum.
Recently, the UK and South Africa, to their credit, have led efforts to institute human rights monitoring, and try to push for resolution to this long-lasting dispute. France continues to block. Its obstruction is unreported; it is carried out in small rooms at the UN, where French diplomats softly declare that they will not permit human rights "language" in the resolution. Their press spokesman tries not to answer questions about it from the few journalists who take an interest ("where's the story?" they ask, "it's been going on for years").
Morocco has been a good ally of the US, including by receiving prisoners for torture under the program of "extraordinary rendition": one of them a British resident, whose genitals were cut with razors by Moroccan government torturers . Today, Morocco has been quick to put itself on the right side of the Arab Spring, by supporting Nato in Libya. The kingdom has bought substantial lobbying muscle in Washington, including the former US ambassador to Rabat.
Hillary Clinton walks an awkward path on this issue, to put it politely, although the US, as this month's president of the UN security council, could play a decisive role. She has made speeches applauding the bravery of women who fight for human rights around the world. But she never mentions Aminatou Haidar , an extraordinary 42 year-old, who has been tortured, held in solitary confinement for years, and has endured 32 days of hunger strike in support of freedom for the Saharawi people. If Hillary Clinton were to meet this extraordinary and heroic woman, who has won numerous human rights prizes, I wonder if she would maintain the laissez-faire US policy that allows continuing repression and the suffering of thousands of refugees waiting for justice in the Sahara desert.
The personal is political. It is ordinary human beings like Aminatou Haidar who suffer in the Western Sahara. And the policies that maintain their suffering are decided by women like Secretary Clinton and the diplomats whom I know to be, at heart, decent people. Why this decency is suspended in Western Sahara is a case study in how diplomacy remains in many ways a morally corrupt business. It does not have to be this way.
• Disclosure notice: Independent Diplomat , the non-profit diplomatic advisory group, which Carne Ross heads, advises the Polisario Front, the representatives of the Saharawi people
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Sahara occidental : le Think tank US Brookings appelle le Maroc à faire preuve de ‘‘sagesse’’
Sahara occidental : le Think tank US Brookings appelle le Maroc à faire preuve de ‘‘sagesse’’
WASHINGTON - Le prestigieux Think tank américain Brookings institution considère, dans une analyse consacrée à la question du Sahara occidental que le Maroc devrait faire preuve de ‘‘sagesse’’ et de poursuivre le processus démocratique en acceptant le droit à l’autodétermination du peuple sahraoui.
S’interrogeant si le Sahara occidental connaîtra, un jour, son ‘‘Printemps arabe’’, ce Think tank de la capitale fédérale américaine souligne que si le Maroc est admiré par les touristes occidentaux, ‘‘ces derniers ne connaissent que peu de choses sur les rapports de ce pays avec le peuple sahraoui, rapports assimilés à une sombre et suppurante plaie’’.
Dans une rétrospective pour expliquer le bien-fondé des revendications du Front Polisario, Brookings institution tient à préciser qu’avant sa colonisation par les Espagnols en 1884, ‘‘le Sahara occidental n’avait jamais connu l’autorité d’un souverain au-dessus de celle de la tribu’’.
En rappelant la résistance armée lancée par les Sahraouis au début des années 1970, suite à la répression perpétrée par les troupes espagnoles, le Think tank américain souligne que ne voulant pas se laisser entraîner dans une guerre, l’Espagne a annoncé un référendum pour l’autodétermination du peuple sahraoui qui devait se tenir en 1976 et coïncider avec son retrait.
Cependant, soutient Brookings, l’Espagne a violé cet accord conclu avec les Sahraouis en signant les accords de Madrid de 1975 prévoyant le transfert de l’administration du Sahara occidental au Maroc et à la Mauritanie (qui s’était retirée du Sahara Occidental en 1979), en échange de droits de pêche le long de la côte.
En dépit de cet accord, la Cour internationale de Justice (CIJ), dans une affaire portée devant le tribunal par le Maroc, a statué que les revendications de ce pays sur le Sahara occidental ’’ne justifient pas sa souveraineté sur les Territoires sahraouis et a plutôt recommandé l’autodétermination pour les Sahraouis’’, ajoute-t-il.
‘‘Mais en violant cette décision de la CIJ, le Maroc a envahi le Sahara occidental en novembre 1975 avec sa marche verte’’.
Durant plusieurs années, le Maroc ‘‘a encouragé les colons marocains d’occuper les terres du Sahara occidental, en les y attirant avec des salaires doubles, les exonérations fiscales et le logement subventionné’’.
Grâce à ces avantages accordés, indique Brookings, ‘‘les colons marocains représentent actuellement plus de la moitié de la population au Sahara occidental où le taux de chômage est des plus élevés’’ chez la population autochtone.
Tout en relevant les différentes résolutions de l’ONU consacrant le droit à l’autodétermination des Sahraouis, il souligne que ces derniers ’’sont soumis à des traitements extrêmement durs par l’armée marocaine, dont l’empoisonnement des puits, la destruction des stocks alimentaire, l’incendie des terres et des maisons, les mutilations, les viols, les arrestations arbitraires et les assassinats’’.
‘‘L’ironie est que leurs oppresseurs marocains sont des coreligionnaires musulmans’’, s’étonne Brookings.
Concernant les camps des réfugiés sahraouis à Tindouf (Algérie), ce Think tank de Washington tient à préciser que si des rumeurs médiatiques évoquent d’éventuels liens entre Al-Qaïda au Maghreb Islamique (AQMI) et les Sahraouis, ‘‘aucune preuve de ces allégations n’a été, toutefois, présentée’’
WASHINGTON - Le prestigieux Think tank américain Brookings institution considère, dans une analyse consacrée à la question du Sahara occidental que le Maroc devrait faire preuve de ‘‘sagesse’’ et de poursuivre le processus démocratique en acceptant le droit à l’autodétermination du peuple sahraoui.
S’interrogeant si le Sahara occidental connaîtra, un jour, son ‘‘Printemps arabe’’, ce Think tank de la capitale fédérale américaine souligne que si le Maroc est admiré par les touristes occidentaux, ‘‘ces derniers ne connaissent que peu de choses sur les rapports de ce pays avec le peuple sahraoui, rapports assimilés à une sombre et suppurante plaie’’.
Dans une rétrospective pour expliquer le bien-fondé des revendications du Front Polisario, Brookings institution tient à préciser qu’avant sa colonisation par les Espagnols en 1884, ‘‘le Sahara occidental n’avait jamais connu l’autorité d’un souverain au-dessus de celle de la tribu’’.
En rappelant la résistance armée lancée par les Sahraouis au début des années 1970, suite à la répression perpétrée par les troupes espagnoles, le Think tank américain souligne que ne voulant pas se laisser entraîner dans une guerre, l’Espagne a annoncé un référendum pour l’autodétermination du peuple sahraoui qui devait se tenir en 1976 et coïncider avec son retrait.
Cependant, soutient Brookings, l’Espagne a violé cet accord conclu avec les Sahraouis en signant les accords de Madrid de 1975 prévoyant le transfert de l’administration du Sahara occidental au Maroc et à la Mauritanie (qui s’était retirée du Sahara Occidental en 1979), en échange de droits de pêche le long de la côte.
En dépit de cet accord, la Cour internationale de Justice (CIJ), dans une affaire portée devant le tribunal par le Maroc, a statué que les revendications de ce pays sur le Sahara occidental ’’ne justifient pas sa souveraineté sur les Territoires sahraouis et a plutôt recommandé l’autodétermination pour les Sahraouis’’, ajoute-t-il.
‘‘Mais en violant cette décision de la CIJ, le Maroc a envahi le Sahara occidental en novembre 1975 avec sa marche verte’’.
Durant plusieurs années, le Maroc ‘‘a encouragé les colons marocains d’occuper les terres du Sahara occidental, en les y attirant avec des salaires doubles, les exonérations fiscales et le logement subventionné’’.
Grâce à ces avantages accordés, indique Brookings, ‘‘les colons marocains représentent actuellement plus de la moitié de la population au Sahara occidental où le taux de chômage est des plus élevés’’ chez la population autochtone.
Tout en relevant les différentes résolutions de l’ONU consacrant le droit à l’autodétermination des Sahraouis, il souligne que ces derniers ’’sont soumis à des traitements extrêmement durs par l’armée marocaine, dont l’empoisonnement des puits, la destruction des stocks alimentaire, l’incendie des terres et des maisons, les mutilations, les viols, les arrestations arbitraires et les assassinats’’.
‘‘L’ironie est que leurs oppresseurs marocains sont des coreligionnaires musulmans’’, s’étonne Brookings.
Concernant les camps des réfugiés sahraouis à Tindouf (Algérie), ce Think tank de Washington tient à préciser que si des rumeurs médiatiques évoquent d’éventuels liens entre Al-Qaïda au Maghreb Islamique (AQMI) et les Sahraouis, ‘‘aucune preuve de ces allégations n’a été, toutefois, présentée’’
Monday, February 27, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
O Encounter in the Spanish Sahara
UFO Encounter in the Spanish Sahara
Submitted by Scott Corrales on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 08:37
By Scott Corrales
Inexplicata-The Journal of Hispanic UFOlogy
UFO Digest Latin America Correspondent
Another UFO Encounter in the Spanish Sahara
[Researcher Alfonso Ferrer has just reminded us of another – and more spectacular – case involving the Canary Islands and the Spanish Sahara. Our readers will remember the review of his book “El Reloj del Fin del Mundo” that we presented in INEXPLICATA in 2009 – S. Corrales]
An Extraordinary Aerial Encounter in the Canary Islands
By Alfonso Ferrer – http://alfonferrer.blogspot.com/2009/10/insolito-encuentro-aereo-en-canarias.html
Date: 3 October 2009
It was the year 1968. On a springtime evening, a Fokker aircraft belonging to the IBERIA airline flew its routine service from Las Palmas (Canary Islands) to Villa Cisneros in the Western Sahara. The flight was proceeding normally until the aircraft, within sight of its destination, found itself escorted by a light of unknown origin. When the Fokker commenced its approach maneuvers and descended, the unidentified light shot off into the sky. But the story doesn’t end here.
Veteran pilot Paco Andreu, a member of the Fokker’s crew along with Cmdr. Ciudad on that March 14th, 41 years ago, told us about his experiences on the return flight to Las Palmas, in which the UFO made a repeat appearance. This is a unique account, provided by an expert aviator who has an encounter with an unidentified light/object in the air. It is doubly interesting by the fact that the sighting occurred in mid-air (the same medium occupied by the UFO). Moreover, these are the words of an expert who is clearly able to distinguish between an airplane and a star, without this inferring that airliner pilots are infallible in their observations, or not immune to error. They are human beings, like everyone lese. Furthermore, Andreu’s words have the virtue of having remain unchanged over time. He contributes no elements that might suggest a mystical reading of the event on his part. The story is told in a sober and dispassionate manner. A sincere, objective and highly interesting report.
[The entire interview (in Spanish) can be heard on the Cronicas del Misterio podcast at http://www.ivoox.com/encuentro-aereo-ovni-tumba-abierta-audios-mp3_rf_13... - we are taking the liberty of transcribing only a few items of Paco Andreu’s experiences - SC]
Interviewer: So tell us what happened that day.
Paco Andreu: Well, let’s start. It was March 14 1968, I was a pilot for Spantax at the time, for some 7 months as a co-pilot, and the flight was from Las Palmas to Villa Cisneros. The entire flight went without incident until we reached the vicinity of Villa. Then we were about to start our descent, and looking to our left we saw a light descending at the same angle of descent as our plane, matching our speed. At that time I remarked to the commander if he wanted me to ask Villa Cisneros Tower of the traffic we had in sight. We thought it was another plane. So we contacted Villa Cisneros and told them that to our left we had some traffic, and could we please receive some information about it. A few seconds went by, and Villa Cisneros answered that there was no traffic reported in that area. We were startled, and immediately following, the light that descended with us at an angle that was perhaps 5-10 degrees, ascended at a 60-80 degree angle and took off with an emanation, losing itself in infinity. There were no clouds, it was a very clear night, and it became lost from sight. In the meantime, we exchanged glances and said “let’s cut the maneuvers and land immediately for the safety of our passengers and our own.” So we landed with short traffic, landed and upon descending we remarked the situation with the personnel of Iberia, because the flight was for Iberia. So we discussed it with the Iberia field officer, and then with a military doctor from the legion, who was a big fan of astronomy. We discussed all we’d seen, and they were left between belief and disbelief. They joked with us and such, but time went by, the layover had ended, passengers boarded the plane for the return trip. We got going. We rolled toward the end of the runway, lined up for takeoff, requested authorization from the tower, received it, and we took off. And it only...within not even a minute of being airborne, we got a call from the tower telling us [...]: “Iberia 372, you have a light to your right.” we looked, and the light that had accompanied during descent was back again. I replied: “Yes, yes, affirmative, we have a light flying beside us.” They said: “Could you advise us if this could compromise flight safety?” We said: “Well, for the time being, if it holds its position, no, it’s not affecting us.” “Well, for your information, I can tell you that as you rolled down the runway, the light passed over the airport, flying very low and giving off blue and red flashes.” [The object] the stopped over a barracks that belonged to the legion, as I recall it was the Tercio Juan de Austria. It remained static. They watched the object from the airport with binoculars, consulted with the doctor who was an astronomy fan, and they all said that it was nothing known at the time, because as it flew low over the airport, it made no engine sound. It was silent. It remained static, we took off, and when we passed its altitude, it started to follow us, climbing at our same rate of speed, much like it did during our descent. We checked our nav and radio equipment and everything was ok, it wasn’t affecting us. So the tower insisted that if that thing jeopardized flight safety, we should inform them at all times. And so we did. Once we reached cruising altitude – some 5000 meters or 15,000 feet – the object stayed with us, but started to wobble at that time, being at the very same altitude as we were. At times it would get above us, and on others it would remain below us, before climbing and staying with us. After a while it repeated it. This, of course, left us stunned, because no airplane or object known to us could do it. There was no effect of gravity or anything. So we kept flying and began our flight – about an 1 ½ hour went by – our ETA for Las Palmas was around 10 pm, we advised the control, and...well, when we began our descent toward Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, we had stratiform clouds near the island, so we descended through the clouds and started to question whether we were mistaking the light of the UFO with the stars, because it could no longer be seen clearly. And we landed. And once the passengers had debarked, we found that the press was at the airport.
Interviewer: So the story had become known, and the media had learned of it through some leak.
Paco Andreu: We can suppose that some member of the control center at Las Palmas had a buddy or friend who worked for a newsroom and called them, telling them that a flight was coming in from Villa Cisneros followed by a strange gadget.
Other voice: Paco, this is Jorge. What was the size of the light? Could you give us more details?
Paco Andreu: Well, how could I best describe it...it was a source of light like an airplane beacon that is about to land, a strong light, but it wasn’t a projected light. it was like a luminous sphere.
Interviewer: Because when it came to reckoning distance...
Paco Andreu: Of course, it was very complicated. We, on our right, headed for Gran Canaria, we had the shore and the desert. Without towns or lights or anything that could give us a distance calculation, I don’t know, it could have been 2-3 miles away by our calculations, but it could have been 50 miles away, because it may have been a gigantic thing, but distance made it seem small.
Interviewer: Paco, this truly interesting, perhaps one of the most interesting ones I can think of as UFO sightings go, especially coming from an expert aviator like yourself. Did you dismiss the possibility that it was a military maneuver? You mention the presence of a military base nearby.
Paco Andreu: You can figure that in the year 1968 military maneuvers in the desert were few. The known military craft at the time had bases in Gran Canarias and in El Aaiun, were Junkers transport aircraft, a plane from 1934-35, so it was impossible that it could make such maneuvers. And then, the only thing it could have been...there were no helicopters yet...or yes, there was a helicopter unit at Los Rodeos, but they were there for evacuation service and emergency purposes only, so the Sahara region may have had piston driven T-6 aircraft but nothing resembling what we saw.
Interviewer: We discussed the likelihood that it could have been a star.
Paco Andreu: No, no, never. A star we don’t see...a star we see above us, like you do from the ground. But we’d sometimes see it below us. It couldn’t be a star. Nor was it a comet. We’ve seen an infinite number of comets in flight, and we know their trajectory and patterns. There’s something else there. Don’t know if its manned, unmanned or guided automatically at a distance. no idea. There could be many conjectures about it. But the fact is that what we saw was that. And the truth is that I never forgot it, despite the years that have gone by.
(Translation & transcription (c) 2012, S. Corrales, IHU. Special thanks to Alfonso Ferrer)
Submitted by Scott Corrales on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 08:37
By Scott Corrales
Inexplicata-The Journal of Hispanic UFOlogy
UFO Digest Latin America Correspondent
Another UFO Encounter in the Spanish Sahara
[Researcher Alfonso Ferrer has just reminded us of another – and more spectacular – case involving the Canary Islands and the Spanish Sahara. Our readers will remember the review of his book “El Reloj del Fin del Mundo” that we presented in INEXPLICATA in 2009 – S. Corrales]
An Extraordinary Aerial Encounter in the Canary Islands
By Alfonso Ferrer – http://alfonferrer.blogspot.com/2009/10/insolito-encuentro-aereo-en-canarias.html
Date: 3 October 2009
It was the year 1968. On a springtime evening, a Fokker aircraft belonging to the IBERIA airline flew its routine service from Las Palmas (Canary Islands) to Villa Cisneros in the Western Sahara. The flight was proceeding normally until the aircraft, within sight of its destination, found itself escorted by a light of unknown origin. When the Fokker commenced its approach maneuvers and descended, the unidentified light shot off into the sky. But the story doesn’t end here.
Veteran pilot Paco Andreu, a member of the Fokker’s crew along with Cmdr. Ciudad on that March 14th, 41 years ago, told us about his experiences on the return flight to Las Palmas, in which the UFO made a repeat appearance. This is a unique account, provided by an expert aviator who has an encounter with an unidentified light/object in the air. It is doubly interesting by the fact that the sighting occurred in mid-air (the same medium occupied by the UFO). Moreover, these are the words of an expert who is clearly able to distinguish between an airplane and a star, without this inferring that airliner pilots are infallible in their observations, or not immune to error. They are human beings, like everyone lese. Furthermore, Andreu’s words have the virtue of having remain unchanged over time. He contributes no elements that might suggest a mystical reading of the event on his part. The story is told in a sober and dispassionate manner. A sincere, objective and highly interesting report.
[The entire interview (in Spanish) can be heard on the Cronicas del Misterio podcast at http://www.ivoox.com/encuentro-aereo-ovni-tumba-abierta-audios-mp3_rf_13... - we are taking the liberty of transcribing only a few items of Paco Andreu’s experiences - SC]
Interviewer: So tell us what happened that day.
Paco Andreu: Well, let’s start. It was March 14 1968, I was a pilot for Spantax at the time, for some 7 months as a co-pilot, and the flight was from Las Palmas to Villa Cisneros. The entire flight went without incident until we reached the vicinity of Villa. Then we were about to start our descent, and looking to our left we saw a light descending at the same angle of descent as our plane, matching our speed. At that time I remarked to the commander if he wanted me to ask Villa Cisneros Tower of the traffic we had in sight. We thought it was another plane. So we contacted Villa Cisneros and told them that to our left we had some traffic, and could we please receive some information about it. A few seconds went by, and Villa Cisneros answered that there was no traffic reported in that area. We were startled, and immediately following, the light that descended with us at an angle that was perhaps 5-10 degrees, ascended at a 60-80 degree angle and took off with an emanation, losing itself in infinity. There were no clouds, it was a very clear night, and it became lost from sight. In the meantime, we exchanged glances and said “let’s cut the maneuvers and land immediately for the safety of our passengers and our own.” So we landed with short traffic, landed and upon descending we remarked the situation with the personnel of Iberia, because the flight was for Iberia. So we discussed it with the Iberia field officer, and then with a military doctor from the legion, who was a big fan of astronomy. We discussed all we’d seen, and they were left between belief and disbelief. They joked with us and such, but time went by, the layover had ended, passengers boarded the plane for the return trip. We got going. We rolled toward the end of the runway, lined up for takeoff, requested authorization from the tower, received it, and we took off. And it only...within not even a minute of being airborne, we got a call from the tower telling us [...]: “Iberia 372, you have a light to your right.” we looked, and the light that had accompanied during descent was back again. I replied: “Yes, yes, affirmative, we have a light flying beside us.” They said: “Could you advise us if this could compromise flight safety?” We said: “Well, for the time being, if it holds its position, no, it’s not affecting us.” “Well, for your information, I can tell you that as you rolled down the runway, the light passed over the airport, flying very low and giving off blue and red flashes.” [The object] the stopped over a barracks that belonged to the legion, as I recall it was the Tercio Juan de Austria. It remained static. They watched the object from the airport with binoculars, consulted with the doctor who was an astronomy fan, and they all said that it was nothing known at the time, because as it flew low over the airport, it made no engine sound. It was silent. It remained static, we took off, and when we passed its altitude, it started to follow us, climbing at our same rate of speed, much like it did during our descent. We checked our nav and radio equipment and everything was ok, it wasn’t affecting us. So the tower insisted that if that thing jeopardized flight safety, we should inform them at all times. And so we did. Once we reached cruising altitude – some 5000 meters or 15,000 feet – the object stayed with us, but started to wobble at that time, being at the very same altitude as we were. At times it would get above us, and on others it would remain below us, before climbing and staying with us. After a while it repeated it. This, of course, left us stunned, because no airplane or object known to us could do it. There was no effect of gravity or anything. So we kept flying and began our flight – about an 1 ½ hour went by – our ETA for Las Palmas was around 10 pm, we advised the control, and...well, when we began our descent toward Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, we had stratiform clouds near the island, so we descended through the clouds and started to question whether we were mistaking the light of the UFO with the stars, because it could no longer be seen clearly. And we landed. And once the passengers had debarked, we found that the press was at the airport.
Interviewer: So the story had become known, and the media had learned of it through some leak.
Paco Andreu: We can suppose that some member of the control center at Las Palmas had a buddy or friend who worked for a newsroom and called them, telling them that a flight was coming in from Villa Cisneros followed by a strange gadget.
Other voice: Paco, this is Jorge. What was the size of the light? Could you give us more details?
Paco Andreu: Well, how could I best describe it...it was a source of light like an airplane beacon that is about to land, a strong light, but it wasn’t a projected light. it was like a luminous sphere.
Interviewer: Because when it came to reckoning distance...
Paco Andreu: Of course, it was very complicated. We, on our right, headed for Gran Canaria, we had the shore and the desert. Without towns or lights or anything that could give us a distance calculation, I don’t know, it could have been 2-3 miles away by our calculations, but it could have been 50 miles away, because it may have been a gigantic thing, but distance made it seem small.
Interviewer: Paco, this truly interesting, perhaps one of the most interesting ones I can think of as UFO sightings go, especially coming from an expert aviator like yourself. Did you dismiss the possibility that it was a military maneuver? You mention the presence of a military base nearby.
Paco Andreu: You can figure that in the year 1968 military maneuvers in the desert were few. The known military craft at the time had bases in Gran Canarias and in El Aaiun, were Junkers transport aircraft, a plane from 1934-35, so it was impossible that it could make such maneuvers. And then, the only thing it could have been...there were no helicopters yet...or yes, there was a helicopter unit at Los Rodeos, but they were there for evacuation service and emergency purposes only, so the Sahara region may have had piston driven T-6 aircraft but nothing resembling what we saw.
Interviewer: We discussed the likelihood that it could have been a star.
Paco Andreu: No, no, never. A star we don’t see...a star we see above us, like you do from the ground. But we’d sometimes see it below us. It couldn’t be a star. Nor was it a comet. We’ve seen an infinite number of comets in flight, and we know their trajectory and patterns. There’s something else there. Don’t know if its manned, unmanned or guided automatically at a distance. no idea. There could be many conjectures about it. But the fact is that what we saw was that. And the truth is that I never forgot it, despite the years that have gone by.
(Translation & transcription (c) 2012, S. Corrales, IHU. Special thanks to Alfonso Ferrer)
Berlin 2012: Javier Bardem Talks About Alvaro Longoria's 'Sons of the Clouds: The Last Colony' (Q&A)
Few people outside of Spain have even heard of the post-Colonial drama of the Sarhawi people who live to this day in the Western Sahara. But that's something Javier Bardem wants to change. The Spanish actor has thrown his weight behind the documentary as producer and star to focus some of his starlight on one of the darker corners of the world. The Hollywood Reporter's Spain Bureau Chief Pamela Rolfe talked to Bardem about the documentary, the Sahara and optimism.
THR: This is clearly a personal project. I know that your contact with the Sahrawi people came while at a film festival, but what was it that really moved you about that experience?
our editor recommends
Nominee Javier Bardem to Present at Academy Awards
Julia Roberts on Javier Bardem: 'If There's Not Hope for Talent, We're F-----'
Bardem: There are many reasons why I was moved by the experiences I had in the refugee camps. I suppose if I had to identify one to summarize it would be seeing the legacy as Spaniards that we left to the Sarhawis. That really gives you a different kind of responsibility. Of course, it wouldn't be the same if the Sarhawis weren't how they are-- so generous. I didn't find any hate or resentment toward us, but the opposite. The Spanish population helps the Sarhawis in a big way -- in a private way. So we want to help and we made the documentary because that's the way we can. You cannot change the world. But we can bring that story to some other people who may not be aware of it. In the end, those stories that are not told are stories that don't exist in people's minds.
THR: Outside Spain, the Western Sahara is largely an unknown problem. It's not even on the radar. How would you explain the situation and Spain's historic role to a complete outsider?
Bardem: That's actually why we tried to do the documentary, because it's not very easy to make sense of it. This film is about the Sarhawis. But in the end, it's about a lot of stories in the world that happen to be the same. Because they are not on the radar, as you say, they're not important. If they're not "important," then people don't move to try to change them. When I say people, I do mean society -- but I also mean governments that have the power to change the landscape. Imagine the situation between Israel and Palestine. It's such a big mess. You can be on one side or the other. But what's clear is that there's an urgent need for a solution there and that's been dragging on for so long. So you can imagine how much more difficult for a people like the Sarhawis that are so much less -- less population, less support. It's important to talk about a situation that people are not aware of and yet those people are having a really hard time to survive. The world is full of these stories. We didn't choose it. It chose us.
THR: There's a moment when you are interviewing Aminatou Haidar when she talks about the growing frustration with non-violence by saying she can no longer find the words to guide younger generations. It's a key moment. What do you see as the path for the Sarhawi people?
Bardem: She's an amazing lady who has lived through so many incredible situations. She presents the Sarhawis as they are -- a people who have been trying peacefully to demand legal rights, common sense rights, with the knowledge and consensus of the United Nations and yet they still feel they don't have a right. It's like Aminatou says -- they are a people that are really peaceful and don't want to move forward in a violent way, but "what can I tell the youth when after all these years and so many betrayals, we still don't matter." What can you say? It's very powerful to hear that from a person recognized as a peace leader in the world.
THR: Something depicted nicely in the film is not just a possible changing in strategy, but a changing of the guard from one generation to the next.
Bardem: People have been born and raised in refugee camps. Those people don't know what the older generation knew, their land, their future, their possibilities. There is a whole generation of people who have grown up in refugee camps asking themselves, "Why? What have we done wrong?" And Aminotou and others are still telling them that peace is what will bring us farther as a movement. But these generations are saying "no," because they see how the world changes and they see that if you do not make some noise, you are not in the news. And we -- society, the media -- either voluntarily or not we make them make decisions like that. It's a pity, because they are an example of people moving forward in the hardest situations with their very peaceful, positive and creative spirit.
THR: Not to minimize the effect of the film, but I'm curious if there's anything else aside from the hefty weight of your prestige and celebrity and the cost of the film that you have invested in this cause? Have you created some foundation or some economic support?
Bardem: Alvaro and I and others I know try -- and sometimes we succeed -- in a private, anonymous way in order for them to have better conditions. But that goes along with all the Spanish society that I mentioned before. There is a lot of awareness in the Spanish society. They bring kids here in the summertime because summers there are unbearable. They bring them here to Spain to see doctors. They send money and they send food. But that's not the goal. The goal is to try to change the scenario and for them to have what they deserve -- their land, their right to make a living out of their land. I could name thousands of people who are helping in a private way. That's not what it should be. We wanted to put it all together so people understand and can know what to ask of their governments in the political forums. But if you're asking about foundations, there are many pro-Sarhawi foundations in Spain and, of course, we can work through that, but if this film makes any money at all, it'll go straight to the refugee camp. But it's not just the film, there are many private initiatives.
THR: Many people outside Spain might not know the Bardem family's link with political activism. But it's something you come by honestly, no?
Bardem: It's not something you choose. It's not something you carry like a flag. It's a part of your education. I've seen people in my family doing whatever they could, however they could, in order to help to create a better way in a very humble way. What you see when you are little, stays with you. It stays a sense of humor, a way you eat or the way you enjoy a book. It's a part of your education.
THR: Would you consider yourself an optimist?
Bardem: Wow. In general? Ah … I believe in people. I'm going to be 43 years old, and my experience in life so far is that I've met way more good people -- people that are trying to help, people that are doing the best they can do to create a better world -- than people that I've met that are the opposite, people that are destroying or creating a horrible world. So I'm optimistic in that way. The bad news is that only the bad people reach the news because they are noisier.
THR: And with respect to this particular situation?
Bardem: I do. Alvaro and I were at the United Nations and we had the chance to be there for three or four days and speak to a lot of people. And there's an awareness for example of the violation of human rights is so strong that I'm optimistic in that sense that it will be supervised there's a sense that it has to be transformed. Transformed so they can have the freedom of speech, freedom to belong to different ideologies without being in prison or tortured. In that sense, the Arab Spring has taught us that it's possible. Even in the darkest regions, people have discovered their right of freedom. And yes, I'm optimistic in that sense.
THR: The number of languages used in the film highlights what an international problem it is.
Bardem: When we got there, we thought it was a local problem with the Spanish government. We made a journey, and as we make the journey, we discovered how many governments are actually involved in this problem. And of course, how many languages. I was amazed about the knowledge of the situation in so many different forums. Of course, on a street level, it's not a very well known crisis. But in political circles, it is.
THR: So what do you take away from the experience of making this documentary?
Bardem: I'm lucky in that I know a lot of good and capable people that can make it happen. We all need people. Human beings are not an island. I know a lot of people in different crafts. In this one, Alvaro has really worked hard to make it happen over the past four years. It's been a long road, and we're happy we have something to show. We wanted to make something real that people can have an opinion after watching it. In this case, it wasn't easy because you have to fight hard for people to speak. We weren't looking to jeopardize anyone. We just want people to learn and to take them through the journey of why this situation keeps being the same for so long.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Sunday, February 05, 2012
Mohamed Mbarek Lafghir:المعتقل السياسي لفقير محمد مبارك
الاسم الكامل : لفقير محمد مبارك الملقب بي " فرنكو "
تاريخ ومكان الازدياد :1978 بمدينة العيون المحتلة
تعريف: لفقير محمد أمبارك كان إلي جانب إخوانه في مدينة العيون المحتلة يساهم في خدمة انتفاضة الاستقلال وكان من الشباب ألطلائعي في توعية و تاطير الجماهير ، والحضور والمساهمة في الوقفات والاحتجاجات المطالبة بتقرير المصير والاستقلال التي تعرفها مدينة العيون المحتلة ،حاولت السلطات الأمنية المغربية اعتقاله عدة مرات ،وزرت منزل عائلته لاعتقاله في مرات عديدة دون أن تنجح في ذالك ، قامت السلطات المغربية أيضا بقطع راتبه لمواقفه السياسية ، لفقير زار مخيمات ألاجئين الصحراويين في سنة 2009 ضمن وفد حقوقي ، كان من المؤطرين الأساسيين في لمخيم اكديم إزيك التاريخي ،تم اعتقال لفقير محمد أمبارك بعد تفكيك مخيم أقديم إزيك تعرض للتعذيب الوحشي ونقل إلي الحبس لكحل بمدينة العيون المحتلة ليتم نقله إلي سجن سلا المغربية وهو اليوم رفقة 23 معتقل سياسي صحراوي على خلفية أكديم إزيك ينتظرون محاكمة عسكرية
Friday, January 27, 2012
Interview with Christopher Ross, Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara
UN envoy Christopher Ross on Western Sahara
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your feedback | Share71
Christopher Ross, Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara
Interview with Christopher Ross, Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara
25 January 2012 – In January 2009 Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appointed Christopher Ross as his Personal Envoy for Western Sahara, a territory that has been under dispute for several decades. Fighting erupted there in 1976 between Morocco and the Polisario Front following the Spanish colonial administration’s withdrawal. The violence quickly drove hundreds of thousands of Saharawi refugees to flee across the border and into neighbouring Algeria, where they remain to this day.
Almost two decades later, the violence has subsided but both parties are still at odds despite ongoing UN-mediated talks. While Morocco supports autonomy for the Saharawis, the Polisario Front says the territory’s final status should be decided in an independence referendum.
Mr. Ross, a former United States diplomat with a long and distinguished career, says in the interview that it is high-time to end the Western Sahara conflict and the human tragedy that it has engendered.
UN News Centre: What is the conflict in the Western Sahara all about?
Christopher Ross: Well, as you know the Western Sahara is a former Spanish colony, roughly the size of Great Britain but with a population of just a few hundred thousand. Its legal status has been in dispute since well before the Spanish withdrawal in 1975-76. The parties to this dispute currently are the Kingdom of Morocco and the Polisario Front. Morocco, which has controlled most of Western Sahara since the 1970s, insists that the Western Sahara must become an autonomous part of Morocco on the basis of negotiations with the Polisario and a yes/no referendum.
The Polisario, for its part, argues that the people of Western Sahara must be free to choose their own future through a referendum that includes the option of independence. From 1975 to 1991 there were open hostilities between these two parties, heavy fighting, but in 1991 a ceasefire was implemented as part of a UN-led settlement effort. It should be noted that while this is no longer a fighting war, it is still a tense and dangerous situation. The UN continues to work to encourage a settlement and to improve the well-being of the people whose lives have been tragically affected.
It’s not enough to keep talking on the basis of fixed positions; the solution must reflect a political will and concrete steps to move.
UN News Centre: So, what is the UN doing?
Christopher Ross: Well, since the mid-1980s the UN has taken two distinct approaches to this conflict under the guidance of the Security Council. The first, which lasted until 2004, was based on several settlement plans that were put forward to the parties for their approval. None of these settlement plans worked. They all called for a referendum but the parties were never able to agree who would be eligible to vote. In 2004, a second phase began and this phase continues to this day. This one is based on direct negotiations between the parties. In resolutions every year, the Security Council has called on the parties to achieve, and here I must quote, “a just, lasting, and mutually acceptable political solution, which will provide for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara.” […] To assist the parties in making progress, the Secretary-General has appointed a Personal Envoy to act as a mediator and facilitator.
So, to summarize, the Security Council now expects the parties themselves to negotiate a political solution with the help of the UN, with the help of the neighbouring States, with the help of the international community and to do so instead of reacting to settlement plans others have drawn up.
In the context of this new phase, in April 2007, the two parties put forward their proposals for a settlement of the conflict to the Security Council, and ever since then these have formed the basis for discussion. I should note that these political efforts to foster a settlement are not the only forms of UN involvement. The UN family has been active on several fronts. It has provided vital support to the thousands of refugees who fled into Algeria to escape the fighting between Morocco and the Polisario in the 1970s.
Separated families meet up again during a family visit in Western Sahara. Photo: UNHCR/S.Hopper
It has worked to implement confidence-building measures to facilitate the return of the refugees once a settlement is reached. It has also maintained a small peacekeeping force in Western Sahara known as MINURSO, the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara. And, finally, it has taken an increased interest in human rights as the parties to the conflict have increasingly accused each other of serious violations of these rights.
UN News Centre: What about the human dimension to this ongoing conflict?
Christopher Ross: Unfortunately, the demands of burning issues around the world and the absence of imminent crisis in Western Sahara have worked to deprive this conflict of the attention it deserves from the international community. But a settlement is, in fact, long overdue not least because of its human dimension. Ensuring a safe return of the Sahrawi refugees in Algeria to their homes under honourable conditions has been my highest objective. I first visited the refugee camps in the 1970s. I returned there beginning in 2009 and I found, much to my dismay, little had changed.
It is unacceptable, in my view, that for 37 years, these refugees have lived in miserable conditions because of a political dispute whose main actors have engaged in endless battles on the ground, at the negotiating table, in international fora. And I think we should never lose site of the people caught in the middle of this conflict.
UN News Centre: Why is this proving so difficult to solve? Why is it taking so long?
Christopher Ross: Essentially, the two sides have maintained positions that are mutually exclusive and neither has been willing to yield one inch. Polisario continues to insist that the final status of Western Sahara must be determined by its people; Morocco continues to insist that the only possible solution is an agreed autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty.
The Security Council has been encouraging the parties to negotiate and has refrained from considering imposing a solution. So, as matters stand, each party is free to reject the proposal of the other as the basis of negotiations. And this is partly a reflection of the fact that each party is convinced that its position is well grounded in history and in international law and enjoys significant domestic and international support. So, they go on maintaining their positions without entering into a genuine negotiating process.
UN News Centre: So, what can you do as the UN mediator to move this process forward?
Christopher Ross: Well, my role as Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General is to promote a settlement by first providing a framework for dialogue and, second, by encouraging genuine negotiations without myself taking a position on the substance. I cannot force a solution on the parties; they themselves must work it out with my help and that of others.
Now, when I first took on these duties, we suspended formal negotiations that had been taking place earlier with large delegations and preferred, instead, to convene informal talks with smaller delegations. This was because the formal negotiations that had gone on had resulted in little more than very strong polemics. We were determined to foster an atmosphere of respect in which much more fluid negotiations and discussions could occur. This effort succeeded but it wasn’t enough to break the impasse. And the two parties simply could not move beyond their two proposals. So, what we have done more recently is try to break down these proposals into individual topics that the parties might be able to discuss without prejudice to whatever the final status might be and they’ve agreed that they could begin by discussing natural resources and demining and then moving on to other subjects. But it really remains to be seen whether this approach will, in fact, lead to movement on the core issue.
UN News Centre: And what will happen if a political solution isn’t found?
Christopher Ross: Well, the fact is that the absence of a solution has imposed growing risks and costs for the parties, the Maghreb region, and for the international community.
The risks for the parties include the possible renewal of military hostilities, the possible outbreak of popular unrest, and the possible recruitment of frustrated young and unemployed Sahrawis into terrorist or criminal groups. The costs include the humanitarian plight of the refugees, increasing questions about human rights, the expense of maintaining significant military forces, and an inability to plan for the use of the natural resources of Western Sahara in a proper way.
Now, for the region and the international community there is the risk of military escalation and there is the possibility of increased terrorist and criminal activity. There, too, there are costs. Among the costs are a failure to achieve the benefits of greater economic integration and the absence of full coordination in responding to threats of terrorism and crime which, in fact, have grown since the collapse of the [Muammar] al-Qadhafi regime and the dispersal of arms and fighters into the Sahel region.
Map of Western Sahara. Please click for a larger more detailed version. Credit: UN Cartographic Section
UN News Centre: Do you think a settlement can be reached?
Christopher Ross: Well, there are some people who think that the Western Sahara conflict really is not ripe for settlement on terms acceptable to the parties and to the international community. But it’s clear that a settlement is needed if the Maghreb region is to move forward to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Now, it’s possible that recent developments may encourage the parties to begin a more serious process of negotiation. We’ve had the Arab Spring. We’ve had increasing signs of disaffection among youth. We’ve had recent and forthcoming elections in several places. We’ve had a desire to revive movement toward Maghreb unity. And we’ve seen a growing awareness of the threat of terrorism. So, these and other developments may push the parties to substantive engagement and may also prompt the key regional and international players to become more active in the search for a settlement.
We, for our part, are going to continue our efforts to promote a genuine negotiating process. And the next round of informal talks is scheduled for February at the Greentree Estate in Long Island.
UN News Centre: Is there anything the international community can do to help out?
Christopher Ross: Well, indeed. I think there are things to be said not only to the parties but to the countries in the neighbourhood and to the international community. For the parties, we hope to see a much greater engagement on the core issue of the future status of Western Sahara in the course of the coming year. It’s not enough to keep talking on the basis of fixed positions; the solution must reflect a political will and concrete steps to move. We also hope that the people of Western Sahara, whether they be in the territory or in the refugee camps, will enjoy full human rights, including the freedom to express their views on their future and that the negotiators will take these views into account.
For the States of the Maghreb and the wider international community, we hope that they will see more clearly than ever the benefits for all parties concerned of actively helping to find a mutually acceptable solution.
After 37 years, it’s high-time to end the Western Sahara conflict and the human tragedy that it has engendered.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your feedback | Share71
Christopher Ross, Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara
Interview with Christopher Ross, Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara
25 January 2012 – In January 2009 Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appointed Christopher Ross as his Personal Envoy for Western Sahara, a territory that has been under dispute for several decades. Fighting erupted there in 1976 between Morocco and the Polisario Front following the Spanish colonial administration’s withdrawal. The violence quickly drove hundreds of thousands of Saharawi refugees to flee across the border and into neighbouring Algeria, where they remain to this day.
Almost two decades later, the violence has subsided but both parties are still at odds despite ongoing UN-mediated talks. While Morocco supports autonomy for the Saharawis, the Polisario Front says the territory’s final status should be decided in an independence referendum.
Mr. Ross, a former United States diplomat with a long and distinguished career, says in the interview that it is high-time to end the Western Sahara conflict and the human tragedy that it has engendered.
UN News Centre: What is the conflict in the Western Sahara all about?
Christopher Ross: Well, as you know the Western Sahara is a former Spanish colony, roughly the size of Great Britain but with a population of just a few hundred thousand. Its legal status has been in dispute since well before the Spanish withdrawal in 1975-76. The parties to this dispute currently are the Kingdom of Morocco and the Polisario Front. Morocco, which has controlled most of Western Sahara since the 1970s, insists that the Western Sahara must become an autonomous part of Morocco on the basis of negotiations with the Polisario and a yes/no referendum.
The Polisario, for its part, argues that the people of Western Sahara must be free to choose their own future through a referendum that includes the option of independence. From 1975 to 1991 there were open hostilities between these two parties, heavy fighting, but in 1991 a ceasefire was implemented as part of a UN-led settlement effort. It should be noted that while this is no longer a fighting war, it is still a tense and dangerous situation. The UN continues to work to encourage a settlement and to improve the well-being of the people whose lives have been tragically affected.
It’s not enough to keep talking on the basis of fixed positions; the solution must reflect a political will and concrete steps to move.
UN News Centre: So, what is the UN doing?
Christopher Ross: Well, since the mid-1980s the UN has taken two distinct approaches to this conflict under the guidance of the Security Council. The first, which lasted until 2004, was based on several settlement plans that were put forward to the parties for their approval. None of these settlement plans worked. They all called for a referendum but the parties were never able to agree who would be eligible to vote. In 2004, a second phase began and this phase continues to this day. This one is based on direct negotiations between the parties. In resolutions every year, the Security Council has called on the parties to achieve, and here I must quote, “a just, lasting, and mutually acceptable political solution, which will provide for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara.” […] To assist the parties in making progress, the Secretary-General has appointed a Personal Envoy to act as a mediator and facilitator.
So, to summarize, the Security Council now expects the parties themselves to negotiate a political solution with the help of the UN, with the help of the neighbouring States, with the help of the international community and to do so instead of reacting to settlement plans others have drawn up.
In the context of this new phase, in April 2007, the two parties put forward their proposals for a settlement of the conflict to the Security Council, and ever since then these have formed the basis for discussion. I should note that these political efforts to foster a settlement are not the only forms of UN involvement. The UN family has been active on several fronts. It has provided vital support to the thousands of refugees who fled into Algeria to escape the fighting between Morocco and the Polisario in the 1970s.
Separated families meet up again during a family visit in Western Sahara. Photo: UNHCR/S.Hopper
It has worked to implement confidence-building measures to facilitate the return of the refugees once a settlement is reached. It has also maintained a small peacekeeping force in Western Sahara known as MINURSO, the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara. And, finally, it has taken an increased interest in human rights as the parties to the conflict have increasingly accused each other of serious violations of these rights.
UN News Centre: What about the human dimension to this ongoing conflict?
Christopher Ross: Unfortunately, the demands of burning issues around the world and the absence of imminent crisis in Western Sahara have worked to deprive this conflict of the attention it deserves from the international community. But a settlement is, in fact, long overdue not least because of its human dimension. Ensuring a safe return of the Sahrawi refugees in Algeria to their homes under honourable conditions has been my highest objective. I first visited the refugee camps in the 1970s. I returned there beginning in 2009 and I found, much to my dismay, little had changed.
It is unacceptable, in my view, that for 37 years, these refugees have lived in miserable conditions because of a political dispute whose main actors have engaged in endless battles on the ground, at the negotiating table, in international fora. And I think we should never lose site of the people caught in the middle of this conflict.
UN News Centre: Why is this proving so difficult to solve? Why is it taking so long?
Christopher Ross: Essentially, the two sides have maintained positions that are mutually exclusive and neither has been willing to yield one inch. Polisario continues to insist that the final status of Western Sahara must be determined by its people; Morocco continues to insist that the only possible solution is an agreed autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty.
The Security Council has been encouraging the parties to negotiate and has refrained from considering imposing a solution. So, as matters stand, each party is free to reject the proposal of the other as the basis of negotiations. And this is partly a reflection of the fact that each party is convinced that its position is well grounded in history and in international law and enjoys significant domestic and international support. So, they go on maintaining their positions without entering into a genuine negotiating process.
UN News Centre: So, what can you do as the UN mediator to move this process forward?
Christopher Ross: Well, my role as Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General is to promote a settlement by first providing a framework for dialogue and, second, by encouraging genuine negotiations without myself taking a position on the substance. I cannot force a solution on the parties; they themselves must work it out with my help and that of others.
Now, when I first took on these duties, we suspended formal negotiations that had been taking place earlier with large delegations and preferred, instead, to convene informal talks with smaller delegations. This was because the formal negotiations that had gone on had resulted in little more than very strong polemics. We were determined to foster an atmosphere of respect in which much more fluid negotiations and discussions could occur. This effort succeeded but it wasn’t enough to break the impasse. And the two parties simply could not move beyond their two proposals. So, what we have done more recently is try to break down these proposals into individual topics that the parties might be able to discuss without prejudice to whatever the final status might be and they’ve agreed that they could begin by discussing natural resources and demining and then moving on to other subjects. But it really remains to be seen whether this approach will, in fact, lead to movement on the core issue.
UN News Centre: And what will happen if a political solution isn’t found?
Christopher Ross: Well, the fact is that the absence of a solution has imposed growing risks and costs for the parties, the Maghreb region, and for the international community.
The risks for the parties include the possible renewal of military hostilities, the possible outbreak of popular unrest, and the possible recruitment of frustrated young and unemployed Sahrawis into terrorist or criminal groups. The costs include the humanitarian plight of the refugees, increasing questions about human rights, the expense of maintaining significant military forces, and an inability to plan for the use of the natural resources of Western Sahara in a proper way.
Now, for the region and the international community there is the risk of military escalation and there is the possibility of increased terrorist and criminal activity. There, too, there are costs. Among the costs are a failure to achieve the benefits of greater economic integration and the absence of full coordination in responding to threats of terrorism and crime which, in fact, have grown since the collapse of the [Muammar] al-Qadhafi regime and the dispersal of arms and fighters into the Sahel region.
Map of Western Sahara. Please click for a larger more detailed version. Credit: UN Cartographic Section
UN News Centre: Do you think a settlement can be reached?
Christopher Ross: Well, there are some people who think that the Western Sahara conflict really is not ripe for settlement on terms acceptable to the parties and to the international community. But it’s clear that a settlement is needed if the Maghreb region is to move forward to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Now, it’s possible that recent developments may encourage the parties to begin a more serious process of negotiation. We’ve had the Arab Spring. We’ve had increasing signs of disaffection among youth. We’ve had recent and forthcoming elections in several places. We’ve had a desire to revive movement toward Maghreb unity. And we’ve seen a growing awareness of the threat of terrorism. So, these and other developments may push the parties to substantive engagement and may also prompt the key regional and international players to become more active in the search for a settlement.
We, for our part, are going to continue our efforts to promote a genuine negotiating process. And the next round of informal talks is scheduled for February at the Greentree Estate in Long Island.
UN News Centre: Is there anything the international community can do to help out?
Christopher Ross: Well, indeed. I think there are things to be said not only to the parties but to the countries in the neighbourhood and to the international community. For the parties, we hope to see a much greater engagement on the core issue of the future status of Western Sahara in the course of the coming year. It’s not enough to keep talking on the basis of fixed positions; the solution must reflect a political will and concrete steps to move. We also hope that the people of Western Sahara, whether they be in the territory or in the refugee camps, will enjoy full human rights, including the freedom to express their views on their future and that the negotiators will take these views into account.
For the States of the Maghreb and the wider international community, we hope that they will see more clearly than ever the benefits for all parties concerned of actively helping to find a mutually acceptable solution.
After 37 years, it’s high-time to end the Western Sahara conflict and the human tragedy that it has engendered.
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
Moroccan authorities behind the destruction of mores than 40 wodden cabins In amigriou Area belonging to Saharawi Natives.
أحتج عشرات المواطنين الصحراويين أمام مقر عمالة الطرفاية ،وذالك بعد أن قامت السلطات المحلية بهدم عشرات لبراريك يوم الثلاثاء 16 نوفبمر مساءا في منطقة جنوب قرية الصيد انكيرو 8 كلم ،ويبلغ عدد لبراريك التي تم هدمها 40 براكة تعود ملكيتها لمواطنين صحراويين منذو العهد الإسباني ،،وكان المواطنين الصحراويين قد تفاجئوا بهذا الإجراء الذي قامت بيه السلطات دون سابق إنذار ،فيما لم تتخذ السلطات أي إجراء ضد براريك أخري قريبة من نفس المكان تعود ملكيتها لمواطنين منحدرين من الشمال ،
وإحتجاجا على هذا الإجراء نظم المتضررين العديد من وقفة أم عمالة الطرفاية محتجين على الإجراءات العنصرية ومصادرة الحقوق التي يقودها رئيس دائرة الطرفاية وقائد الدرك ،حيث جوبهوا بالتهديد المباشر من طرف عشرات رجال السلطة الذي حاصروا الوقفة ،
يؤكد بعض المحتجين أن هذا الإجراء الذي قامت بيه السلطات مرتبط بوجود شركات للتنقيب عن النفط في تلك المنطقة ، فيما يؤكد أخرين وجود محاولة من السلطات إلي بيع هذه الأراضي لجهات أجنبية تحاول إستغلال هذه المنطقة في مشاريع سياحية على حساب السكان الأصليين.
يذكر أنه بعد تهديم لبراريك وصلت قوات من الجيش وصادرت أوراق سيارات المحتجين وأتهموا المحتجين بمحاولة إنشاء ظروف تكوين مخيم أكديم إزيك 2 ،وإلي حدود الساعة ترفض السلطات فتح حوار مع المحتجين بدون حجة واضحة
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
وصية المعتقلين السياسيين في سحن سلا المغربية
لا تصالح
عندما يملأ الحق قلبك
لا تصالح ولو قيل ما قيل من كلمات السلام
لا تصالح وأرو قبلك بالدم
و أرو التراب المقدس
و أرو أسلافك الراقدين
إلى أن ترد عليك العظام
شعبنا الباسل, أمهاتنا الطاهرات, أبنائنا الشامخين, أخواتنا العفيفات, إخواننا الأمجاد رفاقنا الضراغم
سلام عليكم جميعا, نكتب لكم وصيتنا هاته ونحن على مشارف الشهادة في يومنا 30 من معركة الكرامة والشرف لنقول لكم :
أمهاتنا الطاهرات هذه قبلة حب أبدية نطبعها على جباهكم المرفوعة دهرا تمتزج بدمعة شوق وحنين ذرفتها العين في لحظة احتضار تختزلان كل المساحات والأزمنة من أجل البوح بمشاعر استحالت أمواج عاتية تتلاطم على شاطئ القلب لتنثر رذاذ عطر منبعث من ذكريات خالدة نعيد شريط وقائعها فتستوقفنا فيه تضحياتكم الجسام من أجلنا بسهركم وصبركم وتجلدكم, تحملتن الألم من أجل الأمل الذي عقدتموه فينا كنتن تفرحن عندما نفرح وتمرضن لحظة مرضنا أرضعتمونا حتى ارتوين واحتضنتمونا بدفء رائع, كانت أحشائكم المدرسة الأولى التي تلقينا أبجديات الثورة وحروف الوطن ومعاني النيل و التضحية والاستبسال عانيتن وبمرارة و أنتن تنتظرون لساعات وأيام طوال أمام المخافر و المعتقلات. أنها تضحيات استثنائية تفوق طاقة البشر ونحن نستحضرها الآن تجتاحنا أحاسيس عارمة تمزق الفؤاد لوعة وحنينا وتعصف بالكيان والوجدان وأمام هذا الحمل الثقيل الذي يلزمنا انطلاقا من وازع فطري ووجداني وأخلاقي يرد الجميل و الضيع, هنا نحن أمهاتنا الغاليات نفي بعهدنا لكن وللشهداء ونختار الموت البطيء ولكن بشرف وعز وتحدي وكبرياء الألم لتنتشوا بزغرودة نصر تطلقونها مخترقة لعنان السماء من أجل تمتيعكم بوضع اعتباري ومكانة رمزية كأمهات شهداء, فجزاكم الله عنا خيرا وصبرا صبرا موعدنا الجن إنشاء الله أبائنا الشامخين شموخ جبال هذا الوطن و المبجلين بتاج الهبة والوقار ونحن أبنائكم البررة الراسخون ثباتا وإباء من قلب الأقبية و السجون ونخط لكم من على فراش الموت ونحن نحتضر كلماتنا الأخيرة بمداد دم تأريخا للذكرى و حفظا للتاريخ لننحني باعتزاز وشموخ إجلالا لهاماتكم السابحة في بحور المجد... أنتم المدرسة والملهم أنتم ركام التجارب والقدوة والمعلم الذي يلقننا دروس الثورة وتعاليم المقاومة أنتم من قال لنا لا تصالح ولو منحوك الذهب أنتم من أخبرنا أن للحرية الحمراء باب بكل يد مدرجة تدق وأن ولائنا أولا وأخيرا يجب أن يكون للوطن و للوطن وحده, سرنا على نهجكم السديد وخطكم الثوري الملتزم نرجى إلى شمس ساطعة إلى غد قادم بزحف فيه الأخضر على بيادر القحط والبأس غد تزحف فيه الحرية على قلاع القهر و الاستعمار.
ووفاءنا لعهدكم وإنصافا لتضحياتكم كابدنا وقاسينا وعانينا جبروت العدو وسيادته بأنفة وإباء لنجسد واقعيا وميدانيا تعاقب الأجيال في أرقى صوره ولنكمل حلمكم المشروع وتطلعكم التاريخي نحو الإنعتاق لم نجد ما نتوج به هذه المسيرة الحافلة سوى أن نسترخص أنفسنا قرابين على مذبح الحرية شهداء عند ربنا نحسب فهنيئا لنا بكم وهنيئا لكم بنا وعوضكم الله وجزاكم عنا خيرا وصبر وصبر ميعادنا الجنة إنشاء الله.
إخواتنا العفيفات, إخواننا الأماجد
لا تصالح على الدم ... حتى الدم
لا تصالح ولو قيل رأس برأس
أكل الرؤوس سواء؟.
أقلب الغريب كقلب أخيك..؟. أعيناه عينا أخيك و هل تساوي يد سيفها كان لك... بيد سيفها أثكلك أمه قانون المراق هدار يرسم جغرافيا القهر الممتد على طول خارطة الوطن الجريح إنها تعاويذ البقاء الأبدي يرتلها الجسد المنهك النحيل وقلب يتراقص ألما على ‘إيقاع نغماته الأخيرة في سباق العمر... قبل الرحيل إلى جنان الخلد... أنها وصية تحوي في طياتها عهدا يحب الوفاء ودربا تلزمه الاستمرارية وثأرا مشتعلا في الأضلع ووطنا يسكن فينا سنين عجاف من العبودية و الاحتلال, هذا ميثاق بيننا وبينكم فصنوه و أحملوه دمعة من أعينكم لا تذرف إلا يوم يرفرف العلم الوطني خفاقا في فعيوننا الحبيبة حرة ومستقلة فلا مجال للبكاء الاتشاح بالسواد فالموت شرف هو مدعاة للفخر واستنهاض للهمم وحشدنا لمسايرة مسيرة التحرر الوطني والرقي بها تجربة عالمية فريدة تستلهم منها باقي الشعوب عبر التضحية والفداء فاجعلوها براكين وحمما تشهد على إندحار أخر جندي غازي لأرضنا العزيزة.
لا تصالح
فليس سوء أن تريد.
أنت فارس هذا الزمان الوحيد
وسواك... الممسوخ
شعبنا الباسل.
في هذا الزمن الردى حين يصبح الموت من مفردات الحياة تتكالب قوى الظلم و الطغيان على شعب أعزل إلى من إرادته فتنصب المشانق وتقيم حفلات القصاص الظالم, لكل صوت يسبح ضد التيار المتجبر إنها تراجيديا مظلمة ومأساة مفجعة, لكن بقدرة قادر وبتضحية مضحي وبدم شهيد وألم جريح ودموع ...
تتساقط أوراق التوت تباعا ليتعرى وجه النمر الورقي القبيح ويصبر الصوت السابح إعصارا مدمر يقض مضاجع الاحتلال ويزلزلها وتصبح حتمية النصر أمرا معاشا وواقع لا يمكن تجازوه تأطره معطيات الميدان, أي الانتفاضة كصيغة نضالية مفتوحة في بعدها الجماهيري الزاخر بالنضج والعطاء لتتوالى قوافل الشهداء و المعتقلين و المخطوفين و الجرحى و المعطوبين وتندلع في الأفق تباشير الحرية مع بزوغ كل فجر وتلوح أشعة الاستقلال تتربع في كبد السماء, وإيمانا منا أن البطولة تقتضي أن نمد أجسادنا جسورا, فقل لرفقائنا أن يعبروا, وهنا نحن اليوم شعبنا الأصيل نروي تراب الصحراء الطاهرة بدماء زكية ونصرخ ملء حناجرنا بكل عنفوان ثوري لنقول لا في وجه من قال نعم, لا للذل لا للخضوع لا للخنوع ونكتب لا بالدم و الروح ليشهد التاريخ على برنا بالوطن هذه هي فلسفة الكفاح الوطني وقوامه ننشد من خلالها الخلود وأملنا الالتحاق بركب الخالدين شهداء الوطن وهدفنا من وراء هذه التضحية أن نكون وقودا يشعل نارا حارقة تأتي على أخضر العدو ويابسه دعما لكل الآمال ولا تنتظر جزاءا ولا شكورا فهذا واجب وطني يمليه علينا ضمير متقد وحي ولكن ما ننتظر منكم ونوصيكم به نوجزه في هذه الأبيات الناطقة بلسان حالنا في ساعات الاحتضار هاته :
أيها الواقفون على حافة المذبحة
أشهروا الأسلحة
سقط الموت وانفرط القلب كالمسبحة
الدم انساب فوق الوشاح
المنازل أضرحة...الزنازين أضرحة...المدى أضرحة...
فارفعوا الأسلحة و أتبعوني
أنا ندم الغد و البارحة
رايتي عظمتان و جمجمة
وشعاري الصباح
المعتقلين السياسيين الصحراويين
مجموعة أكديم إزيك المضربين عن الطعام
بسجن سلا2
29 نوفمبر2011
عندما يملأ الحق قلبك
لا تصالح ولو قيل ما قيل من كلمات السلام
لا تصالح وأرو قبلك بالدم
و أرو التراب المقدس
و أرو أسلافك الراقدين
إلى أن ترد عليك العظام
شعبنا الباسل, أمهاتنا الطاهرات, أبنائنا الشامخين, أخواتنا العفيفات, إخواننا الأمجاد رفاقنا الضراغم
سلام عليكم جميعا, نكتب لكم وصيتنا هاته ونحن على مشارف الشهادة في يومنا 30 من معركة الكرامة والشرف لنقول لكم :
أمهاتنا الطاهرات هذه قبلة حب أبدية نطبعها على جباهكم المرفوعة دهرا تمتزج بدمعة شوق وحنين ذرفتها العين في لحظة احتضار تختزلان كل المساحات والأزمنة من أجل البوح بمشاعر استحالت أمواج عاتية تتلاطم على شاطئ القلب لتنثر رذاذ عطر منبعث من ذكريات خالدة نعيد شريط وقائعها فتستوقفنا فيه تضحياتكم الجسام من أجلنا بسهركم وصبركم وتجلدكم, تحملتن الألم من أجل الأمل الذي عقدتموه فينا كنتن تفرحن عندما نفرح وتمرضن لحظة مرضنا أرضعتمونا حتى ارتوين واحتضنتمونا بدفء رائع, كانت أحشائكم المدرسة الأولى التي تلقينا أبجديات الثورة وحروف الوطن ومعاني النيل و التضحية والاستبسال عانيتن وبمرارة و أنتن تنتظرون لساعات وأيام طوال أمام المخافر و المعتقلات. أنها تضحيات استثنائية تفوق طاقة البشر ونحن نستحضرها الآن تجتاحنا أحاسيس عارمة تمزق الفؤاد لوعة وحنينا وتعصف بالكيان والوجدان وأمام هذا الحمل الثقيل الذي يلزمنا انطلاقا من وازع فطري ووجداني وأخلاقي يرد الجميل و الضيع, هنا نحن أمهاتنا الغاليات نفي بعهدنا لكن وللشهداء ونختار الموت البطيء ولكن بشرف وعز وتحدي وكبرياء الألم لتنتشوا بزغرودة نصر تطلقونها مخترقة لعنان السماء من أجل تمتيعكم بوضع اعتباري ومكانة رمزية كأمهات شهداء, فجزاكم الله عنا خيرا وصبرا صبرا موعدنا الجن إنشاء الله أبائنا الشامخين شموخ جبال هذا الوطن و المبجلين بتاج الهبة والوقار ونحن أبنائكم البررة الراسخون ثباتا وإباء من قلب الأقبية و السجون ونخط لكم من على فراش الموت ونحن نحتضر كلماتنا الأخيرة بمداد دم تأريخا للذكرى و حفظا للتاريخ لننحني باعتزاز وشموخ إجلالا لهاماتكم السابحة في بحور المجد... أنتم المدرسة والملهم أنتم ركام التجارب والقدوة والمعلم الذي يلقننا دروس الثورة وتعاليم المقاومة أنتم من قال لنا لا تصالح ولو منحوك الذهب أنتم من أخبرنا أن للحرية الحمراء باب بكل يد مدرجة تدق وأن ولائنا أولا وأخيرا يجب أن يكون للوطن و للوطن وحده, سرنا على نهجكم السديد وخطكم الثوري الملتزم نرجى إلى شمس ساطعة إلى غد قادم بزحف فيه الأخضر على بيادر القحط والبأس غد تزحف فيه الحرية على قلاع القهر و الاستعمار.
ووفاءنا لعهدكم وإنصافا لتضحياتكم كابدنا وقاسينا وعانينا جبروت العدو وسيادته بأنفة وإباء لنجسد واقعيا وميدانيا تعاقب الأجيال في أرقى صوره ولنكمل حلمكم المشروع وتطلعكم التاريخي نحو الإنعتاق لم نجد ما نتوج به هذه المسيرة الحافلة سوى أن نسترخص أنفسنا قرابين على مذبح الحرية شهداء عند ربنا نحسب فهنيئا لنا بكم وهنيئا لكم بنا وعوضكم الله وجزاكم عنا خيرا وصبر وصبر ميعادنا الجنة إنشاء الله.
إخواتنا العفيفات, إخواننا الأماجد
لا تصالح على الدم ... حتى الدم
لا تصالح ولو قيل رأس برأس
أكل الرؤوس سواء؟.
أقلب الغريب كقلب أخيك..؟. أعيناه عينا أخيك و هل تساوي يد سيفها كان لك... بيد سيفها أثكلك أمه قانون المراق هدار يرسم جغرافيا القهر الممتد على طول خارطة الوطن الجريح إنها تعاويذ البقاء الأبدي يرتلها الجسد المنهك النحيل وقلب يتراقص ألما على ‘إيقاع نغماته الأخيرة في سباق العمر... قبل الرحيل إلى جنان الخلد... أنها وصية تحوي في طياتها عهدا يحب الوفاء ودربا تلزمه الاستمرارية وثأرا مشتعلا في الأضلع ووطنا يسكن فينا سنين عجاف من العبودية و الاحتلال, هذا ميثاق بيننا وبينكم فصنوه و أحملوه دمعة من أعينكم لا تذرف إلا يوم يرفرف العلم الوطني خفاقا في فعيوننا الحبيبة حرة ومستقلة فلا مجال للبكاء الاتشاح بالسواد فالموت شرف هو مدعاة للفخر واستنهاض للهمم وحشدنا لمسايرة مسيرة التحرر الوطني والرقي بها تجربة عالمية فريدة تستلهم منها باقي الشعوب عبر التضحية والفداء فاجعلوها براكين وحمما تشهد على إندحار أخر جندي غازي لأرضنا العزيزة.
لا تصالح
فليس سوء أن تريد.
أنت فارس هذا الزمان الوحيد
وسواك... الممسوخ
شعبنا الباسل.
في هذا الزمن الردى حين يصبح الموت من مفردات الحياة تتكالب قوى الظلم و الطغيان على شعب أعزل إلى من إرادته فتنصب المشانق وتقيم حفلات القصاص الظالم, لكل صوت يسبح ضد التيار المتجبر إنها تراجيديا مظلمة ومأساة مفجعة, لكن بقدرة قادر وبتضحية مضحي وبدم شهيد وألم جريح ودموع ...
تتساقط أوراق التوت تباعا ليتعرى وجه النمر الورقي القبيح ويصبر الصوت السابح إعصارا مدمر يقض مضاجع الاحتلال ويزلزلها وتصبح حتمية النصر أمرا معاشا وواقع لا يمكن تجازوه تأطره معطيات الميدان, أي الانتفاضة كصيغة نضالية مفتوحة في بعدها الجماهيري الزاخر بالنضج والعطاء لتتوالى قوافل الشهداء و المعتقلين و المخطوفين و الجرحى و المعطوبين وتندلع في الأفق تباشير الحرية مع بزوغ كل فجر وتلوح أشعة الاستقلال تتربع في كبد السماء, وإيمانا منا أن البطولة تقتضي أن نمد أجسادنا جسورا, فقل لرفقائنا أن يعبروا, وهنا نحن اليوم شعبنا الأصيل نروي تراب الصحراء الطاهرة بدماء زكية ونصرخ ملء حناجرنا بكل عنفوان ثوري لنقول لا في وجه من قال نعم, لا للذل لا للخضوع لا للخنوع ونكتب لا بالدم و الروح ليشهد التاريخ على برنا بالوطن هذه هي فلسفة الكفاح الوطني وقوامه ننشد من خلالها الخلود وأملنا الالتحاق بركب الخالدين شهداء الوطن وهدفنا من وراء هذه التضحية أن نكون وقودا يشعل نارا حارقة تأتي على أخضر العدو ويابسه دعما لكل الآمال ولا تنتظر جزاءا ولا شكورا فهذا واجب وطني يمليه علينا ضمير متقد وحي ولكن ما ننتظر منكم ونوصيكم به نوجزه في هذه الأبيات الناطقة بلسان حالنا في ساعات الاحتضار هاته :
أيها الواقفون على حافة المذبحة
أشهروا الأسلحة
سقط الموت وانفرط القلب كالمسبحة
الدم انساب فوق الوشاح
المنازل أضرحة...الزنازين أضرحة...المدى أضرحة...
فارفعوا الأسلحة و أتبعوني
أنا ندم الغد و البارحة
رايتي عظمتان و جمجمة
وشعاري الصباح
المعتقلين السياسيين الصحراويين
مجموعة أكديم إزيك المضربين عن الطعام
بسجن سلا2
29 نوفمبر2011
Tuesday, October 04, 2011
Western Sahara: Keeping the Status Quo
Western Sahara: Keeping the Status Quo
October 1, 2011 9:30 amadmin0 Comments
Resolution 1979 (2011) regarding the Western Sahara
Since December 2010, the so-called international community watches, unmoved, by the popular uprisings that have taken place in the Arab world. In the midst of a global economic crisis, these uprisings – hitherto unimaginable and unimagined – are the result of the desperation of societies in the face of entrenched corruption and the authoritarianism of regimes founded on oligarchies that seized power during their independence. Nevertheless, the revolutionary outbreak owes, without doubt, its rapid local and regional propagation to the expansion of communication amongst the youth (via Internet networks), which breaks the iron silence of information upon which such regimes were founded. The first achievement of this “Arab Spring” was the deposition of Ben Ali in Tunis. The trigger of his demise was the self-immolation of a young man haunted by his own future and the constant arrogance and humiliation of the regime.
However, the first warning signs of this tide of demonstrations took place in early October 2010, several thousand kilometres from the Mediterranean, in the extreme South-western point of the Arab world, in El-Aaiun – the capital of Western Sahara. Prohibited from demonstrating peacefully in the city streets, thousands of Sahrawis, dodging Moroccan occupation forces, pitched their tents in Gdeim Yzik – the middle of the desert – and protested for their lack of work and housing, and demanding their rights to sovereignty over the natural resources of their territory.
The Moroccan monarchy, overwhelmed by the magnitude of the events and the deterioration of its international image, reacted, making use of what has become a classic formula: first, expulsion of the international press to avoid uncomfortable testimonials, followed by the assault on and destruction of the encampment on November 8, 2011, followed by the detention, and disappearance of opposition leaders without due process. But this time, some members of the Moroccan Security Forces died along with protesters.
The young Sahrawis who lived in the zone of Western Sahara that is occupied by the Moroccans – desperate after waiting for a referendum allowing them to freely choose their future for more than 35 years – had lost the fear to die and faced the occupier, brandishing kitchen knives.[1] Meanwhile, in the Algerian refugee camps, the Polisario Front[2] (the Sahrawi Liberation Movement) had to calm its own, also desperate group that threatened to break the ceasefire and intervene on behalf of their brothers.
The Polisario – another oligarchy in power since the foundation of the Movement in 1972 – preferred to offer a new opportunity in the framework of negotiations established by the United Nations. They hoped that their gesture of good faith would be rewarded at the next Security Council resolution which reviews the conflict annually and would include the protection of human rights desired by MINURSO[3] – the sole UN peace mission without competencies in human rights.
Recall that Western Sahara is, according to the UN, “a non-autonomous territory,” that is to say, a colonial territory still awaiting decolonisation. In October 1975, the International Tribunal in The Hague rejected any and all sovereign rights of Morocco and Mauritania over the territory.[4] However, Spain – the administrative legal power – just a few days later, signed a treaty[5] with Morocco and Mauritania ceding administration and thus abandoning its responsibilities. Those agreements were never endorsed by the General Assembly and thus lack all legal effect at the international level. Confirmed by a UN legal report in 2002,[6] Morocco and Mauritania became the occupying powers of the Western Sahara in 1976 with the consent of Spain since it was the previous administrating power.
The war that ensued between the occupiers and the Polisario Front initially led to the defeat of Mauritania in 1979, which abandoned the territory. The conflict passed, then, to a war of attrition in the desert that Morocco – mainly with the help of France (Morocco’s former colonial metropolis and trading partner) – managed to hold on to Sahrawi cities in order to build a defensive wall protecting nearly 80% of the territory. In 1991, the exhausted parties agreed to commence negotiations to observe the due referendum of self-determination. But Morocco challenged the census prepared for this very purpose in 1999 by MINURSO. From this moment on, conversations have continued without any concrete progress towards the achievement of “a just and sustainable, mutually acceptable, political solution,” which would allow for the self-determination of the Sahrawi peoples in accordance with the UN Charter.
Human Rights – On Standby
Paradoxically, this stalemate of the negotiations has run in parallel to the emergence of human rights groups in Western Sahara cities, which denounce the grave human rights violations committed by the Moroccan Occupation Forces. The activities of these organizations have been harshly repressed by Morocco, to the point that in November 2009, the internationally-renowned Sahrawi defender of human rights Aminatu Haidar[7] was expelled from the territory. Haidar was able to return only after a long and painful hunger strike and effective pressure from the United States. [8]
Despite the ever-decreasing situation and Moroccan repression, the last resolutions in 2009 and 2010 of the Security Council regarding the territory have ignored the necessity to protect Sahrawi human rights. Instead, these resolutions have merely confirmed the importance of progressing in the “human dimensions” of the conflict, as if an analogy exists between the Sahrawi conflict and Europe during the Cold War.[9] Therefore, after the events of the Gdeim Yzik protest encampment, the new Security Council resolution regarding Western Sahara was expected with much anticipation.
The new resolution 1979/2011, like the previous resolutions, was pre-planned by France and Spain, as well as negotiated by the United States, to be finally adopted by the Security Council on April 27, 2011. Its content proves highly disappointing: the resolution does not amplify the MINURSO mandate to the supervision and monitoring of Sahrawis’ human rights. The resolution goes so far as to make an unsubstantiated claim to justify a concern for the human rights’ conditions as serious in the zone occupied by Morocco, as in the Algerian refugee camps where the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has an ample presence.
To guarantee the future amelioration of human rights for Sahrawis, the Security Council declares that the Resolution and the Security Council will welcome the establishment of a National Council for Human Rights by Morocco, complete with a special chamber dedicated to Western Sahara. This new institution merely renames the pre-existing and inefficient Advisory Council on Human Rights[10] created in 1990. The Resolution therefore does no more than implicitly recognize the competence of a public Moroccan institution in a territory outside of its sovereignty, subject to a still pending decolonisation process sponsored by the UN.
Moreover, the Resolution contains an irrelevant reference to the commitment of Morocco to ensure unconditional access – free of conditions and obstacles – to all the Special Procedures of the UN Advisory Council on Human Rights. This organ is not an objective nor independent institution, but rather it is of a political and inter-governmental nature, having been formed by the representatives of 47 states – including France and Spain – whose governments are characterised by minimal sensitivity to human rights violations of the Sahrawis, in addition to other states characterised by indifference towards human rights, such as China, Cuba, or Saudi Arabia. In this sense, it suffices to recall the Universal Periodic Review, to which Morocco was subject in 2008 by the UN Advisory Council on Human Rights, whose final report[11] solely recognised progress without once mentioning the dire situation, which already existed, in the occupied territory of Western Sahara.
Endorsing the Moroccan Monarchy
The icing on the cake of this Resolution is that – as a solution – it endorses the application of a refugee protection programme developed by the UNHCR in coordination with the Polisario Front. This programme, led by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), includes capacity-building and awareness-raising activities on human rights. However, and despite these initiatives, the Resolution does not require a similar and indispensable programme for the authorities and Moroccan Occupation Forces present in Western Sahara. Morocco is not part of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, nor of the Optional Protocol of the International Convention Against Torture, nor of the International Convention Against the Forced Disappearance of Persons. Morocco is supposed to respect the 1949 Geneva Conventions on International Human Rights, which requires occupying powers to respect the rights of the occupied.
Currently, the Security Council, with all its cynicism and the likely worsening of the situation, recently requested that the Secretary-General inform the Council regularly – “at least twice per annum” – of the progress in negotiations between parties. As pre-established by the OHCHR,[12] almost all the human rights violations committed in the occupied zone are consequence of the lack of application of the fundamental right to free self-determination of the Sahrawi people. What underlies this decision – just as in all the Security Council interventions on this issue since 1991 – is the clear intention to protect the stability of the Moroccan Monarchy, considered by the United States since its independence in 1956, as an essential ally against Communism previously and currently against fundamentalist Islam.
Nevertheless, this blind protectionism concerned with the abuses of a dictatorship is no way to guarantee for local or regional stability, but rather the complete opposite, as demonstrated by the fall of Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt, as well as the mass protests in Syria, Jordan, Algeria, and of course Morocco. Since February 20, 2011, every month we have witnessed daily protests in major Moroccan cities calling for democracy and an end to the abuses of corruption. Mohammed VI and his entourage, pressured by their French partners, have not gone beyond a mere cosmetic reform of the system. The new constitution,[13] which just barely and superficially cut the king’s absolute powers, was approved in a recent referendum – as in previous elections. Barely 30% of the voting-age population participated due to abstention from leftists and fundamentalists, who are surprisingly united in all the claims of the “Arab Spring”.[14]
The Moroccan monarchy’s anecdotal reformism and the blind protection of the Security Council appear to move in the same direction: in the face of new challenges, and using the words of the Prince of Lampedusa in The Leopard, change so that nothing changes. Introducing a standard for democracy in institutions and speaking of human rights in resolutions regarding Western Sahara are always desirable – if, and only if, the effective control of the king and his political-economic-military entourage over Morocco and the Sahrawi territory and natural resources is not threatened. However, in both scenarios, the prudish and short-term strategy may soon be over-taken by events. The Arab people are taking their destiny into their own hands in opposition to the special interests of their oligarchies and the reductionist interests of the great powers.
Eduardo Trillo de Martín-Pinillos is associate professor at UNED in Public International Law, and a consultant for international organizations in human rights and democracy.
Alan Gignoux is a British photographer: www.gignouxphotos.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Report from the Moroccan Association for Human Rights on 24 December 2010.
[2] Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguía el Hamra y Río de Oro.
[3] United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara, MINURSO.
[4] Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Western Sahara, 16 October 1975.
[5] “Madrid Agreement,” 20 October 1975.
[6] UN Doc. S/2002/161.
[7] Human Rights Prize of the Robert F. Kennedy Foundation 2008 – Civil Courage Prize, Train Foundation, 2009.
[8] Eduardo Soto-Trillo, Viaje al abandono, Aguilar, 2011.
[9] The term “human dimension” was first used within the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe in Helsinki, 1975 to introduce human rights issues in the conversations. This was reflected in the final act of the conference.
[10] See Amnesty International annual reports, “Alliance for Dignity and Freedom,” Human Rights Watch, and the Moroccan Association for Human Rights, among others.
[11] A/HRC/8/22.
[12] Confidential report of the OHCHR, November 2006, the conclusions of which were, a posteriori, confirmed by a Human Rights Watch report in December 2008.
[13] Bernabé López García, “Marruecos. Cien Días para una nueva Constitución unanimidad para la galería y una”, Real Instituto Elcano, June 2011.
[14] Said Kirlhani, “Marruecos, la nueva constitución marroquí y el referéndum del 1 de julio”, Análisis del observatorio electoral TEIM, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, August 2011.
October 1, 2011 9:30 amadmin0 Comments
Resolution 1979 (2011) regarding the Western Sahara
Since December 2010, the so-called international community watches, unmoved, by the popular uprisings that have taken place in the Arab world. In the midst of a global economic crisis, these uprisings – hitherto unimaginable and unimagined – are the result of the desperation of societies in the face of entrenched corruption and the authoritarianism of regimes founded on oligarchies that seized power during their independence. Nevertheless, the revolutionary outbreak owes, without doubt, its rapid local and regional propagation to the expansion of communication amongst the youth (via Internet networks), which breaks the iron silence of information upon which such regimes were founded. The first achievement of this “Arab Spring” was the deposition of Ben Ali in Tunis. The trigger of his demise was the self-immolation of a young man haunted by his own future and the constant arrogance and humiliation of the regime.
However, the first warning signs of this tide of demonstrations took place in early October 2010, several thousand kilometres from the Mediterranean, in the extreme South-western point of the Arab world, in El-Aaiun – the capital of Western Sahara. Prohibited from demonstrating peacefully in the city streets, thousands of Sahrawis, dodging Moroccan occupation forces, pitched their tents in Gdeim Yzik – the middle of the desert – and protested for their lack of work and housing, and demanding their rights to sovereignty over the natural resources of their territory.
The Moroccan monarchy, overwhelmed by the magnitude of the events and the deterioration of its international image, reacted, making use of what has become a classic formula: first, expulsion of the international press to avoid uncomfortable testimonials, followed by the assault on and destruction of the encampment on November 8, 2011, followed by the detention, and disappearance of opposition leaders without due process. But this time, some members of the Moroccan Security Forces died along with protesters.
The young Sahrawis who lived in the zone of Western Sahara that is occupied by the Moroccans – desperate after waiting for a referendum allowing them to freely choose their future for more than 35 years – had lost the fear to die and faced the occupier, brandishing kitchen knives.[1] Meanwhile, in the Algerian refugee camps, the Polisario Front[2] (the Sahrawi Liberation Movement) had to calm its own, also desperate group that threatened to break the ceasefire and intervene on behalf of their brothers.
The Polisario – another oligarchy in power since the foundation of the Movement in 1972 – preferred to offer a new opportunity in the framework of negotiations established by the United Nations. They hoped that their gesture of good faith would be rewarded at the next Security Council resolution which reviews the conflict annually and would include the protection of human rights desired by MINURSO[3] – the sole UN peace mission without competencies in human rights.
Recall that Western Sahara is, according to the UN, “a non-autonomous territory,” that is to say, a colonial territory still awaiting decolonisation. In October 1975, the International Tribunal in The Hague rejected any and all sovereign rights of Morocco and Mauritania over the territory.[4] However, Spain – the administrative legal power – just a few days later, signed a treaty[5] with Morocco and Mauritania ceding administration and thus abandoning its responsibilities. Those agreements were never endorsed by the General Assembly and thus lack all legal effect at the international level. Confirmed by a UN legal report in 2002,[6] Morocco and Mauritania became the occupying powers of the Western Sahara in 1976 with the consent of Spain since it was the previous administrating power.
The war that ensued between the occupiers and the Polisario Front initially led to the defeat of Mauritania in 1979, which abandoned the territory. The conflict passed, then, to a war of attrition in the desert that Morocco – mainly with the help of France (Morocco’s former colonial metropolis and trading partner) – managed to hold on to Sahrawi cities in order to build a defensive wall protecting nearly 80% of the territory. In 1991, the exhausted parties agreed to commence negotiations to observe the due referendum of self-determination. But Morocco challenged the census prepared for this very purpose in 1999 by MINURSO. From this moment on, conversations have continued without any concrete progress towards the achievement of “a just and sustainable, mutually acceptable, political solution,” which would allow for the self-determination of the Sahrawi peoples in accordance with the UN Charter.
Human Rights – On Standby
Paradoxically, this stalemate of the negotiations has run in parallel to the emergence of human rights groups in Western Sahara cities, which denounce the grave human rights violations committed by the Moroccan Occupation Forces. The activities of these organizations have been harshly repressed by Morocco, to the point that in November 2009, the internationally-renowned Sahrawi defender of human rights Aminatu Haidar[7] was expelled from the territory. Haidar was able to return only after a long and painful hunger strike and effective pressure from the United States. [8]
Despite the ever-decreasing situation and Moroccan repression, the last resolutions in 2009 and 2010 of the Security Council regarding the territory have ignored the necessity to protect Sahrawi human rights. Instead, these resolutions have merely confirmed the importance of progressing in the “human dimensions” of the conflict, as if an analogy exists between the Sahrawi conflict and Europe during the Cold War.[9] Therefore, after the events of the Gdeim Yzik protest encampment, the new Security Council resolution regarding Western Sahara was expected with much anticipation.
The new resolution 1979/2011, like the previous resolutions, was pre-planned by France and Spain, as well as negotiated by the United States, to be finally adopted by the Security Council on April 27, 2011. Its content proves highly disappointing: the resolution does not amplify the MINURSO mandate to the supervision and monitoring of Sahrawis’ human rights. The resolution goes so far as to make an unsubstantiated claim to justify a concern for the human rights’ conditions as serious in the zone occupied by Morocco, as in the Algerian refugee camps where the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has an ample presence.
To guarantee the future amelioration of human rights for Sahrawis, the Security Council declares that the Resolution and the Security Council will welcome the establishment of a National Council for Human Rights by Morocco, complete with a special chamber dedicated to Western Sahara. This new institution merely renames the pre-existing and inefficient Advisory Council on Human Rights[10] created in 1990. The Resolution therefore does no more than implicitly recognize the competence of a public Moroccan institution in a territory outside of its sovereignty, subject to a still pending decolonisation process sponsored by the UN.
Moreover, the Resolution contains an irrelevant reference to the commitment of Morocco to ensure unconditional access – free of conditions and obstacles – to all the Special Procedures of the UN Advisory Council on Human Rights. This organ is not an objective nor independent institution, but rather it is of a political and inter-governmental nature, having been formed by the representatives of 47 states – including France and Spain – whose governments are characterised by minimal sensitivity to human rights violations of the Sahrawis, in addition to other states characterised by indifference towards human rights, such as China, Cuba, or Saudi Arabia. In this sense, it suffices to recall the Universal Periodic Review, to which Morocco was subject in 2008 by the UN Advisory Council on Human Rights, whose final report[11] solely recognised progress without once mentioning the dire situation, which already existed, in the occupied territory of Western Sahara.
Endorsing the Moroccan Monarchy
The icing on the cake of this Resolution is that – as a solution – it endorses the application of a refugee protection programme developed by the UNHCR in coordination with the Polisario Front. This programme, led by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), includes capacity-building and awareness-raising activities on human rights. However, and despite these initiatives, the Resolution does not require a similar and indispensable programme for the authorities and Moroccan Occupation Forces present in Western Sahara. Morocco is not part of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, nor of the Optional Protocol of the International Convention Against Torture, nor of the International Convention Against the Forced Disappearance of Persons. Morocco is supposed to respect the 1949 Geneva Conventions on International Human Rights, which requires occupying powers to respect the rights of the occupied.
Currently, the Security Council, with all its cynicism and the likely worsening of the situation, recently requested that the Secretary-General inform the Council regularly – “at least twice per annum” – of the progress in negotiations between parties. As pre-established by the OHCHR,[12] almost all the human rights violations committed in the occupied zone are consequence of the lack of application of the fundamental right to free self-determination of the Sahrawi people. What underlies this decision – just as in all the Security Council interventions on this issue since 1991 – is the clear intention to protect the stability of the Moroccan Monarchy, considered by the United States since its independence in 1956, as an essential ally against Communism previously and currently against fundamentalist Islam.
Nevertheless, this blind protectionism concerned with the abuses of a dictatorship is no way to guarantee for local or regional stability, but rather the complete opposite, as demonstrated by the fall of Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt, as well as the mass protests in Syria, Jordan, Algeria, and of course Morocco. Since February 20, 2011, every month we have witnessed daily protests in major Moroccan cities calling for democracy and an end to the abuses of corruption. Mohammed VI and his entourage, pressured by their French partners, have not gone beyond a mere cosmetic reform of the system. The new constitution,[13] which just barely and superficially cut the king’s absolute powers, was approved in a recent referendum – as in previous elections. Barely 30% of the voting-age population participated due to abstention from leftists and fundamentalists, who are surprisingly united in all the claims of the “Arab Spring”.[14]
The Moroccan monarchy’s anecdotal reformism and the blind protection of the Security Council appear to move in the same direction: in the face of new challenges, and using the words of the Prince of Lampedusa in The Leopard, change so that nothing changes. Introducing a standard for democracy in institutions and speaking of human rights in resolutions regarding Western Sahara are always desirable – if, and only if, the effective control of the king and his political-economic-military entourage over Morocco and the Sahrawi territory and natural resources is not threatened. However, in both scenarios, the prudish and short-term strategy may soon be over-taken by events. The Arab people are taking their destiny into their own hands in opposition to the special interests of their oligarchies and the reductionist interests of the great powers.
Eduardo Trillo de Martín-Pinillos is associate professor at UNED in Public International Law, and a consultant for international organizations in human rights and democracy.
Alan Gignoux is a British photographer: www.gignouxphotos.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Report from the Moroccan Association for Human Rights on 24 December 2010.
[2] Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguía el Hamra y Río de Oro.
[3] United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara, MINURSO.
[4] Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Western Sahara, 16 October 1975.
[5] “Madrid Agreement,” 20 October 1975.
[6] UN Doc. S/2002/161.
[7] Human Rights Prize of the Robert F. Kennedy Foundation 2008 – Civil Courage Prize, Train Foundation, 2009.
[8] Eduardo Soto-Trillo, Viaje al abandono, Aguilar, 2011.
[9] The term “human dimension” was first used within the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe in Helsinki, 1975 to introduce human rights issues in the conversations. This was reflected in the final act of the conference.
[10] See Amnesty International annual reports, “Alliance for Dignity and Freedom,” Human Rights Watch, and the Moroccan Association for Human Rights, among others.
[11] A/HRC/8/22.
[12] Confidential report of the OHCHR, November 2006, the conclusions of which were, a posteriori, confirmed by a Human Rights Watch report in December 2008.
[13] Bernabé López García, “Marruecos. Cien Días para una nueva Constitución unanimidad para la galería y una”, Real Instituto Elcano, June 2011.
[14] Said Kirlhani, “Marruecos, la nueva constitución marroquí y el referéndum del 1 de julio”, Análisis del observatorio electoral TEIM, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, August 2011.
2011: the year of Facebook revolutions … some forgotten and ignored
The occupation of Wall Street began in the deserts of Western Sahara and this weekend it will spread to our Australian cities.
In El-Ayoun, Moroccan controlled Western Sahara, in the Gdeim Izik refugee tent camp, a demonstration was set up by Saharawis as a form of protest in October-November 2010.
Western Sahara has been occupied illegally by Morocco since 1975. The situation is similar to Indonesia’s invasion of East Timor.
The attack on Gdeim Izik
The UN is responsible for organizing a referendum, although Morocco has succeeded in derailing its implementation.
France, the US and the international community have also looked the other way.
The Moroccan government’s response to the Gdeim Izik refugee camp was swift and brutal.
While Polisario, the Western Sahara liberation movement, claimed that 36 Saharawis were killed, hundreds wounded and 163 arrested, the Moroccan government argued that only 2 demonstrators but 11 Moroccan security forces had been killed.
The only filmed representation of this occupation exists on Youtube.
The first shot of the Arab Spring
According to Noam Chomsky the Arab Spring began not in Tunisia but in Western Sahara at Gdeim Izik.
Kamal Fadel, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Front representative in Australia, argues that there were no journalists in the protest camp. The revolution wasn’t tweeted, says Fadel.
One week ago, on September 25, a peaceful Sahrawi demonstration followed violent and fatal football clashes between Saharawis and Moroccan settlers.
The demonstration was violently repressed by the Moroccan authorities and another Sahrawi was killed. In both Gdeim Izik and Dahkla, we can only try to reconstruct what happened through eyewitness testimonies and online media.
The Facebook revolution you haven’t heard of
Exiled human rights activist Aicha Dahane, who toured Australia earlier this year, has stated that because of extreme repression, the only media platform available to the Saharawis is online and Youtube and Facebook are the most popular.
And while there has been a Facebook Revolution in Western Sahara, as I argue here, it has been largely forgotten.
Gdeim Izik and Wall Street; Western Sahara and the Arab Spring: the relationship between events is beginning to resemble online mirror sites.
When the Wikileaks site was hacked late last year many others stepped up and reproduced the information trail endlessly by introducing their own sites. If 2011 is the year of revolutions the connections are often new, unexpected and exciting.
Dahane also spoke about the solidarity and sharing of food and possessions that was emblematic of the Gdeim Izik tent camp.
When the Net goes down
It reminded me of Ahdif Soueif’s introduction to the little gem of a book Tweets From Tahrir from cutting edge publisher OR books:
“Tahrir was a space of unity, pride, resistance, celebration, laughter, sharing, and most importantly ownership. This was the people’s space; our rules and our demands. We would not leave until justice was born.”
When the internet was blocked in Egypt social media was forced to take a back-seat. The action was now on the streets.
It was no longer simply viral. People could meet face-to-face while before they shielded themselves behind the internet screen. This is the place where Facebook becomes redundant.
From Harvard to the Sahara to the White House
While Facebook was founded in the mainstream American college circuit nobody could have predicted its radical role in Western Sahara and Egypt. If we trace the life cycle of Facebook we can say that it is now all grown up.
It’s now tired of the all night decadent parties as epitomised in the myth-making film The Social Network. It now wants to get political; or at least, organize its staff to do so.
Following on from the example of Google it now plans to encourage its employees to donate to a political action committee.
Facebook’s political action committee “will give our employees a way to make their voice heard in the political process by supporting candidates who share our goals of promoting the value of innovation to our economy while giving people the power to share and make the world more open and connected.”
Facebook is functioning like any other corporation in Washington, employing its own lobbyists to promote what Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman call spin and flak, one of the filters used by the corporate media and its lobbyists to manufacture consent in industrialised societies.
Who needs who?
Openness, in Facebook’s definition, is a form of spin and a not too unsophisticated means of getting one’s own way.
The Occupy Wall Street movement is one of the most recent sustained challenges to corporate greed and unbridled corporate influence, including media monopolies.
“We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments,” argues the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City.
One of the current great ironies is that the Wall Street occupiers need Facebook as an information tool now more than Facebook, with its corporate lobbyists, needs them.
And when, like the Egyptian protesters in Tahrir Square, the Occupy Wall Street movement is consolidated on the streets Facebook could find it has become the corporate target
In El-Ayoun, Moroccan controlled Western Sahara, in the Gdeim Izik refugee tent camp, a demonstration was set up by Saharawis as a form of protest in October-November 2010.
Western Sahara has been occupied illegally by Morocco since 1975. The situation is similar to Indonesia’s invasion of East Timor.
The attack on Gdeim Izik
The UN is responsible for organizing a referendum, although Morocco has succeeded in derailing its implementation.
France, the US and the international community have also looked the other way.
The Moroccan government’s response to the Gdeim Izik refugee camp was swift and brutal.
While Polisario, the Western Sahara liberation movement, claimed that 36 Saharawis were killed, hundreds wounded and 163 arrested, the Moroccan government argued that only 2 demonstrators but 11 Moroccan security forces had been killed.
The only filmed representation of this occupation exists on Youtube.
The first shot of the Arab Spring
According to Noam Chomsky the Arab Spring began not in Tunisia but in Western Sahara at Gdeim Izik.
Kamal Fadel, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Front representative in Australia, argues that there were no journalists in the protest camp. The revolution wasn’t tweeted, says Fadel.
One week ago, on September 25, a peaceful Sahrawi demonstration followed violent and fatal football clashes between Saharawis and Moroccan settlers.
The demonstration was violently repressed by the Moroccan authorities and another Sahrawi was killed. In both Gdeim Izik and Dahkla, we can only try to reconstruct what happened through eyewitness testimonies and online media.
The Facebook revolution you haven’t heard of
Exiled human rights activist Aicha Dahane, who toured Australia earlier this year, has stated that because of extreme repression, the only media platform available to the Saharawis is online and Youtube and Facebook are the most popular.
And while there has been a Facebook Revolution in Western Sahara, as I argue here, it has been largely forgotten.
Gdeim Izik and Wall Street; Western Sahara and the Arab Spring: the relationship between events is beginning to resemble online mirror sites.
When the Wikileaks site was hacked late last year many others stepped up and reproduced the information trail endlessly by introducing their own sites. If 2011 is the year of revolutions the connections are often new, unexpected and exciting.
Dahane also spoke about the solidarity and sharing of food and possessions that was emblematic of the Gdeim Izik tent camp.
When the Net goes down
It reminded me of Ahdif Soueif’s introduction to the little gem of a book Tweets From Tahrir from cutting edge publisher OR books:
“Tahrir was a space of unity, pride, resistance, celebration, laughter, sharing, and most importantly ownership. This was the people’s space; our rules and our demands. We would not leave until justice was born.”
When the internet was blocked in Egypt social media was forced to take a back-seat. The action was now on the streets.
It was no longer simply viral. People could meet face-to-face while before they shielded themselves behind the internet screen. This is the place where Facebook becomes redundant.
From Harvard to the Sahara to the White House
While Facebook was founded in the mainstream American college circuit nobody could have predicted its radical role in Western Sahara and Egypt. If we trace the life cycle of Facebook we can say that it is now all grown up.
It’s now tired of the all night decadent parties as epitomised in the myth-making film The Social Network. It now wants to get political; or at least, organize its staff to do so.
Following on from the example of Google it now plans to encourage its employees to donate to a political action committee.
Facebook’s political action committee “will give our employees a way to make their voice heard in the political process by supporting candidates who share our goals of promoting the value of innovation to our economy while giving people the power to share and make the world more open and connected.”
Facebook is functioning like any other corporation in Washington, employing its own lobbyists to promote what Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman call spin and flak, one of the filters used by the corporate media and its lobbyists to manufacture consent in industrialised societies.
Who needs who?
Openness, in Facebook’s definition, is a form of spin and a not too unsophisticated means of getting one’s own way.
The Occupy Wall Street movement is one of the most recent sustained challenges to corporate greed and unbridled corporate influence, including media monopolies.
“We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments,” argues the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City.
One of the current great ironies is that the Wall Street occupiers need Facebook as an information tool now more than Facebook, with its corporate lobbyists, needs them.
And when, like the Egyptian protesters in Tahrir Square, the Occupy Wall Street movement is consolidated on the streets Facebook could find it has become the corporate target
Monday, September 26, 2011
Another Saharawi Victim falls down in Dakhla: A New Martyr
الذى استشهد يوم 26-09-2011
اثناء المواجهات و الاحداث التى شهدتها مدينة الداخلة المحتلة على اثر الهجوم الذى قامت به الاجهزة الامنية المغربية مدعومة بالمستوطنين ضد المواطنين الصحراويين العزل
اسم الشهيد
ميشان ولد محمد لمين ولد لحبيب ابوه معروف باسم باريز
اسم الام عيشة منت احميادة
تاريخ الازدياد 1982 بمخيمات العزة والكرامة
Friday, July 22, 2011
Coming Crisis in Phosphate Supplies
Coming Crisis in Phosphate Supplies
Written by David Gabel
Wednesday, 20 July 2011 12:22
Message :Investors: Free Oil Industry Investment Report - Our Fracking industry guide shows you the strategies that will enable you to generate excellent returns in what will be one of the most profitable sectors of the energy industry. Click here for your Free report.
Phosphate is a mineral that is used in fertilizer to boost agricultural productivity. It is greatly responsible for the "green" revolution and the increased output of farms around the world. Unfortunately, the world will be coming to a point, if certain trends hold, where we will run out of phosphate. The mineral is widely used, but utterly unrecycled. Like fossil fuels, phosphate may come to a point where it is too costly to use, and world hunger may be the consequence.
Phosphate is an inorganic chemical mined from the earth. It typically consists of one phosphorus atom surrounded by oxygen atoms. The addition of phosphates can have a huge impact to an ecosystem. Like water and air, it is literally essential to life on Earth. On cropland, it can greatly boost yields. However, from there it usually drains into waterways. In freshwater and marine environments, it acts as a limiting nutrient, often causing eutrophication (oxygen deprived water).
The largest reserve of phosphate rock can be found in the country of Western Sahara, just south of Morocco. Once a Spanish colony, it is now controlled by Morocco. One of the reasons the Moroccans are so interested is thought to be the vast phosphate reserves. The mines are at Bou Craa which produces several million tons of phosphate rock each year. It gets transferred down a huge 150-kilometer long conveyor belt to the Atlantic port of El Ayoun.
Farmers around the world use about 170 million tons of phosphate every year to keep their soils fertile. One ton of phosphate is typically used for every 130 tons of grain. Fifteen percent of all phosphate comes from Western Sahara and Morocco. The other big producers are the US and China which each use up their own. This makes Western Sahara and Morocco the biggest players in the international phosphate trade. The biggest nations which rely on this trade are India and Brazil which may be starving otherwise.
According to the US Geological Survey, the world has 65 billion tons of known phosphate reserves, but only 16 billion tons that are economically viable to mine. Almost 80 percent are found in Western Sahara and Morocco. The US, with only 1.4 billion tons, may run out soon, causing alarm among agronomists. Academic researcher, Dana Cordell, of the Global Phosphorus Research Initiative, has predicted that we could reach "peak phosphorus" production by 2030.
There are no substitutes for phosphate. On the other hand, the other vital nutrient for plants, nitrogen, can be found from a number of sources. It can be fixed from the atmosphere thanks to German chemist Fritz Haber. Phosphate cannot be fixed from anything. It must be mined and the mines are going to run out. Unless a solution can be found, the long term consequences may be lower yield crops and a hungrier world.
By. David Gabel
Source: Environmental News Network
http://oilprice.com/Metals/Commodities/The-Coming-Crisis-in-Phosphate-Supplies.html
Written by David Gabel
Wednesday, 20 July 2011 12:22
Message :Investors: Free Oil Industry Investment Report - Our Fracking industry guide shows you the strategies that will enable you to generate excellent returns in what will be one of the most profitable sectors of the energy industry. Click here for your Free report.
Phosphate is a mineral that is used in fertilizer to boost agricultural productivity. It is greatly responsible for the "green" revolution and the increased output of farms around the world. Unfortunately, the world will be coming to a point, if certain trends hold, where we will run out of phosphate. The mineral is widely used, but utterly unrecycled. Like fossil fuels, phosphate may come to a point where it is too costly to use, and world hunger may be the consequence.
Phosphate is an inorganic chemical mined from the earth. It typically consists of one phosphorus atom surrounded by oxygen atoms. The addition of phosphates can have a huge impact to an ecosystem. Like water and air, it is literally essential to life on Earth. On cropland, it can greatly boost yields. However, from there it usually drains into waterways. In freshwater and marine environments, it acts as a limiting nutrient, often causing eutrophication (oxygen deprived water).
The largest reserve of phosphate rock can be found in the country of Western Sahara, just south of Morocco. Once a Spanish colony, it is now controlled by Morocco. One of the reasons the Moroccans are so interested is thought to be the vast phosphate reserves. The mines are at Bou Craa which produces several million tons of phosphate rock each year. It gets transferred down a huge 150-kilometer long conveyor belt to the Atlantic port of El Ayoun.
Farmers around the world use about 170 million tons of phosphate every year to keep their soils fertile. One ton of phosphate is typically used for every 130 tons of grain. Fifteen percent of all phosphate comes from Western Sahara and Morocco. The other big producers are the US and China which each use up their own. This makes Western Sahara and Morocco the biggest players in the international phosphate trade. The biggest nations which rely on this trade are India and Brazil which may be starving otherwise.
According to the US Geological Survey, the world has 65 billion tons of known phosphate reserves, but only 16 billion tons that are economically viable to mine. Almost 80 percent are found in Western Sahara and Morocco. The US, with only 1.4 billion tons, may run out soon, causing alarm among agronomists. Academic researcher, Dana Cordell, of the Global Phosphorus Research Initiative, has predicted that we could reach "peak phosphorus" production by 2030.
There are no substitutes for phosphate. On the other hand, the other vital nutrient for plants, nitrogen, can be found from a number of sources. It can be fixed from the atmosphere thanks to German chemist Fritz Haber. Phosphate cannot be fixed from anything. It must be mined and the mines are going to run out. Unless a solution can be found, the long term consequences may be lower yield crops and a hungrier world.
By. David Gabel
Source: Environmental News Network
http://oilprice.com/Metals/Commodities/The-Coming-Crisis-in-Phosphate-Supplies.html
Friday, June 17, 2011
Friday, June 10, 2011
Monday, May 30, 2011
The Theft of Western Sahara
The theft of Western Sahara
Author: David Cronin
29 May 2011 - Issue : 937
Sahrawi women refugees chant slogans during Mohamed Abdelaziz' speech at a forum at the Echorouk Newspaper in Algiers, Algeria, on 10 November 2010. The President of the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic and leader of the Polisario, Mohamed Abdelaziz, said during his visit to the paper, that dozens of civilians perished after the Moroccan security forces dismantled tents of the 'Gdaim Izik' camp that was the site of an anti government protest near Al Ayun city, according to Abdelaziz hundreds are either wounded or lost. |EPA/MOHAMED MESSARA When and where did the “Arab Spring” begin? Most observers of the tyrant-toppling uprisings would probably agree they kicked off after the Tunisian street vendor Mohammed Bouazizi set himself on fire in December last year. Not for the first time, Noam Chomsky has highlighted an omission from the conventional discourse. The wave of protests really started a month earlier in Western Sahara, Chomsky has argued.
On 7 November, Moroccan forces occupying that territory destroyed tents set up by the indigenous Sahrawi people near the town of Laayoune, leading to a series of confrontations. Testimonies gathered by Amnesty International indicate that the tactics used in the operation were extremely aggressive, with elderly women beaten with batons. Amnesty says the tents were erected to highlight the Sahrawis’ “perceived marginalisation and a lack of jobs and adequate housing”. The word “perceived” is unnecessary, I believe. The marginalisation of the Sahrawis is a proven fact; we seldom see anything about Western Sahara – a former Spanish colony invaded by Morocco in 1975 - in our newspapers or on our TV screens.
Rather than imposing sanctions against Morocco over its acts of brutality in November, the European Union has effectively tightened its embrace of the Rabat authorities. Although a four-year fisheries agreement between the EU and Morocco expired in February this year, both sides have decided to extend it for a further twelve months.
As EU representatives are constantly harping on about how much they cherish democratic values, the least we should be able to expect is that they would have published the information at their disposal about the agreement’s effects. Yet an evaluation of the agreement conducted at the European Commission’s request remains confidential.
Luckily, I have managed to have a peek at this report – drawn up by the French consultancy firm Océanic Developpement and dated December 2010. It concludes that the agreement with Morocco brings “the least favourable returns to the European taxpayers that we can find” in any of the fisheries agreements the EU has signed with countries beyond its borders.
Under the terms of the accord, the EU gives Morocco 36 million euros per annum. For every euro invested by the Union, the turnover generated is only 83 cents, the consultants calculate. In the 2007-2009 period, EU vessels availing of the agreement caught an average of 44,000 tonnes per year. With demand for fish in the Union reaching about 13 million tonnes per year, the agreement was making only a tiny contribution towards satisfying the requirements of Europe’s markets, Oceanic added.
More disturbingly, the consultants found that the agreement is having adverse ecological consequences. Trawlers are capturing demersal species – living near the bottom of the sea – that are already overexploited, while the capture of sharks in European nets runs contrary to the Union’s own policies on conserving endangered species. European vessels have targeted sharks in the same way as the industrial boats in the Moroccan fleet. Three large Portuguese vessels have been responsible for 70% of all sharks captured (more than 450 tonnes), according to the evaluation.
It’s not surprising that powerful figures in the EU bureaucracy want this evaluation kept secret. By extending the agreement, the Union has ignored advice that it spent good money to obtain.
This is part of a wider pattern. The agreement enabled European vessels to fish in the waters surrounding Western Sahara, on the condition that their activities brought tangible benefits to the Sahrawis. In an opinion made public during 2010, lawyers advising the European Parliament found there was no evidence that the Sahrawis had been aided in any way due to the accord’s implementation. Unless an “amicable settlement” could be found, European boats should be forbidden from entering a 200 nautical mile zone off Western Sahara, the lawyers recommended.
When I interviewed Maria Damanaki, the EU fisheries commissioner, in the autumn last year, she expressed sympathy with that legal opinion. Damanaki said she was “not persuaded” that the agreement was in the Sahrawis’ interests. Despite the clarity of her views, the European Commission still went ahead and clinched a deal with Morocco to prolong the agreement. Damanaki was clearly overruled by others in the EU executive. Can it be a coincidence that the Commission is headed by José Manuel Barroso of Portugal and that several Portuguese vessels are doing nicely from the arrangements?
Mindful of a looming presidential election, Nicolas Sarkozy has lately been promoting himself as an unflagging defender of North Africa’s downtrodden. Yet Francesco Bastagli, a former United Nations envoy to Western Sahara, has hinted there might be more than a whiff of hypocrisy emanating from the French president. “France is so unquestioning in its support of Morocco as to block even a reference to Sahrawi human rights in Security Council resolutions,” Bastagli wrote in a 2010 piece for The New Republic.
A report published in April this year by the New York City Bar Association says that if Morocco is receiving money from the EU for fishing off Western Sahara, without giving any to the Sahrawis, then it is violating international law. The same report highlighted how Irish and British companies are involved in exploration for oil and gas off Western Sahara. If they move from exploration to extraction, then their activities would be “unlawful”, the bar association concluded.
The resources of Western Sahara do not belong to Europe. So why are a few European fishing and energy firms allowed to steal them?
Read more: The theft of Western Sahara - New Europe http://www.neurope.eu/articles/The-theft-of-Western-Sahara-/106679.php#ixzz1NkmvlecK
Author: David Cronin
29 May 2011 - Issue : 937
Sahrawi women refugees chant slogans during Mohamed Abdelaziz' speech at a forum at the Echorouk Newspaper in Algiers, Algeria, on 10 November 2010. The President of the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic and leader of the Polisario, Mohamed Abdelaziz, said during his visit to the paper, that dozens of civilians perished after the Moroccan security forces dismantled tents of the 'Gdaim Izik' camp that was the site of an anti government protest near Al Ayun city, according to Abdelaziz hundreds are either wounded or lost. |EPA/MOHAMED MESSARA When and where did the “Arab Spring” begin? Most observers of the tyrant-toppling uprisings would probably agree they kicked off after the Tunisian street vendor Mohammed Bouazizi set himself on fire in December last year. Not for the first time, Noam Chomsky has highlighted an omission from the conventional discourse. The wave of protests really started a month earlier in Western Sahara, Chomsky has argued.
On 7 November, Moroccan forces occupying that territory destroyed tents set up by the indigenous Sahrawi people near the town of Laayoune, leading to a series of confrontations. Testimonies gathered by Amnesty International indicate that the tactics used in the operation were extremely aggressive, with elderly women beaten with batons. Amnesty says the tents were erected to highlight the Sahrawis’ “perceived marginalisation and a lack of jobs and adequate housing”. The word “perceived” is unnecessary, I believe. The marginalisation of the Sahrawis is a proven fact; we seldom see anything about Western Sahara – a former Spanish colony invaded by Morocco in 1975 - in our newspapers or on our TV screens.
Rather than imposing sanctions against Morocco over its acts of brutality in November, the European Union has effectively tightened its embrace of the Rabat authorities. Although a four-year fisheries agreement between the EU and Morocco expired in February this year, both sides have decided to extend it for a further twelve months.
As EU representatives are constantly harping on about how much they cherish democratic values, the least we should be able to expect is that they would have published the information at their disposal about the agreement’s effects. Yet an evaluation of the agreement conducted at the European Commission’s request remains confidential.
Luckily, I have managed to have a peek at this report – drawn up by the French consultancy firm Océanic Developpement and dated December 2010. It concludes that the agreement with Morocco brings “the least favourable returns to the European taxpayers that we can find” in any of the fisheries agreements the EU has signed with countries beyond its borders.
Under the terms of the accord, the EU gives Morocco 36 million euros per annum. For every euro invested by the Union, the turnover generated is only 83 cents, the consultants calculate. In the 2007-2009 period, EU vessels availing of the agreement caught an average of 44,000 tonnes per year. With demand for fish in the Union reaching about 13 million tonnes per year, the agreement was making only a tiny contribution towards satisfying the requirements of Europe’s markets, Oceanic added.
More disturbingly, the consultants found that the agreement is having adverse ecological consequences. Trawlers are capturing demersal species – living near the bottom of the sea – that are already overexploited, while the capture of sharks in European nets runs contrary to the Union’s own policies on conserving endangered species. European vessels have targeted sharks in the same way as the industrial boats in the Moroccan fleet. Three large Portuguese vessels have been responsible for 70% of all sharks captured (more than 450 tonnes), according to the evaluation.
It’s not surprising that powerful figures in the EU bureaucracy want this evaluation kept secret. By extending the agreement, the Union has ignored advice that it spent good money to obtain.
This is part of a wider pattern. The agreement enabled European vessels to fish in the waters surrounding Western Sahara, on the condition that their activities brought tangible benefits to the Sahrawis. In an opinion made public during 2010, lawyers advising the European Parliament found there was no evidence that the Sahrawis had been aided in any way due to the accord’s implementation. Unless an “amicable settlement” could be found, European boats should be forbidden from entering a 200 nautical mile zone off Western Sahara, the lawyers recommended.
When I interviewed Maria Damanaki, the EU fisheries commissioner, in the autumn last year, she expressed sympathy with that legal opinion. Damanaki said she was “not persuaded” that the agreement was in the Sahrawis’ interests. Despite the clarity of her views, the European Commission still went ahead and clinched a deal with Morocco to prolong the agreement. Damanaki was clearly overruled by others in the EU executive. Can it be a coincidence that the Commission is headed by José Manuel Barroso of Portugal and that several Portuguese vessels are doing nicely from the arrangements?
Mindful of a looming presidential election, Nicolas Sarkozy has lately been promoting himself as an unflagging defender of North Africa’s downtrodden. Yet Francesco Bastagli, a former United Nations envoy to Western Sahara, has hinted there might be more than a whiff of hypocrisy emanating from the French president. “France is so unquestioning in its support of Morocco as to block even a reference to Sahrawi human rights in Security Council resolutions,” Bastagli wrote in a 2010 piece for The New Republic.
A report published in April this year by the New York City Bar Association says that if Morocco is receiving money from the EU for fishing off Western Sahara, without giving any to the Sahrawis, then it is violating international law. The same report highlighted how Irish and British companies are involved in exploration for oil and gas off Western Sahara. If they move from exploration to extraction, then their activities would be “unlawful”, the bar association concluded.
The resources of Western Sahara do not belong to Europe. So why are a few European fishing and energy firms allowed to steal them?
Read more: The theft of Western Sahara - New Europe http://www.neurope.eu/articles/The-theft-of-Western-Sahara-/106679.php#ixzz1NkmvlecK
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)