Meeting Summary
The Committee received a briefing from the Western Sahara delegation on developments in the struggle for independence from Morocco. It was noted that the Western Sahara was the last African country that still suffered from the yoke of colonialism, which was imposed by another African country. The issues of Western Sahara were regarded as high priority by this government. The UN and Australian ambassadors noted that the UN involvement in the region had begun in the 1980s, and described the history from then until the present. Morocco wanted to continue to rule the territory, but the Polisario Front were calling for a referendum so that the people of Western Sahara could determine their own destiny. If peace could prevail then Morocco would be given full diplomatic status. A new mediator was appointed in 2008 to chair the peace negotiations.
Members asked about the work of international NGOs and the problems that seemed to arise with co-existence, the conflicting views as to whether there was in fact a problem, whether Polisario Front was being proactive and strong enough in putting forward its views, and the results of the latest round of negotiations. Members asked what could be done to break the impasse, enquired about the attitude of the African Union and the Arab League, and the role of neighbouring countries, and the best way forward.
Meeting report
Chairperson’s Introductory remarks
The Chairperson said that the Western Sahara was the last African country that still suffered from the yoke of colonialism. The worst aspect was that the coloniser was another African country oppressing with the help of European masters. He said that the freedom of the Western Sahara would free Africa itself, including the coloniser, and this concept had been demonstrated by the freedom enjoyed, after 1994, by the former oppressor in South Africa. The ruling African National Congress was still busy transforming the South African society from racism, hunger, homelessness and other social ills.
The South African government was involved in several regional peace initiatives such as in Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of Congo and in Burundi. He added that South Africa was still grappling with the problem of xenophobia. When the Committee visited Western Sahara they were shown armaments that were sold by the apartheid government to Morocco to suppress a popular revolution. He noted that this oppressor would not be able to sustain an unjust war because it was not winnable..
He mentioned that the Committee had visited Israel, but the Israeli government refused to meet the delegation because they had also met Palestinians. The Moroccan government did not like the fact that South Africa supported the Polisario Front. The South African delegation that had visited Morocco had refused a guided tour organised with the pretext of safety concerns. The delegation stated that they saw no danger in meeting Western Saharans alone.
The Chairperson noted that the African National Congress government had been facing many “domestic problems”, but he hastened to say that the challenges were not insurmountable. He compared these problems to “a storm in a teacup”. He expressed the view that the ANC would win the next elections, and said that the Western Sahara issue would remain a top priority for the ruling party. The Polisario Front could expect the necessary support across all international forums.
Western Sahara delegation briefing
Dr Sidi Omar, UN Ambassador, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, said that the UN’s involvement in the region started in the 1980s, due to problems on the ground that were experienced by the Moroccan government. The UN stipulated that a ceasefire should precede the referendum. In 1991 the ceasefire came into effect and after that the situation reached a stalemate. Dr James Baker, former US Secretary of State, who was then the Chief Mediator, had revived the peace negotiations. In 2000 an electoral list was compiled as a step towards the proposed referendum.
In 2004 Dr Baker resigned, and at that stage Morocco and France had ignored the previous plan and came up with a third way, which was something between independence and integration. Exiled Sahrawis in the Algerian refugee camps and the occupied territories went into uprising. The Dutch ambassadors to the UN briefed the Security Council. Polisario Front was left with two options - either indirect negotiations or prolonging the stalemate.
In April 2007 Morocco came up with a proposition that was premised on the assumption that Western Sahara was part of Morocco. Morocco wanted to continue to rule the territory and certain powers would be later be handed to the Sahrawis. Dr Omar reiterated that the Polisario Front wanted a referendum so that the people of Western Sahara could determine their own destiny. He said that if peace could prevail then Morocco would be given full diplomatic status. A new mediator was appointed in 2008 to chair the peace negotiations.
Dr Omar stated that the situation in Western Sahara was different from the pre-1994 South African negotiations, where both parties had recognised the problem. He concluded that it was a difficult time for Western Sahara. The oppressor was still exploiting the natural resources and oppressing people. A second generation of Sahrawis was growing up in refugee camps in neighbouring countries.
Discussion
Ms S Motubase-Hounkpatin (ANC) wanted to know what Morocco’s problem was regarding coexistence with the Sahrawis. She asked whether international NGOs like Oxfam were working in Western Sahara.
Dr Omar replied that there were a number of International NGOs operating in the Algerian refugee camps, and inside the occupied territories.
Adv Z Madasa (ANC) said that when he spoke to the Moroccans they felt that South Africans were misled and that there was no problem. Morocco and other North African countries did not understand why South Africa had been supporting Polisario Front. Morocco pointed out that there were Sahrawis in Libya and Mauritania but they were not demanding autonomy. Morocco held the view that Western Saharans and Moroccans were one people.
Dr Omar replied that Western Sahara existed as a separate entity long before Morocco had received its Independence. Morocco and Western Sahara did not share the same country, but Morocco continued to illegally occupy a sovereign country. He pointed out that Morocco was telling half truths.
Mr L Khoarai (ANC) said that he felt that Polisario Front was taking a lukewarm approach in taking the African Union and other regional forums to task regarding their issue. He asked the delegation the reason why they were not forcing the AU to put the Western Sahara on top of the agenda. He cited that the Movement for Democratic Change had been knocking on every door to raise awareness of the Zimbabwean issues. He asked what the Polisario Front had been doing to garner support in the neighbouring countries.
Dr Omar noted that Polisario Front, as a founding member of the African Union was still pushing the same position of decolonisation that was stipulated by the OAU. When the war broke out between Morocco and the Polisario Front the UN regarded the matter as an international security issue.
Dr L Luthuli asked for clarity on the latest round of negotiations.
Dr Omar replied that the UN proposed a mutually acceptable resolution after the Moroccan government reject the previous peace plans. The Polisario Front did not understand what was meant by the mutually acceptable resolution.
Dr Luthuli said that a mutually acceptable political solution was difficult. She asked what could be done to break the impasse. She said that she was sympathetic to the people in the refugee camps who advocated for a return to armed struggle.
Ambassador K Fadil, Australian Ambassador, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, said that the media attention span was very short and that the Polisario Front was advocating for peace. Polisario Front was unlikely to hijack planes just to attract media attention.
Mr Khoarai reiterated his position that Polisario was taking a soft approach when lobbying the AU, and it was not working hard enough, citing once again the work done by the MDC by way of example. The Zimbabwe issue was a picnic compared to Western Sahara because the situation in the refugee camps was horrible.
Amdr Fadil replied that Morocco was not a member of the African Union because Morocco wanted the African Union to fail.
Mr M Kalako (ANC) enquired about the attitude of the Arab League toward the Western Sahara issue. He wanted to know about the growing voices to return to armed struggle and how the leadership dealt with it. He asked whether there were Sahrawis in other countries.
Dr Omar replied that Western Sahara was not a member of the Arab League because some members of the Arab League helped Morocco to occupy Western Sahara. Sahrawis would only come up with alternatives when they saw a change of behaviour from the Moroccans.
Amdr Fadil said that he was grateful to the Department of Foreign Affairs for the study tour, adding that Western Sahara had received a lot of warmth and solidarity from South Africans across the spectrum. He noted that his country had gained support across all political parties. The Moroccan government’s main fear was that if Western Sahara gained independence then there would be a demand for reforms. He stated that Polisario Front had pleaded for peace time and again, because it would benefit both sides. Morocco spent $2,5 million a day to maintain their occupation with soldiers, dogs arms and other means. It was clear that reconciliation would benefit everyone concerned. Algeria supported the Palestinian Liberation Organisation, South West Peoples Organisation, East Timor, ANC and many other freedom fighters across the world. In the 1960s and 1970s Algeria was known as the Mecca of Revolution. When the ANC resorted to armed struggle Nelson Mandela went to Algeria to ask for help.
Amdr Fadil stated that there were many Irish refuges in America, but they did not demand autonomy. In South Africa there were many Zimbabweans, but they did not demand autonomy because they were simply refugees. It was a fallacy to say that Sahrawis were refuges in Morocco. Sahrawis wanted to live peacefully in the country of their forefathers.
Ms Mthubase-Hounkpatin enquired about the role of neighbouring countries in helping, and the role of the Western Sahara’s embassies around the world.
Dr Omar replied that some neighbouring countries, like Libya, Algeria and Mauritania, were sympathetic to the Sahrawi cause. Others did not want to involve themselves.
Mr F Beukman (ANC) asked about other means that were employed to advance the cause of Western Sahara.
Dr Omar replied that Polisario Front had been fighting with Morocco for more than 14 years and neither side had won that war. There was no other way except through negotiations for peace.
The Chairperson said that the ANC had realised that there was a need to involve the masses in mass mobilisation through popular struggles. The South African struggle was divided into mass mobilisation, armed struggle, international solidarity and underground political work, all of which operated simultaneously to keep the enemy in crisis. The primary purpose was to push the apartheid regime to the negotiation table. Mass action was also used to fuel fire to the negotiators.
The Chairperson expressed the view that South Africa should go beyond pronouncements of solidarity to Western Sahara. He mentioned that the Speaker of Parliament had agreed to support the Western Sahara position on all international forums. The only difficulty was that issues of such nature were confined by diplomatic protocol. Politicians needed to push the public profile of the Western Sahara struggle. He said that there was a need for a Commission that would inform the ANC International Commission for the next five years.
The meeting was adjourned .
