9 ms·

A couple of misconceptions about Western Sahara I've seen pop up over the past few days: - most (90%) of Morocco's phosphate mining is done in non-disputed ter

by timinou 1mo ago

A couple of misconceptions about Western Sahara I've seen pop up over the past few days: - most (90%) of Morocco's phosphate mining is done in non-disputed territories (it's mentioned in the article). The most disputed resource is actually fish, and to some degree predicted oil reserves. - Tribal allegiances to the Moroccan crown date back from way before colonial times. Today, part of the Sahrawi population supports Morocco and another part supports independence. - There are efforts on both sides to bolster their numbers: Moroccans emigrate to the disputed territories, and Polisario brings in migrants to its refugee camps. That's partly why organising a referendum is almost impossible: no-one agrees on who's allowed to vote. - Morocco and Algeria (/ the Ottomans before Algeria) have been fighting over access to southwards trade for centuries. Geopolitically, the endgame for Algeria is to encircle Morocco. - Polisario itself is quite antidemocratic. Only two leaders in 50 years of existence, and lots of corruption. - Morocco's plan is actually of "advanced autonomy", which would let Sahrawis get their own parliament, amongst other things. - Today, Sahrawis on the Moroccan controlled areas basically enjoy a welfare state with free transport, no VAT, and many other benefits. All in all, it's far from the colonial story we'd reflexively apply onto this situation. I'm biased as I am Moroccan. In my opinion, Morocco is already a deeply multi cultural country, and we need a stable political environment to unite. This conflict keeps the North Africa region one of the least economically integrated areas in the world. It prevents us from building sustainable people power against oligarchic and authoritarian powers, who are at least just as bad on the Algeria/Polisario side as they are on the Moroccan side (Algeria and Polisario are military dictatorship, Morocco is a constitutional monarchy, pick your poison).

Matl 1mo ago
[flagged]
jvican 1mo ago
[flagged]
- f6v 1mo ago
  It's always funny how one side always assumes they're right. But from outsider's perspective, both sides always suck (Palestine and Israel, I'm looking at you). So, please, stop with the knee-jerk "It's a propaganda!". You don't bring anything to the discussion.
  - jvican 1mo ago
    I'm indeed bringing something to the discussion. And I'm not Algerian, or from another imaginary "side". I'm flagging that every little bit he's uttering in his comment should be fact-checked by a serious, educated reader if it is to be believed, as it's framed as a "casual" catchup on the situation of Western Sahara. I don't have neither the time nor the interest to fact check, but I know enough to know that much of this perspective he's sharing is wrong, so my comment simply serves as a warning for those that want to take it. If you don't, that's fine.
- mohamedkoubaa 1mo ago
  Thank you for this. Anyone with even cursory knowledge of the issue can see that it's propaganda but the way it's presented obfuscates that.
f6v 1mo ago
Thanks for sharing! I'm not familiar with the situation, so maybe you can help me out. What's the stance of Polisario on Islam and religion in general?
- alephnerd 1mo ago
  Not OP but they're supposedly secular. In action, much of their leadership defected to join ISGS, AQIM, JNIM, and other Islamist groups in the Sahel and Maghreb in the 1990s to 2000s that have put Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger under siege. Adnan al-Sahrawi (POLISARIO turned Islamic State) played a major role in that. It's a side effect of the Algerian Civil War in the 1990s (Military leadership versus moderate Islamists backed by Morocco versus hardcore Islamists backed by Iran - very very horrible civil war that the Maghreb never recovered from and only exacerbated the Libyan Civil War) and Polisario got pulled into it. Both Morocco and Algeria have had a multi-decade rivalry over accessing the Atlantic Coast as well as becoming the primary hegemon of the Sahel and Maghreb. The only winning move for Europe is doubling down support for FRONTEX and staying out of it. Otherwise, you get blowback like in France due to returnees the Algerian Civil War creating jihadist cells in the 1990s to 2010s (remember Charlie Hebdo, the Paris Bombings, and Flight 8969?). The Bosnian War had a similar impact as well. Most European jihadist networks trace their origins to veterans from the Algerian and Bosnian Wars. With neighbors like these...
- timinou 1mo ago
  From what I understand, it's a secular movement but it's not anti-religion. It's rooted in socialism and Arab nationalism way more so than religion, although I think Islam has 'official religion' status. Morocco OTOH is a Muslim state, with most laws being secular except for family laws, sexual freedoms, and inheritance. Before Western colonial times, the Moroccan royal dynasty built a lot of its soft power on spreading Morocco-based Sufi orders South, and one of the king's titles is "Commander of Believers", which is how caliphs of the original Muslim caliphate called themselves. People like that he has this role because it helps keep Islam somewhat out of politics, but it cuts both ways: it's harder for religious conservatives to argue against more liberal laws when the institution (called the "Makhzen") proposes them, but it's even harder for individual liberty advocates to argue for a more progressive society when it goes against the Makhzen's plans.
yorwba 1mo ago
> Sahrawis on the Moroccan controlled areas basically enjoy a welfare state with free transport, no VAT, and many other benefits. How is this implemented? Do ethnic Sahrawis get special IDs that entitle them to such benefits? Or do they also apply to Moroccan settlers from the north? And considering that Moroccan provincial boundaries don't align with the borders of Spanish West Africa, where does Western Sahara even begin from the Moroccan point of view?
- stephbook 1mo ago
  He never said northerners don't get the same benefit. The contrast was obviously with Sahrawis on the Polisario side, which stay poor and Moroccans outside of the Sahara, which have to pay VAT.
  - yorwba 1mo ago
    Yes, since he said neither of these things nor the opposite, I decided to take the opportunity to ask instead of assuming. For example, is Guelmim-Oued Noun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guelmim-Oued_Noun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guelmim-Oued_Noun inside or outside the sahara for VAT purposes, or does it have a VAT border running straight across it? Such things would be interesting to know.
- timinou 1mo ago
  Ok so anyone making a company ends up getting the same tax benefits on company taxes (to "attract investments"), but they don't get access to the "kartiya", which is the welfare card that ethnic Sahrawis get. Here's a PDF that mentions it https://www.crisisgroup.org/sites/default/files/227-negotiations-over-western-sahara.pdf https://www.crisisgroup.org/sites/default/files/227-negotiat... and here's an Arabic article about it https://www.dakhlanews.com/63328/ https://www.dakhlanews.com/63328/ The investment incentives let the local elites coopt the Moroccan government, while the card buys the assent of lower income Sahrawis. It's caused systemic unemployment, despite Sahrawis GDP per capita being 26% over the national average (The PDF is from an NGO so it gives a relatively unbiased view of the situation) From the Moroccan perspective, Western Sahara is just the Southern provinces. I'm guessing if you're part of a Sahrawi tribe, you get the card. It's less about where you live. Also, people who relocate from the refugee camps to Morocco get that card + housing.
artnanika 1mo ago
Calling Morocco a "constitutional monarchy" when it is a hereditary dictatorship with no binding constitution (meaning no greater authority to punish the king for violating the "constitution") discredits all the other points you've made. Also, there's a difference between undemocratic and antidemocratic. Morocco is antidemocratic, while Polisario is undemocratic. Polisario could be a democracy if it allows its leaders to be elected, but Morocco will never be a democracy since you don't elect kings.
- JuniperMesos 1mo ago
  I don't see how this is any different than the United Kingdom and its monarchy.
  - jvican 1mo ago
    In constitutional monarchy systems like the UK, the king/queen serves a merely representative and largely symbolic role. Morocco's king actually rules over the country. That is a big difference.
    - stephbook 1mo ago
      I don't think you'll be able to argue with Moroccans. If they criticize their dictator they land in prison, so..
- timinou 1mo ago
  Here's a link to Morocco's constitution in English: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_2011 https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_2011 We kinda voted for it, so it's quite binding on the king. We also have elections in a couple of months. The king has clear areas where he's limited, for example that he has to appoint the chief of government from the party that came in first. In practice though, democracy doesn't seem to work at enacting very long term plans. The current dynasty knows how to balance out the different sources of power within the country (local/tribal, economic, and institutional), and they've done it for several centuries. It helps, in our regions, to have symbols to unite so many people who are so different from each other. Now, the king and the palace are very rich and benefit from their positions. Institutional insiders rig the game. But elected officials do so the most in Morocco, and elected officials extract from the system in the West as well. It's an oligarchy anyway no matter which side you live on.
mohamedkoubaa 1mo ago
As a North African, your inability to respect the right to self determination of a an aggreived minority population has nothing to do with the "economic integration of North Africa".
- alephnerd 1mo ago
  [flagged]
  - mohamedkoubaa 1mo ago
    I'm not Algerian and though I am of North African descent I am a US citizen that spent my whole life in the United States and I don't feel anything but embarrassment and contempt for the authoritarian country that my parents immigrated from. I don't know why you are bringing Europe into this.
    - owebmaster 1mo ago
      So you don't have the legitimacy to call yourself north African in a discussion.
- timinou 1mo ago
  If you can find the empathy to do so, please reread my post realising that the people under a government are not the government itself. Morocco ≠ Moroccans. The reality is we're all subjugated. Moroccans, Sahrawis, or Americans. And we're all minorities in Morocco: Sahrawis, Riffis, Chlouh, Doukkali, Chamá-lo, Fassi, Meknessi, Soussi, and I can keep going. The issues people are saying about the Moroccan government's behaviour in the Sahara are just as true in other places in Morocco. And they're just as bad as what any government who's taken by oligarchs does to its population. "Economic integration" = more trade = more power together.
  - twister2920 1mo ago
    nice motte and bailey defense
TFNA 1mo ago
Claiming that Sahrawis benefit from a great welfare state, when their businesses have so often been confiscated and handed over to Moroccan settlers, is appalling.

by timinou 1mo ago

Matl 1mo ago

[flagged]

jvican 1mo ago

[flagged]

f6v 1mo ago
It's always funny how one side always assumes they're right. But from outsider's perspective, both sides always suck (Palestine and Israel, I'm looking at you). So, please, stop with the knee-jerk "It's a propaganda!". You don't bring anything to the discussion.
- jvican 1mo ago
  I'm indeed bringing something to the discussion. And I'm not Algerian, or from another imaginary "side". I'm flagging that every little bit he's uttering in his comment should be fact-checked by a serious, educated reader if it is to be believed, as it's framed as a "casual" catchup on the situation of Western Sahara. I don't have neither the time nor the interest to fact check, but I know enough to know that much of this perspective he's sharing is wrong, so my comment simply serves as a warning for those that want to take it. If you don't, that's fine.
mohamedkoubaa 1mo ago
Thank you for this. Anyone with even cursory knowledge of the issue can see that it's propaganda but the way it's presented obfuscates that.

f6v 1mo ago

Thanks for sharing! I'm not familiar with the situation, so maybe you can help me out. What's the stance of Polisario on Islam and religion in general?

alephnerd 1mo ago
Not OP but they're supposedly secular. In action, much of their leadership defected to join ISGS, AQIM, JNIM, and other Islamist groups in the Sahel and Maghreb in the 1990s to 2000s that have put Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger under siege. Adnan al-Sahrawi (POLISARIO turned Islamic State) played a major role in that. It's a side effect of the Algerian Civil War in the 1990s (Military leadership versus moderate Islamists backed by Morocco versus hardcore Islamists backed by Iran - very very horrible civil war that the Maghreb never recovered from and only exacerbated the Libyan Civil War) and Polisario got pulled into it. Both Morocco and Algeria have had a multi-decade rivalry over accessing the Atlantic Coast as well as becoming the primary hegemon of the Sahel and Maghreb. The only winning move for Europe is doubling down support for FRONTEX and staying out of it. Otherwise, you get blowback like in France due to returnees the Algerian Civil War creating jihadist cells in the 1990s to 2010s (remember Charlie Hebdo, the Paris Bombings, and Flight 8969?). The Bosnian War had a similar impact as well. Most European jihadist networks trace their origins to veterans from the Algerian and Bosnian Wars. With neighbors like these...
timinou 1mo ago
From what I understand, it's a secular movement but it's not anti-religion. It's rooted in socialism and Arab nationalism way more so than religion, although I think Islam has 'official religion' status. Morocco OTOH is a Muslim state, with most laws being secular except for family laws, sexual freedoms, and inheritance. Before Western colonial times, the Moroccan royal dynasty built a lot of its soft power on spreading Morocco-based Sufi orders South, and one of the king's titles is "Commander of Believers", which is how caliphs of the original Muslim caliphate called themselves. People like that he has this role because it helps keep Islam somewhat out of politics, but it cuts both ways: it's harder for religious conservatives to argue against more liberal laws when the institution (called the "Makhzen") proposes them, but it's even harder for individual liberty advocates to argue for a more progressive society when it goes against the Makhzen's plans.

yorwba 1mo ago

> Sahrawis on the Moroccan controlled areas basically enjoy a welfare state with free transport, no VAT, and many other benefits. How is this implemented? Do ethnic Sahrawis get special IDs that entitle them to such benefits? Or do they also apply to Moroccan settlers from the north? And considering that Moroccan provincial boundaries don't align with the borders of Spanish West Africa, where does Western Sahara even begin from the Moroccan point of view?

stephbook 1mo ago
He never said northerners don't get the same benefit. The contrast was obviously with Sahrawis on the Polisario side, which stay poor and Moroccans outside of the Sahara, which have to pay VAT.
- yorwba 1mo ago
  Yes, since he said neither of these things nor the opposite, I decided to take the opportunity to ask instead of assuming. For example, is Guelmim-Oued Noun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guelmim-Oued_Noun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guelmim-Oued_Noun inside or outside the sahara for VAT purposes, or does it have a VAT border running straight across it? Such things would be interesting to know.
timinou 1mo ago
Ok so anyone making a company ends up getting the same tax benefits on company taxes (to "attract investments"), but they don't get access to the "kartiya", which is the welfare card that ethnic Sahrawis get. Here's a PDF that mentions it https://www.crisisgroup.org/sites/default/files/227-negotiations-over-western-sahara.pdf https://www.crisisgroup.org/sites/default/files/227-negotiat... and here's an Arabic article about it https://www.dakhlanews.com/63328/ https://www.dakhlanews.com/63328/ The investment incentives let the local elites coopt the Moroccan government, while the card buys the assent of lower income Sahrawis. It's caused systemic unemployment, despite Sahrawis GDP per capita being 26% over the national average (The PDF is from an NGO so it gives a relatively unbiased view of the situation) From the Moroccan perspective, Western Sahara is just the Southern provinces. I'm guessing if you're part of a Sahrawi tribe, you get the card. It's less about where you live. Also, people who relocate from the refugee camps to Morocco get that card + housing.

artnanika 1mo ago

Calling Morocco a "constitutional monarchy" when it is a hereditary dictatorship with no binding constitution (meaning no greater authority to punish the king for violating the "constitution") discredits all the other points you've made. Also, there's a difference between undemocratic and antidemocratic. Morocco is antidemocratic, while Polisario is undemocratic. Polisario could be a democracy if it allows its leaders to be elected, but Morocco will never be a democracy since you don't elect kings.

JuniperMesos 1mo ago
I don't see how this is any different than the United Kingdom and its monarchy.
- jvican 1mo ago
  In constitutional monarchy systems like the UK, the king/queen serves a merely representative and largely symbolic role. Morocco's king actually rules over the country. That is a big difference.
  - stephbook 1mo ago
    I don't think you'll be able to argue with Moroccans. If they criticize their dictator they land in prison, so..
timinou 1mo ago
Here's a link to Morocco's constitution in English: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_2011 https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_2011 We kinda voted for it, so it's quite binding on the king. We also have elections in a couple of months. The king has clear areas where he's limited, for example that he has to appoint the chief of government from the party that came in first. In practice though, democracy doesn't seem to work at enacting very long term plans. The current dynasty knows how to balance out the different sources of power within the country (local/tribal, economic, and institutional), and they've done it for several centuries. It helps, in our regions, to have symbols to unite so many people who are so different from each other. Now, the king and the palace are very rich and benefit from their positions. Institutional insiders rig the game. But elected officials do so the most in Morocco, and elected officials extract from the system in the West as well. It's an oligarchy anyway no matter which side you live on.

mohamedkoubaa 1mo ago

As a North African, your inability to respect the right to self determination of a an aggreived minority population has nothing to do with the "economic integration of North Africa".

alephnerd 1mo ago
[flagged]
- mohamedkoubaa 1mo ago
  I'm not Algerian and though I am of North African descent I am a US citizen that spent my whole life in the United States and I don't feel anything but embarrassment and contempt for the authoritarian country that my parents immigrated from. I don't know why you are bringing Europe into this.
  - owebmaster 1mo ago
    So you don't have the legitimacy to call yourself north African in a discussion.
timinou 1mo ago
If you can find the empathy to do so, please reread my post realising that the people under a government are not the government itself. Morocco ≠ Moroccans. The reality is we're all subjugated. Moroccans, Sahrawis, or Americans. And we're all minorities in Morocco: Sahrawis, Riffis, Chlouh, Doukkali, Chamá-lo, Fassi, Meknessi, Soussi, and I can keep going. The issues people are saying about the Moroccan government's behaviour in the Sahara are just as true in other places in Morocco. And they're just as bad as what any government who's taken by oligarchs does to its population. "Economic integration" = more trade = more power together.
- twister2920 1mo ago
  nice motte and bailey defense

TFNA 1mo ago

Claiming that Sahrawis benefit from a great welfare state, when their businesses have so often been confiscated and handed over to Moroccan settlers, is appalling.