In view of the adoption of the MINURSO, issues, and circumstances that have been associated with the Issue of the Sahara conflict resolution case have still in processing. Current discussions have studied upon the main functionalism of the forum and its effectiveness and productivity in managing its performances over the conflictual region.
Due to this, the recent budget cost of the UN mission is given as a new financial deposit for MINURSO in Sahara territory. The interests of the UN Security Council resolutions on the renewal of financial process to the conflict is to bring regional stability and securitized MINURSO’s work field under international UN standards, and preserving the safety of its members coinciding with the current political uprising in Algeria and Polisario’s camp. This is quite superficial that the pressure poured by the superpower powers on the commitment to frame up an territory for the settlement, particularly the United State side, which was intentionally supervised to decrease its contribution to the United Nations, and the Secretary-General and his envoy to set a time frame in six months to cope with the Sahara case.
Yes, Resolution 690 had brought the result of the ceasefire and how MINURSO guided the division of the settlement plan process and the observing of the cease-fire. Meanwhile, new missions were added to the adjustment file, especially, the implementation of the voter identification and registration program after the full establishment of the identity confirmation committee to handle the referendum, over the introduction and presentation of the lists and the holding of the proportion.
But the inefficiency and lack of the UN mission to designate a clearly specified scope was the first sign of failure to terminate the file of the Sahara conflict, making the application impossible and contrary to the rules of rational sought to avert anarchy and maintain stability in an open arena on all geopolitical potentials and variables.
As noted, the MINURSO Mission’s relationship with the parties to the Western Sahara conflict has been moved to the sphere of disagreement, and has pushed to Morocco’s call for MINURSO personnel quit and suspend the liaison office of the United Nations Mission in Sahara (UNSMA) in Dakhla, as long as the failure of the approach adopted to hand over different possibilities, scenarios and go beyond the established and beyond-of the Mission, the failure of the latter was seen in mishandling the process of independent human rights monitoring in 2014 that goes beyond the usual tasks of peacekeeping missions. Though this indicates a symbol of its failure to engage in biased approaches, risky alternatives, weak ability to rearrange the process of the settlement, and how to maintain it. And also currently discussed the preparatory talks in Geneva, I and II, with the decisions of the mission and the envoys of the Secretary-General of the United Nations during the past periods, and argued the framework of the settlement plan to be implemented since the resolution 690 and possible alternatives and initiatives proposed, as well as recording abuses and inequality management of the cease-fire since the early nineties of the last century .
To certain extent, the transformations in the international sphere have overcasted the duty of the mission in Western Sahara and the adjustments seen by all the parties engaged in the Sahara issue, both advocating the Polisario Front, particularly after the Kingdom of Morocco back to the African Union and the enhancing of European and Moroccan strategic cooperation, as well as the progress of economic and financial openness with many states such as China, Russia, and India. Algerian leverage declined due to the financial crisis caused by the descend in oil and Gas interests, and the current political situation, with a constitutional vacuum, as an outcome of social mobility. And made it the fully complicated case in Algeria on the road map to be achieved, due to the new role and direct the Algerian party and the Mauritanian in the Western Sahara case as involved in seeking a suitable resolution within the scope of the settlement.
Accordingly, the real motives provided by the MINURSO mission in the Western Sahara in relation to the settlement project and the deterrents encountered in past stations, when they exceed the powers granted to them, the involved parties in conflict thought the Mission officers would be more professional to provide reliable plans and decided to reach rational peace and security over the territory of Sahara region, but it is supposed to evoke the developments and changes taking place in the regional and international environment, which seeks to end up the case, and stop the suffering of many individuals in the Tindouf camps.
In both theory and practice, it is widely held that the applicable existence of MINURSO in the Western Sahara conflict has been focused on two key aspects: First the time framework of the mission, and the mechanism of observing the conflict circumstances over the region, also the manner in which the case is handled by the United Nations, which is based on the quality of the events contained in the decisions of the UN envoy, and the pressure of members of the UN Security Council, particularly the United States. Who given strong positions in the statements of US National Security Advisor John Bolton and Senator Jim Anheoff.
The second aspect is rational, based on the right to develop a settlement policy, move away from rigid unreliable decisions, and take a real understanding of the geopolitical changes in the Sahara region and beyond in order to achieve security and stability of the Northeast region, and more importantly to develop the linkage of solidarity of the Maghreb integration based on institutional charter.
Equally, it is very crucial to understand why Russia and South Africa refused to vote for Sahara resolution text in the UNSC a few days ago, pointing out that the text resolution was prepared tried to ensure the political unity of the members of the Security Council on the subject of Western Sahara. Unlike the permanent and non-permanent members of the Security Council showed their positions after the adoption by the UN Security Council of the extension of MINURSO’s mandate in Western Sahara until October 31, 2019, with the support of 13 members are willing to end up this longstanding conflict in Africa.
Yet, The representative of the United States of America, which is adapting the text resolution, is pleased with the support showed by the UN Security Council for the efforts of Horst Köhler, the UN envoy to Western Sahara, to make a lasting and acceptable solution by both parties to the conflict.
In Foreign affairs doctrine, ” consensus ” refers to the accepted plan in which the adjustment of conflicts towards negotiation is only the legitimate way. The United States sent straightforward strong messages to Algeria. “Neighboring states should cooperate seriously due to achieve a political solution. This strong language has helped to make progress in today’s consultations with The kingdom of Morocco, Algeria, the Polisario Front, and Mauritania,”
For its part, France restated its strong support for the autonomy initiative, which proposes The Kingdom of Morocco to resolve the Sahara conflict, outlining autonomy as “the only basic, realistic, credible and trustworthy solution that can shape the keystone of the forthcoming negotiations.”
True, France showed its regret that the mandate of the MINURSO had not been improved for an entire year instead of six months, calling on the Security Council to renew to the old version of the forthcoming resolutions. France also pointed out the need for the engaged four parties to the conflict to continue in the same format, organizing the third session of the consultations.
South Africa, which abstained in favor of the resolution, showing its disapproval of its contents.”The resolution contains many aspects that are not fit for UNSC resolution. It is also unbalanced and does not accurately reflect the efforts of the parties, Morocco and especially the Polisario Front,” Indeed, South African is known an anti-Rabat stance for any resolution come to settled down Western Sahara conflict. Also, For its part, Cote d’Ivoire praised the efforts and achievements of the Kingdom of Morocco to end the Sahara issue, particularly the autonomy plan, which it characterized as “serious and solid for negotiations among the parties to the conflict.” The Côte d’Ivoire had hoped that the mandate of the United Nations Mission would be renewed for a full year instead of six months.
In effect, this is what the Kingdom has expected the outcome. The Russian position, which fully rejects the UN Security Council resolution, declared its rejection of the text resolution submitted by the United States, on the basis of which the Security Council resolution was passed. The Russian representative highlight that “amendments to the resolution go in an unbiased direction,” calling for “the determination of criteria on the basis of the ultimate aim of self-determination for the peoples of the Sahara.”
Having indicated that it would maintain to play a balanced role among all parties to the conflict in order to reach a mutually rational solution, Russia pointed out that the continuation of the current circumstances in Western Sahara could be used by jihadists groups, which would jeopardize the region militarily and politically.
As a strategically important Arab Middle East countries of Morocco, Kuwait, as a non-permanent member of the Security Council, welcomed the decision of the Security Council and Morocco’s efforts to close the Sahara conflict file. The representative of Kuwait points out that the final resolution of the conflict would give the progress of the peoples of the Maghreb region and upgrade the security and stability of the neighboring States of the region. Therefore, Kuwait also restated its support for the autonomy plan in the Moroccan Sahara, showing the need to respect Morocco’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, describing Morocco’s serious and credible solutions as well as the role played by the National Human Rights Council in Dakhla and Laayoune and Rabat’s cooperation with the UN human rights bodies.
The Security Council resolution highlighted the commitment for a rational, practical and lasting political solution to the case of Western Sahara on the sense of consensus and fully supported the efforts of the Secretary-General and his Personal Envoy to sustain the process of new negotiations to resolve the issue.
So far, the resolution noted the significance of the Personal Envoy to invite the Kingdom of Morocco, the Polisario Front, Algeria, and Mauritania to meet again and welcomed their commitment to keeping to participate in this settlement process in a spirit of commitment and compromise to ensure success.
Additionally, The Security Council called upon the parties to restate negotiations under the supervision of the Secretary-General without preconditions and in good faith, taking into account the efforts made since 2006 and subsequent developments with a view to reaching a just, lasting and mutually acceptable political solution that would guarantee the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara.
Security Council stressed the importance of renewing the parties’ commitment to enhancing the political process, in preparation for deeper negotiations, and encouraged the neighboring countries especially Algeria to make important and effective contributions to the resolution process. In the end, the resolution advocated both parties and neighboring countries to engage seriously with each other ongoing to solve this conflictual issue and promote better implementation of UN mission in Western Sahara territory.
In summary, the classical Security Council resolution draft for MINURSO extension in Western Sahara doesn’t give any realistic solution to the issue, just a postponement. As a matter fact, UNSC needs to updates its time framework and implementation measures through calling all involved conflict parties, especially Algeria and Polisario Front to speed up their commitments and engagement in Moroccan Autonomy plan which is seen internationally more acceptable and more suitable for settling down the Western Sahara conflict.