The Moroccan delegate at the United Nations October 7, 2026 hearings in New York on decolonization was clad in a red skirt suit. The choice of colour should have warned petitioners on Western Sahara that she was there not to hear anybody but to fight everybody that did not support her country’s ongoing attempts to recolonize its neighbour.
She tried to set the rules. For instance, she said nobody should refer to Western Sahara as a territory, claiming no place like that exists in UN “language”. Any such reference, she instructed, should be about “Moroccan Sahara”. The Algerian delegate mocked her, saying that the map of Morocco known from colonial times to this day, and in the UN, does not include a Moroccan Sahara.
When I mentioned Morocco as a monarchy under King Mohammed VI, the delegate quaked. For her, it was sacrilegious, as this was not just a sovereign but a deity.
When a petitioner, Hamza Ahmed Baba, mentioned his country, Western Sahara, the Moroccan delegate went into overdrive. She raised a point of order four times on him within two minutes. When the obviously angry petitioner managed to finish his presentation, he gave the two-finger victory sign; the livid Moroccan said he had “crossed a dangerous line” and demanded that he be barred from bringing a petition before the UN body in future.
When the Algerian delegate advised the Moroccan to be patient and tolerant enough to listen to petitioners and obey Rule 113, which confines replies to procedural matters, some in the audience involuntarily broke into applause. Angry Morocco demanded that all those who clapped must be fished out and ejected from the hearing. The chairman obliged and instructed the UN security men to eject them, but the latter thought it wiser to appeal to the audience and petitioners not to clap and to observe decorum. However, both Morocco and the session chairman insisted on the ejection. After making two further orders and people were not ejected, the chairman said he would later address the issue of the security personnel.
There were three trends in the debates. The pro-Moroccan petitioners expressed support for the UN to adopt the Moroccan “Autonomy Plan”, in which Western Sahara would be granted “autonomy” under the Moroccan monarchy and the Saharawi in exile, especially in the Tindouf refugee camps, would return to their ancestral homes.
This group argued that Morocco is extending development to Western Sahara, including road construction and a university campus. It claimed that Morocco is a strategic partner of the West, it had suffered colonization, and that many states have signed up to the Moroccan autonomy plan. This group claimed that the POLISARIO Liberation Movement, which is leading the independence struggle, is a separatist and terrorist organization.
There was a supposedly neutral group which pointed out that the dispute has had adverse effects, especially on Saharawi children and development. Therefore, it is better to accept the Moroccan plan in order to bring peace.
There was the third group which pointed out that the issue is the fundamental human rights of the Saharawi to freedom and sovereignty. This line of thought argued that the Western Sahara Question is one of the failures of the UN decolonization process and that the POLISARIO is the legitimate representative of the Saharawi while King Mohammed VI is the one exporting terrorism to Western Sahara. It demanded that Morocco stop pillaging Western Sahara and evacuate the territory.
Matt Meyer, the Secretary-General Emeritus of the International Peace Research Association (IPRA), summarized the submission of this group: “Without an end to all colonialism, which includes the freedom and self-determination of Western Sahara, there can’t and will be no peace.”
As the representative of the Nigeria Movement for the Liberation of Western Sahara, my presentation at the hearings was titled “Western Sahara: The Truth Stands Naked”.
It reads: “The truth about the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic, better known as Western Sahara, stands naked but powerful forces prefer clothing it in borrowed camouflage. It was colonized by Spain in 1884 and, under the United Nations, UN Resolution 1415 of 1960, had a fundamental right to independence.
But when independence came on February 26, 1976, it was during the Cold War and the POLISARIO was considered anti-West. So, part of its territory was parceled to neighbouring Morocco, which claimed pre-colonial ownership. However, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), to which the UN referred this matter, on October 16, 1975 found these claims to be false. So, on April 9, 1991, the UN Security Council (UNSC), in Resolution 690, directed that a referendum be held to allow the Saharawi to decide either independence or partial autonomy. Tragically, until today, the UN has not had the courage to conduct that referendum, which was slated for 1992, that is thirty-four years ago! Today, eleven of the fifteen-member UN Security Council (UNSC), charged by humanity to right the wrong done to the Saharawi, have resolved to recolonize this African country by handing it over to the unelected Moroccan King, Mohammed VI, under a dubious ‘Autonomy Plan’.
One of the fundamental reasons this plan cannot work is that, where Morocco is an unrepentant monarchy, the Saharawi prefer freedom and democracy.
Also, the European Union (EU) is committed to the recolonization plan. The European Court of Justice (ECJ), after six previous rulings, had on October 4, 2024 made a final ruling that European countries exploiting the fisheries, agriculture and natural resources of Western Sahara without the consent of the Saharawi are committing illegality.
But EU President von der Leyen publicly declared that European countries will not obey their court.
Ladies and gentlemen, if indeed Western Sahara were part of Morocco, why did it support splitting the territory with Mauritania? Why was it ecstatic and expressed gratitude when President Donald Trump on December 4, 2020 issued a declaration purportedly donating Western Sahara to it?
If in truth the Saharawi were Moroccan citizens, why did Rabat expel the Saharawi, Aminatou Ali Haidar, from Morocco to the Spanish Canary Islands?
Western Sahara is the 55th independent African country, which was so declared on February 22, 1982 by the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and immediately admitted as a full member.
Also, where Western Sahara is a founding member of the African Union (AU), Morocco is not.
If the African peoples, leaders and countries have collectively resolved an internal issue such as the sovereignty of Western Sahara, the least other countries should do is concur, not to seek reversing it. If the UN, its Security Council and other powerful forces do not allow the independence of Western Sahara now, we may spend another half century desperately trying to cover up the truth and human shame.”
The post The truth stands naked in the United Nations, by Owei Lakemfa appeared first on Vanguard News.