The visit of Stephan de Mistura, the UN envoy to the Moroccan Sahara, to South Africa has stirred strong official and partisan reactions within Morocco. Rabat considered this step to exceed the envoy’s powers and to go beyond the framework that defines his role in mediating between the parties involved in resolving the conflict.
The justifications provided by Stephane Dujarric, the spokesperson for the United Nations, regarding this visit were not sufficient to quell Morocco’s anger. He stated, “Part of de Mistura’s mission is to speak with the countries involved and other parties believed to be necessary to push forward the UN process.”
Reasons for Anger
Stephan de Mistura, the personal envoy of the UN Secretary-General on the Sahara issue, visited South Africa last January 31, which Morocco considered a violation of his powers and role in the file.
The first Moroccan reactions were expressed by Omar Hilale, Morocco’s permanent representative to the United Nations, in a dialogue with the Maghreb News Agency, where he expressed Morocco’s concern about this visit.
Hilale said, “Morocco was not consulted or even informed about the visit of the UN Secretary-General’s personal envoy to the Sahara to South Africa.”
He explained that the Moroccan Foreign Ministry, upon learning of this planned visit several weeks ago, immediately expressed to de Mistura and to the UN Secretariat its strong objection to this visit, and its rejection of any interaction with Pretoria on the issue of the Moroccan Sahara, based on legitimate and objective reasons. Morocco warned him, in clear terms, of the consequences of his visit on the political process.
Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita detailed the reasons for Morocco’s concern during a press conference following the ministerial segment of the high-level conference on middle-income countries.
Bourita said, “South Africa, which has taken a negative position on the Sahara issue for the past 20 years, does not have the legitimacy or the ability to influence the course of this file.”
He explained that Morocco relies on three elements that are akin to red lines not open to debate or negotiation in addressing this issue, which are: identifying the parties involved in the regional dispute over the Sahara, consolidating round tables as the sole framework for the UN process, and emphasizing the self-governing initiative as the singular and unified solution to the regional conflict.
Bourita affirmed that these three elements constitute the fundamental determinants of Morocco’s work and interaction with international parties and the UN envoy, and when they are tampered with, Morocco takes appropriate measures.
Objective Perspective
Several Moroccan parties expressed their dissatisfaction with the step taken by de Mistura, with the opposition Party of Progress and Socialism describing the visit as “unacceptable” and “unproductive,” stating in a statement that the task of this UN official is framed by the necessity to work exclusively with the parties involved in the political process.
On the other hand, the Justice and Development Party (opposition) considered it “an unacceptable, condemned, and unproductive deviation from the UN mandate, which clearly defines the scope of its mission and the countries directly involved in this conflict.”
The newspaper, Al-Alam, the mouthpiece of the Independence Party participating in the government, wrote that this visit means that de Mistura has strayed from the settlement path and from the methodology agreed upon by the UN, adding that “faced with his failure, he turned to pushing for his dismissal indirectly.”
In response to these interactions, Ibrahim Idris, the South African ambassador in Rabat, denied his country’s intention to intervene in Morocco’s internal affairs, adding, in an interview with the electronic newspaper Voice of Morocco, that his government invited the UN Secretary-General’s personal envoy to meet with them to obtain an objective perspective.
He called for not looking at de Mistura’s visit to South Africa in a negative light, “but it should be viewed in a more positive light, as this issue has been on the agenda for the past 50 years, not because of South Africa,” he said.
Electoral Calculations
Ahmed Nour al-Din, a researcher on the Sahara issue, believes that Morocco’s anger stems from the lack of neutrality and objectivity on the part of South Africa in the regional conflict over the Sahara.
He pointed out in a conversation with Al-Jazeera Net that they adopt without reservation the separatist thesis, and recognize the so-called “self-proclaimed Republic in Tindouf unilaterally.” In his view, this recognition means legally that Pretoria has decided the fate of the region in dispute instead of the population.
He highlighted that South Africa invited the UN envoy, even though it is not geographically or institutionally involved, as it does not have a mandate from the African Peace and Security Council, which is African in mediation to resolve disputes within the continent.
Nour al-Din believes that this step is governed by electoral calculations, as South Africa will hold parliamentary elections next May, so he suspects that it is “an attempt to achieve some points in foreign policy to compensate for the failure in domestic policy.”
As for the impact on trust, it is certain that Morocco’s relationship with the UN’s personal envoy will be affected after this move, especially after the statements of the Moroccan Foreign Minister and Ambassador Omar Hilale.
He believes that de Mistura made a professional mistake by not informing Morocco of his visit to South Africa, and made a political mistake by ignoring Morocco’s rejection of conducting that visit, adding that “Morocco is the primary party concerned with the conflict, and simply refusing to engage will signal the end of his mission without resorting to a vote of no confidence.”
Nour al-Din went even further when he predicted that the current crisis could result in ending the entire UN settlement series that started in 1991 and has yielded no results.
On the other hand, Abbas al-Wardi, a professor of international law at Mohammed V University, believes that what happened will affect Morocco’s confidence in the UN envoy on the Sahara issue.
He added in a statement to Al-Jazeera Net that what is currently happening is a repetition of old scenarios (the crisis with Ban Ki-moon and Christopher Ross), considering that this will affect international legitimacy and the strategic roles of the United Nations in this issue.
Al-Wardi said that “the United Nations must play its role in framing its special envoy so that he is not dragged into what he called “traps” that may intensify ambiguity rather than lead to realistic and acceptable solutions as the autonomy project.”
