Javier Bardem talks about his latest film projects - The National

The actor Javier Bardem.

Javier Bardem talks about his latest film projects


While film journalism requires concerted efforts made at all times to remain cool, collected and completely unaffected by big-name stars and major blockbusters, occasions spring up every now and again that put these endeavours to the test.
"I've just been shooting James Bond in London. We finished for the day about 30 minutes ago, and then I called you," is such an example - a line offered by one Javier Bardem down the phone that proves almost impossible not to get just a tiny bit excited about.
Little has been revealed about Skyfall, the 23rd 007 and the third outing for Daniel Craig due for release in October. With the film hidden behind the usual Bond veil of MI5-level secrecy, among the carefully managed pieces of information revealed so far is that Bardem is playing the main villain in a plot that will ignore anything that happened in Quantum of Solace and see Bond's "loyalty to M [Judi Dench] tested as her past comes back to haunt her".
"The story is very solid," says Bardem. "There's nothing light. It's very strongly put together."
No stranger to playing the antagonist, having deservedly picked up the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for No Country for Old Men in 2008, Bardem claims his latest baddie is - thankfully - cut from a different cloth than the terrifyingly emotionless cattle gun-wielding hitman Anton Chigurh.
"He's a different kind of guy," he says. "But we do different movies, we try to pretend that we are different people. Sometimes we do and sometimes we fail."
Thankfully, pretending to be someone else wasn't a concern for Bardem in Sons of the Clouds, a documentary that premiered at the Berlinale in February.
This year's festival, a notoriously politicised event at the best of times, was predictably heavy with features relating to the Arab Spring. But with Sons of the Clouds, which was produced by and stars Bardem, came a film highlighting an Arab conflict that has remained out of the limelight.
As claimed by Noam Chomsky in the documentary's opening scenes, the Arab Spring did not, as widely held, begin with the self-immolation of Mohammed Bouazizi in Tunisia, but the protest camp in Western Sahara that began in October 2010. The month-long protest, involving an estimated 5,000 local Sahrawis, was aimed at bringing to public attention the discrimination and human rights abuses inflicted against the local citizens in a disputed territory that has been under Moroccan rule since 1979.
But while western governments were quick to respond to the various uprisings across North Africa and the Middle East, little was said or done about Western Sahara, a situation that - barring the occasional call for negotiations - hasn't changed in more than three decades. And it's this situation of international abandonment afflicting a people of under 500,000 that Bardem, together with his Spanish director Alvaro Longoria, set out to understand and, hopefully, bring to a wider audience.
"There is always something that brings the media attention, the political attention. But with Western Sahara, because they've chosen to have a peaceful resistance, they are always at the back of the list," says Bardem.
Choosing Berlin for the film's premiere was - intentionally or not - somewhat symbolic. It was there at the famous 1884 conference where the European colonial powers took their rulers to Africa, carving up the continent and sealing the fate of the Sahwaris, a nomadic people who suddenly found their land now divided by empirical borders.
At the time, Spain was awarded the area known today as Western Sahara. But when independence came in 1975, Morocco and Mauritania quickly laid claim, as did the Polisario Front, a liberation movement which had been pushing for an end to Spanish colonisation and wanted the land for the local Sahrawis.
By 1979, however, Morocco had virtually annexed the whole region and soon began construction of the 2,700km sand wall that now separates their area from the parts controlled by the Polisario. And this is how it has largely remained since, with the Sahrawis in Morocco-controlled Western Sahara under strict rule with allegations of human rights abuses and torture (even raising the Polisario flag is banned), and those on the other side of the wall living in refugee camps.
The UN has called Western Sahara the "last African colony", and its 1991 call for a referendum in which locals could choose between independence and integration with Morocco has been repeatedly sabotaged.
Bardem, who says he "has seen the political effects in my family since I was born" (his uncle, a director, was jailed and his mother was "almost persecuted by Franco's regime", which only fell in 1975), claims the Western Sahara issue is one very present in the minds of most Spaniards.
"Of course, we feel especially responsible, and Spanish society is doing lots of things to help the Sahrawis, but the government hasn't done anything because of its blind marriage to Morocco."
He himself was spurred into action having been invited to the Sahara Film Festival, an annual event that has been held in one of the refugee camps since 2004.
"When you have an emotional experience with something, that changes your perspective," says the actor. "After I spent time with the Sahrawis, we all came back saying 'enough' and 'what can we do?"
In the end, Bardem and Alvaro Longoria - who produced Steven Soderbergh's Che in 2008 - did what they know best: make a film.
Sons of the Clouds - the result of four years' work - tells the story not just of the Sahrawis, but of Bardem's journey as he attempts to understand the situation and the reason why it's been ignored by so many politicians. With lobbying from Morocco (estimated in the film as costing 3.5 per cent of the country's GDP) influencing the major political players in the US and France, Bardem - someone perhaps not used to having his requests refused - struggled to find people willing to talk.
"For them, saying 'no' says a lot about how people don't really want to deal with this conflict, the hot potato," he says. "It's not that they don't care, it's that they don't want to look at the other side because it's a shame on them."
But with the film, an expertly crafted lesson in history and diplomatic chess, the hope is that more people will talk about Western Sahara. "The aim of doing this movie is to bring international attention to the issue, and make the situation known outside Spain," says Bardem. "What we really need to stop right now is the human rights abuses in the occupied territory."
Bardem's involvement obviously helps bring exposure to the film, which will be showing at many other festivals. "If we make any money out of it, it will all go directly to the Sahrawi people in the refugee camps," he adds. "But beyond that, the goal is for it to be seen by as many people as possible."
Bardem and Longoria will be taking Sons of the Clouds to the Sahara Film Festival this May, something he says will be "a very special moment", and there are also plans to bring it to the Middle East.
There is one event, however, where it's unlikely to be screened.
"I don't think we'll ever be invited to the Marrakech film festival," he laughs. "But that would be great, a really good gesture from them. Because at the end, Morocco is not thinking about themselves, it's not helping them."
READMORE
 

Morocco criticised for growing levels of violence


3e07mustafaincourt1.jpgUpdate 13.05.11: Mustapha Abdaiem has been located in Sale prison. He is thought to be deprived of his medication (he is diabetic and has blood pressure problems) and the majority of his clothes. The exact conditions he is being held in are unknown as he is being held in solitary confinement and was allowed only a 10 minute visit by his sisters.

Concerns have been raised for Saharawi journalist Mustapha Abdaiem after he and fellow prisoner  Mahmoud Abou Alqasem were reportedly removed from Tiznit prison on Saturday June 4th and taken to an unknown location. Abdaiem’s family fear for his safety.
Published: 05.06 - 2011 16:18Printer version    
Abdaiem has been in prison since 2008 after supporting Saharawi demonstrations in favour of self-determination and speaking out about the occupation.  The journalist who is also Secretary General of the Saharawi Committee for the Defence of Human Rights in Zag seemed to anticipate these events, reportedly telling colleagues from the Saharawi Journalists’ and Writers’ Union (UPES) on Thursday that he feared reprisals from the Moroccan authorities after his writings were published on the organisation’s website.

In a statement UPES said it is “deeply concerned about the fate and physical and moral safety of Mr. Abdaiem” and calls for international support to ensure his safety.

Morocco has faced strong criticism by Amnesty international this  week for what the organisation describes as a “draconian response to people merely exercising their right to freedom of expression and assembly “.

Recent weeks have seen disproportionate levels of violence used by Moroccan security forces  against protestors in cities across Morocco. On Thursday a 30 year old protestor Kamel Ammari died as a result of severe beating.

Amnesty International issued the following URGENT ACTION in response to the violence.

See below for a report of other recent violence against the family of murdered Saharawi Said Dambar.

Top
News:
17.02 - 2012 / 17.02 - 2012Tell the UN to MONITOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN WESTERN SAHARA
17.02 - 2012 / 17.02 - 2012ONU debe supervisar la situación de los Derechos Humanos en el Sahara
17.02 - 2012 / 17.02 - 2012Dites à l'ONU de surveiller les droits humains au Sahara Occidental
17.10 - 2011 / 17.10 - 201120 years: too long, but not too late
15.08 - 2011 / 15.08 - 2011Friend of WSC sentenced to life imprisonment in Bahrain
02.08 - 2011 / 02.08 - 2011Update and Latest Resources
05.06 - 2011 / 05.06 - 2011Morocco criticised for growing levels of violence
26.05 - 2011 / 26.05 - 2011Moroccan Violence Continues
11.04 - 2011 / 11.04 - 2011Tell France to stop blocking human rights!
10.02 - 2011 / 10.02 - 2011AGIR: Surveillance des Droits de l'homme au Sahara Occidental
08.02 - 2011 / 08.02 - 2011ACTÚA: Observación de los Derechos humanos en el Sahara Occidental
03.12 - 2010 / 03.12 - 2010Western Sahara activists launch ‘Don’t Go To Morocco’ campaign
20.11 - 2010 / 20.11 - 2010STOP Violence in Western Sahara - 3 Simple Actions
07.11 - 2010 / 07.11 - 2010Campaigners call for UN action on protest camps
06.11 - 2010 / 06.11 - 2010Call to release human rights defenders
26.10 - 2010 / 26.10 - 2010MPs condemn Teenager’s death as Moroccan forces open fire on Saharawi
25.10 - 2010 / 25.10 - 2010Teenager shot dead, five wounded as Moroccan Security forces open fire
08.10 - 2010 / 08.10 - 20101 Year Without Trial - Free the Human Rights Defenders
19.07 - 2010 / 19.07 - 2010Make sure the Conservatives keep their promise!
16.05 - 2010 / 16.05 - 2010Guinness World Records challenged over Moroccan flag stunt

READMORE
 

Moroccan Violence Continues



On Thursday 19th June Moroccan Security Forces attacked the house of Said Dambar’s family. Said was shot and killed by Moroccan police on the 21st December 2010. A number of Saharawis were protesting outside his family house on Thursday to express their support for the family.  Approximately 30 Saharawis, mostly women and including Said's mother are reported to have been injured.

Said’s family have been calling on the Moroccan authorities to investigate his death. They have so far failed to do so. Below is a recent letter they sent to Security Council members

The Western Sahara Campaign calls on the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to investigate this violence and for the Moroccan authorities to immediately conduct an impartial investigation into Said Dambar’s death.
Published: 26.05 - 2011 16:30Printer version    
Video of Moroccan Security Forces attacking the family's home

Letter from Said Damber's family

Arrecife de Lanzarote, April, 25, 2011

REF.: Death of a young man by police gun shot, and authorities refuse to restitute his body to his family

We, undersigning parties to the following request, Sidahmed Abdelwahab DAMBAR, born in Saguia El Hamra, living in Laayoune, father of the victim. Mrs. Khira Ahmed Lmbarek, born in Tan Tan, living in Laayoune, mother of the victim.

On behalf of all the members of the family of the Saharawi Martyr, Said Sidahmed Abdelwahab DAMBAR, born in Fez killed by Moroccan police last December 2010 in the circumstances indicated below.
Supported by an international campaign that collected so far 6000 signatures of support, and backed by the municipality of San Bartolomé, and the Council of Lanzarote, we would like to inform you:

1- That we would like to express our deepest concerns about the serious situation lived by our people, the people of Western Sahara, because of the illegal occupation of our Non-Self-Governing territory by the Kingdom of Morocco for the last for decades, deprived of the free exercise of their most fundamental rights of freedom of expression and other political, social, economic rights. Any attempt by Saharawis to demand these rights through peaceful means is systematically oppressed by the Moroccan police. The Moroccan authorities are not only impeding the exercise by the Saharawi people of these rights, but most serious is the Moroccan refusal to enable the people of this last colony to exercise their right to self-determination as recognized to them by the UN Charter and UN resolutions.

2- That because of the points risen in paragraph 1, we would like as members of the people of Western Sahara to denounce the Moroccan systematic violations of human rights of the Saharawi civilians in the zones of the territory occupied by its forces since 1975. Such violations have been reported in many international reports. One of the latest violations was committed against peaceful demonstrators last November 2010 in the protest encampment of Gdeim Izik 12 Km east the capital of Western Sahara. The Moroccan army and police, it should be recalled attacked the camps of around 8000 tent, dismantled it setting it on fire causing many injuries and killing at least two victims.

3- That there is no way our family and any Saharwi victim can be protected from the Moroccan violations and oppression because there are no reliable Moroccan institutions or legal bodies that can guarantee the respect and monitoring of human rights in Western Sahara independently. The Moroccan authorities, which are de facto administrating the Non-Self-Governing territory of Western Sahara, has always failed their obligations to protect the basic rights of the people of the territory. The judicial system of Morocco for example has always refused to investigate allegations of torture and other ill-treatment exercised by the Moroccan police and army to extract information from arrested demonstrators, human rights defender or political activists who oppose the Moroccan official stand on Western Sahara. Our son, Said Sidahmed Abdelwahab Dambar, is not the first Saharawi citizen to be killed by Moroccan police or army in circumstances that the state of Morocco always refuses to unveil. The Moroccan Royal Council for Human Rights has for example recognized lately the responsibility of the State in the death under torture or in prison of some 350 Saharawis between 1975 and 1993, a recognition so far denied.

4- Last December 21, 2010, our son SAID DAMBAR, was coldly assassinated by a Moroccan policeman, during the siege imposed on the city of EL Aaiún, after the dismantling of Gdeim Izik protest camp.

SAID DAMBAR, was 26 years old, a university graduate in Economy and worked in the municipality of the city of El Aaiún. He is famous of his exemplary reputation and special relation with our father. He was also famous of having been an exemplary student, sportsperson and hard-working, but also of his support to the struggle of our people and concern about the general situation.

In the evening of the 21st of December of 2010, SAID got of a cyber-café after he finished watching a football match, minutes after two policemen dressed in civil clothes stopped him and asked for his ID. According to eye witnesses, SAID didn’t have his ID on him, for this a tense discussion started between him and the policemen. One of the policemen took his gun and shot him in the head without any apparent reason.

Minutes later, our house was surrounded by a group of policemen in civil clothes who entered the house saying that they are looking for the ID of SAID, in the end they asked his elder brother Mohamed to accompany them to the seat of the Moroccan Governor of El Aaiún, where he was given a suspicious story about what happened. The governor of El Aaiún tried to buy the silence of the family.
Since that date our family has been demanding from the Moroccan authorities to tell the truth about what happened to our son and the causes of his death, in vain.
The dead body of our late brother is until now in the hospital of Ben EL Mehdi, in the city of El Aaiún, we still cannot burry him as he deserves following the relevant religious and cultural rituals. The Moroccan authorities refuse completely to give any kind of accountability and do not want to give us back the dead body of SAID, putting pressures on us to bury him in secret, without autopsy or investigation.

5- Not only this, the Moroccan authorities are exercising all kinds of intimidations and pressures against the members of our family attempting to abort any attempts we can think of undertaking to get justice.

6- For all the above mentioned reasons, we call on the Human Rights Council to urgently intervene vis-à-vis the Moroccan competent authorities so as it:
- Restitute the dead corps of our son SAID, still detained in morgue of the hospital in El Aaiún under police custody.

- Investigate adequately to find out the details about the causes of the death of our son before we can bury him appropriately.
- To give to the family an adequate moral and material reparation and to establish the responsibility of the Moroccan state in the crime, in addition to the arrest and judgment of the persons directly accountable of it.

7- We also call on the Human Rights Council to:
- Adopt all available measures vis-à-vis the Moroccan authorities so as to establish the truth about what happened on the night of the crime.
- Adopt all necessary measures so as to investigate on many other cases of assassinations, illegal arrest and torture of civilians, and other serious human rights violations massively committed by the Moroccan authorities in the zones of Western Sahara it adminstrates.

8- Finally, it is unacceptable that the State of Morocco not only kills our son and tries to intimidate us with a view to force us burry him without any autopsy or investigation and reparation. This is not only illegal, it is also inhumane, and the Human Rights Council should take an urgent action to enable us end this tragedy.

Top
News:
17.02 - 2012 / 17.02 - 2012Tell the UN to MONITOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN WESTERN SAHARA
17.02 - 2012 / 17.02 - 2012ONU debe supervisar la situación de los Derechos Humanos en el Sahara
17.02 - 2012 / 17.02 - 2012Dites à l'ONU de surveiller les droits humains au Sahara Occidental
17.10 - 2011 / 17.10 - 201120 years: too long, but not too late
15.08 - 2011 / 15.08 - 2011Friend of WSC sentenced to life imprisonment in Bahrain
02.08 - 2011 / 02.08 - 2011Update and Latest Resources
05.06 - 2011 / 05.06 - 2011Morocco criticised for growing levels of violence
26.05 - 2011 / 26.05 - 2011Moroccan Violence Continues
11.04 - 2011 / 11.04 - 2011Tell France to stop blocking human rights!
10.02 - 2011 / 10.02 - 2011AGIR: Surveillance des Droits de l'homme au Sahara Occidental
08.02 - 2011 / 08.02 - 2011ACTÚA: Observación de los Derechos humanos en el Sahara Occidental
03.12 - 2010 / 03.12 - 2010Western Sahara activists launch ‘Don’t Go To Morocco’ campaign
20.11 - 2010 / 20.11 - 2010STOP Violence in Western Sahara - 3 Simple Actions
07.11 - 2010 / 07.11 - 2010Campaigners call for UN action on protest camps
06.11 - 2010 / 06.11 - 2010Call to release human rights defenders
26.10 - 2010 / 26.10 - 2010MPs condemn Teenager’s death as Moroccan forces open fire on Saharawi
25.10 - 2010 / 25.10 - 2010Teenager shot dead, five wounded as Moroccan Security forces open fire
08.10 - 2010 / 08.10 - 20101 Year Without Trial - Free the Human Rights Defenders
19.07 - 2010 / 19.07 - 2010Make sure the Conservatives keep their promise!
16.05 - 2010 / 16.05 - 2010Guinness World Records challenged over Moroccan flag stunt

READMORE
 

Establishment of Kenya-Western Sahara Friendship society | Sahara Press Service


Nairobi, April 04, 2012 (SPS) - A group of Kenyan activists have announced on Tuesday the establishment of Kenya-Western Sahara Friendship society “to mobilise support and solidarity from the people of Kenya and Africa for solidarity with the people of Western Sahara ”.
“The Kenya-Western Sahara Friendship society has officially been registered by the government of Kenya. We are now legal entity to pursue the case of self determination of the saharawi people in Kenya and the region” said the Executive Secretary- Kenya Western Sahara Friendship Society, Jared Akama Onyari, in statement reached SPS.
Mr. Onyari underlined that the new body aims at forging links of solidarity and friendship between the people of Kenya and those of Western Sahara. “Supporting the liberation struggle of the last colony in Africa”.
“The Mission is of the society is to mobilise support and solidarity from the people of Kenya and Africa for solidarity with the people of Western Sahara and their struggle for their inalienable right to national freedom and self determination” he added. (SPS)
090/00
READMORE
 

Danish government zigzagging over Western Sahara | Newstime Africa


Western Sahara - Credit Lailab
Danish Minister for Trade and Investment, Pia Olsen Dyhr, says that Denmark will not support or subsidize Danish companies that operate illegally in Western Sahara. A month ago, the Minister was rather less adamant when replying to a letter from Danish solidarity movement, Africa Contact. “The government will not oppose Danish companies operating in areas such as Western Sahara, but the External Action Service is reluctant to actively support such activities.”
In a response to the Danish Committee on Foreign Affairs in March, however, Pia Olsen Dyhr now says that “the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has no tax-financed programmes or undertakings that seek to promote Danish business interests in Western Sahara, nor does the Ministry have any plans of such undertakings. Based on a concrete enquiry by the Danish Export Credit Agency (EKF), concerning whether EKF could risk assess Danish investments in Western Sahara, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs discouraged EKF from working in areas, such as Western Sahara, where the question of sovereignty is presently unresolved.”
All trade in resources from occupied areas such as Western Sahara, colonised by Morocco since 1975, is illegal under international law (e.g. the UN Convention on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights §1,2) unless the indigenous inhabitants of Western Sahara, the Saharawis, agree to and benefit from such trade.
According to the Saharawis themselves – those from the occupied territories as well as the more than 150.000 Saharawis living in refugee camps in the Algerian dessert – they have neither been asked nor do they benefit from Moroccos selling of their phosphate and fishing quotas, something that is confirmed by Abba Malainin from the Saharawi liberation front, Polisario. “The Saharawis have not been consulted,” he tells Africa Contact.
These claims are supported by a secret statement from the European Parliament’s Legal Service from 2009, which therefore concludes that the much debated fisheries agreement between the EU and Morocco, that allows the EU’s fishing fleet to fish of the shores of Western Sahara, is illegal under present circumstances.
© 2012, Peter Kenworthy. All rights reserved.
READMORE
 

The Future of Western Sahara | FPIF

By Stephen Zunes. Edited by John Feffer, July 21, 2007
Morocco’s ongoing refusal to allow for the long-planned UN-sponsored referendum on the fate of Western Sahara to move forward, combined with a growing nonviolent resistance campaign in the occupied territory against Moroccan occupation authorities, has led Morocco to propose granting the former Spanish colony special autonomous status within the kingdom.
The kingdom of Morocco, generously supplied with American-made weapons, invaded the largely desert nation – then known as Spanish Sahara – more than three decades ago. It has controlled much of the territory ever since. More then 75 nations have recognized the government-in-exile of Western Sahara, led by the nationalist Polisario Front, and it is a full member state of the African Union.
A series of resolutions by the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly, as well as a landmark 1975 advisory ruling by the International Court of Justice, have recognized the right of self-determination by the people of Western Sahara. However, France and the United States have blocked the Security Council from enforcing its resolutions. Both countries have perceived a need to strengthen the Moroccan monarchy as a bulwark against Communism and radical Arab nationalism during the Cold War and, in more recent years, as an important ally in the struggle against Islamist extremism.
The ongoing conflict between Morocco and the Western Sahara nationalists, led by the Polisario Front, has resulted in enormous suffering by the Western Saharan people, over half of whom live in refugee camps in neighboring Algeria. It has seriously crippled efforts to advance badly needed economic and strategic cooperation between the states of the Maghreb region facing challenges from struggling economies and rising Islamist militancy.
The Bush administration and a bipartisan group of congressional leaders have enthusiastically supported the Moroccan autonomy plan as a means of ending the conflict. But Morocco’s plan for autonomy falls well short of what is necessary to bring about a peaceful resolution to the conflict. It also poses a dangerous precedent that threatens the very foundation of the post-World War II international legal system.

Morocco’s “Autonomy” Plan

The autonomy plan is based on the assumption that Western Sahara is part of Morocco, a contention that the United Nations, the World Court, the African Union, and a broad consensus of international legal opinion have long rejected. To accept Morocco’s autonomy plan would mean that, for the first time since the founding of the UN and the ratification of the UN Charter more the 60 years ago, the international community would be endorsing the expansion of a country’s territory by military force, thereby establishing a very dangerous and destabilizing precedent.
If the people of Western Sahara accepted an autonomy agreement over independence as a result of a free and fair referendum, it would constitute a legitimate act of self-determination. However, Morocco has explicitly stated that its autonomy proposal “rules out, by definition, the possibility for the independence option to be submitted” to the people of Western Sahara, the vast majority of whom – according to knowledgeable international observers – favor outright independence.
International law aside, there are a number of practical concerns regarding the Moroccan proposal. For instance, centralized autocratic states have rarely respected the autonomy of regional jurisdictions, which has often led to violent conflict. In 1952, the UN granted the British protectorate (and former Italian colony) of Eritrea autonomous status federated with Ethiopia. In 1961, however, the Ethiopian emperor revoked Eritrea’s autonomous status, annexing it as his empire’s 14th province. The result was a bloody 30-year struggle for independence and subsequent border wars between the two the countries. Similarly, the decision of Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic to revoke the autonomous status of Kosovo in 1989 led to a decade of repression and resistance, culminating in the NATO war against Yugoslavia in 1999.
Moreover, there are no enforcement mechanisms included in the proposal, and Morocco has a history of breaking its promises to the international community regarding the UN-mandated referendum for Western Sahara and related obligations based on the ceasefire agreement 16 years ago. Indeed, a close reading of the proposal raises questions as to how much autonomy is even being offered initially, such as control of Western Sahara’s natural resources and law enforcement (beyond local matters). In addition, the proposal appears to indicate that all powers not specifically vested in the autonomous region would remain with the kingdom. Indeed, since the king of Morocco is ultimately invested with absolute authority under Article 19 of the Moroccan constitution, the autonomy proposal’s insistence that the Moroccan state “will keep its powers in the royal domains, especially with respect to defense, external relations and the constitutional and religious prerogatives of His Majesty the King” appears to give the monarch considerable latitude in interpretation.
In any case, the people of Western Sahara will not likely accept autonomy rather than independence. For years, they have engaged in pro-independence protests only to be subjected to mass arrests, beatings, torture, and extra-judicial killings. There is little reason to expect that the Moroccan authorities would change their ways under “autonomy.”

U.S. Defends the Moroccan Proposal

Despite all these serious problems with the Moroccan proposal, both the Bush administration and congressional leaders of both parties have rushed to try to legitimize what amounts to an illegal annexation of one country by another. U.S. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicolas Burns called it “a serious and credible proposal to provide real autonomy for the Western Sahara,” a pointunderscored before the House International Relations Committee by assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs David Welch. Although the well-organized refugee camps are largely demilitarized and, even during the 16 years of armed struggle against Morocco, the Polisario never engaged in acts of terrorism, Welch warned in the course of his testimony that the camps present “a potentially attractive safe haven for terrorist planning or activity.”
Congressional leaders of both parties appear to be allying themselves with administration hard-liners. Congressman Tom Lantos of California, whom the Democrats have chosen to chair the House International Relations Committee, referred to the Moroccan proposal as “reasonable and realistic” and called on the Polisario to accept it. He was joined by 172 other members of the House, who signed a letter declaring it “a breakthrough opportunity” and a “realistic framework for a political solution.” Given the widespread opposition in the international community to legitimizing Morocco’s act of aggression, the letter concludes by urging President Bush to “embrace this promising Moroccan initiative so that it receives the consideration necessary to achieve international acceptance.”
The letter was drafted and circulated by Congressman Gary Ackerman of New York, whom the Democrats have chosen to chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East. Other Democratic leaders joining their foreign policy leadership in supporting Morocco’s right of conquest included Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Democratic Caucus Chair Rahm Emanuel. Prominent Republicans signing the letter included Minority Leader John Boehner, House Republican Whip Roy Blunt, and former House Speaker Dennis Hastert. Indeed, more than 80 of the signers are either committee chairmen or ranking members of key committees, subcommittees and elected leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives, yet another indication in this post-Cold War era of a growing bipartisan effort to undermine the longstanding principle of the right of self-determination.
Former Clinton administration officials have also weighed in to support the contention that the people of Western Sahara should give up on their widely acknowledged claim to independence and instead accept the suzerainty of the autocratic Moroccan monarchy. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, in an open letter to President Bush, also encouraged him to back the Moroccan plan, which she claimed gave “the people of the Western Sahara a true voice in their future through the full benefits of autonomy as presented by Morocco, a credible political solution can be achieved.” The letter was signed by a host of other prominent Democrats.

Distorting the Facts

Prominent Democrats have joined the Bush administration in distorting the facts of the conflict. For example, UN monitors report that the Polisario has scrupulously honored its 1991 ceasefire agreement with Morocco despite the Moroccans’ refusal to honor their reciprocal commitment to allow the holding a referendum on independence to take place. Nevertheless, Lantos has insisted that “peace has been summarily rejected by the rebel Polisario Front in favor of . . .guerrilla ambushes.” The House Democrats’ chief foreign policy spokesman also blames the Polisario for forcing most of the Western Saharan population to live in “arid refugee camps,” ignoring that they are living in these camps as a direct result of Moroccan repression.
Despite well-documented reports by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other reputable human rights groups monitoring the situation in the occupied territory that public expressions in support for self-determination are routinely suppressed, Lantos has also expressed his confidence that “Morocco will do nothing to stifle debate among the people of Western Sahara.”
In a prominent op-ed column in The New York Times this past March backing Morocco’s autonomy plan, President Bill Clinton’s ambassador to Morocco Frederick Vreeland falsely claimed that the Polisario Front, which has led Western Sahara’s independence movement since the territory was under Spanish control, was a creation of Algeria in order to advance its own irredentist claims. In reality, the Polisario grew out of earlier anti-colonial movements that long pre-dated the establishment of the independent Algerian state and only began receiving substantial Algerian assistance after the Moroccan conquest in 1975.
Vreeland also claimed that the Polisario-administered refugee camps in Algeria are potential recruiting grounds for al-Qaeda and other Islamic extremists. In reality, the Polisario Front is a secular nationalist organization, the Western Saharans tend to observe a relatively liberal interpretation of Islam, and the Algerian government – which has only recently emerged from a hard-fought war against Islamist insurgents – would certainly crack down decisively at even a hint of such extremist activities within its territory. Indeed, there have been no credible reports of any radical Islamist activities by the many hundreds of UN officials, scholars and relief workers – including those from U.S. evangelical Christian groups – who have spent time in the camps.
Nor would an independent Western Sahara, endowed with generous natural resources and governed by the Polisario Front’s increasingly pro-Western leadership, constitute “a weak independent state” that “would likely morph into a terrorist-controlled one” as Ambassador Vreeland ominously predicted in his article.
Interestingly, The New York Times refused to run any of the op-eds submitted in subsequent weeks by a number of reputable North African scholars refuting Vreeland’s claims or raising objections about Morocco’s autonomy plan. Nor did the newspaper of record bother to mention that Ambassador Vreeland now serves as chairman of an energy company with contracts with the Moroccan government to develop energy resources in occupied Western Sahara.
Other former officials have had to be more open about their affiliations. Former Connecticut Congressman Toby Moffet, who has lobbied his fellow Democrats to back the Moroccan plan by raising the specter of a growing al-Qaeda threat in North Africa if it’s not accepted, has had to register as an agent of a foreign government for his services on behalf of the Moroccan monarchy. On the Republican side, former Florida Republican Party chairman Alberto Cardenas, who co-chaired 2004 re-election campaign, in that state, has also been hired by the Moroccans.

Implications of U.S. Support

Support for Morocco’s autonomy plan for Western Sahara is indicative of a growing bipartisan rejection of the international legal norms that have governed international relations since the end of the Second World War. At that time, when the victorious allies agreed to never again allow invading armies to conquer other peoples without a collective response. While some have tried to blame the bipartisan congressional support for Israel’s efforts to annex East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and parts of the West Bank as a consequence of the alleged power of “the Jewish Lobby,” the strong bipartisan Congressional support for the annexation of Western Sahara by the Arab kingdom of Morocco demonstrates that members of Congress are nowadays quite willing to support the illegal conquests by U.S. allies of their weaker neighbors even without pressure from a well-organized ethnic minority.
Ironically, the majority of House members who were in Congress in 1991 and have gone on record seeking to legitimize Morocco’s aggression against Western Sahara voted to authorize the Gulf War on the grounds that Iraq’s aggression against Kuwait was so egregious that it justified a massive military response.
Most supporters of Morocco’s autonomy plan deny that they are legitimizing aggression. They argue that some sort of compromise, or “third way” between Western Saharan independence and integration with Morocco, is necessary to resolve the conflict and that a “winner take all” approach is unworkable. Encouraging such compromise and trying to find a win/win situation is certainly the preferable way to pursue a lasting peaceful settlement regarding most ethnic conflicts and many international disputes. However, Western Sahara is a clear-cut case of self-determination for a people struggling against foreign military occupation. The Polisario Front has already offered guarantees to protect Moroccan strategic and economic interests if allowed full independence. To insist that the people of Western Sahara must give up their moral and legal right to genuine self-determination, then, is not a recipe for conflict resolution, but for far more serious conflict in the future.
The irresolution to the conflict is not a result of the Polisario’s unwillingness to compromise. Rather, it represents the failure of the UN Security Council – as a result of the French and American veto threats – to place the Western Sahara issue under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Such an action would give the international community the power to impose sanctions or whatever appropriate leverage is required to force the Moroccan regime to abide by the UN mandates it has up until now been able to disregard thanks to its friends in Paris and Washington.
In the comparable case of East Timor, only after human rights organizations, church groups, and other activists forced the U.S. government to end its support for Indonesia’s occupation did the Jakarta regime finally offer a referendum that gave the East Timorese their right to self-determination. It may take similar grassroots campaigns to ensure that the United States lives up to its international legal obligations and pressures Morocco to allow the people of Western Sahara to determine their own destiny.

Stephen Zunes (www.stephenzunes.org) is a professor of politics at the University of San Francisco and the Middle East editor for Foreign Policy in Focus. He is the author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press, 2003) and the forthcoming book, co-authored by Jacob Mundy, Western Sahara: Nationalist and Conflict Irresolution in Northwest Africa (Syracuse University Press.)
READMORE