# Spain and Morocco



## Pesky Wesky (May 10, 2009)

I don't know if people are aware of the situation between Spain and Morocco at this moment.

Western Sahara is a mineral-rich former Spanish colony that Morocco marched into and occupied when Spain withdrew in 1975, leaving a power vacuum. Many believe that the Saharawi people are owed by Spain as Spain "left them in the lurch" when they withdrew. 
The Spanish government is largely ignoring the conflict and hasn't even condemmed it as most other countries have. Seems they are too worried about upsetting Morocco.
Spain laments confrontation in Western Sahara :: La Prensa :: America in English

Thousands protest in Spain over Western Sahara - Yahoo! News


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

Yes, it's appalling and the Moroccan army have been going into the refugee camps and butchering civilians. I am ashamed of ZP & co for sitting on the fence! 

We had planned a trip to Tangiers before Christmas (we can almost see it from where we live) but won't be going now.


----------



## Pesky Wesky (May 10, 2009)

Alcalaina said:


> We had planned a trip to Tangiers before Christmas (we can almost see it from where we live) but won't be going now.


Too risky!!


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

Pesky Wesky said:


> Too risky!!


No, not that - we just don´t want to visit a country with a government that sanctions the sort of things going on in Ayoun.


----------



## gerrit (Jul 15, 2008)

Actually, without reading the article (will do so in a few minutes), when Spain withdrew there was an agreement that the Sahara would be divided between Mauritania and Morocco. It was when Spain was already gone that Mauritania's part was taken over by Morocco. Spain did not just let Morocco take control when it was still in Spain's hands.

EDIT: read the articles. I find it hard to disagree with the Spanish government on this. They withdrew from the Sahara and left it, as agreed, divided between Mauritania and Morocco. What happened afterwards is not something Spain asked for, by that moment the territory wasn't a Spanish territory anymore anyway. If Spain interferes now they are sticking their nose in other nation's bussinesses. The events in the Sahara sound more like a case for the UN than a case the Spanish government should step up for.

PS: Morocco is very safe to travel in, few colleagues of mine have been recently (in the south, not in the touristic areas in northern Morocco) and had zero security incidents. Tangiers has been known for decades as a beautiful artist-drawing idyllic coastal place that is rapidly developing into an economical and touristic hotspot now. But further south, away from tourists, the real Morocco awaits. I'd love to go if I could afford a trip that includes the places off the beaten path.


----------



## fourgotospain (May 4, 2009)

> Tangiers has been known for decades as a beautiful artist-drawing idyllic coastal place that is rapidly developing into an economical and touristic hotspot now.


15 years ago I travelled around Morocco with my then boyfriend (now my husband). I've travelled all through Africa and Asia and have never experienced the same level of hassle as I did in Tangiers (Delhi train station came close but still more respectful). I wore a wedding ring and did not leave the hotel alone ever and I've been back since and had similar feelings. Morocco may be safe as far as stats go but IMO Tangiers is NOT a beautiful idyllic coastal place.


----------



## gerrit (Jul 15, 2008)

Odd. It has attracted artists for decades who spent time there or resided there, no hassle with recent flows of tourists neither. I guess that the bad experiences are rarely published for the sake of that tourism industry. I can imagine though it gets more relaxed as the economy of that city is booming and attracting more and more companies opening offices there, including those that send some staff over to Morocco.

Anyways, to get back on topic... Spain withdrew from the Sahara in 1975. Mauritania and Morocco would each get a portion of it under their control. So far the Spanish involvement. Mauritania withdrew in 1979 and Morocco took over the entire Sahara, which since then has been disputed territory between Morocco and the Polisario front which is backed by Algeria. The total occupation by Morocco happened in 1979, 4 years after Spain withdrew. I don't see how Spain is to blame by any means, they are not involved in this conflict and IMO it is wise not to choose a side in cases that are more complex than one knows about. If the Spanish government considers itself not well placed to judge the situation, it is better to stay neutral. This whole conflict is a matter for the UN anyway, Spain is not an involved party as things got out of hand several years after Spain had left the territory.

Also, Laayoune is a relatively safe and peaceful city, it is the border zone between the Polisario-controlled area and the Moroccan-controlled area that is a minefield. Laayoune has been under Moroccan control for a long time and only recently began to get involved in the conflicts.

For sure this is not a matter Spain is involved in, and it is not up to Spain to resolve the issue. The UN should take a clear opinion here.


----------



## jimenato (Nov 21, 2009)

gerrit said:


> Odd. It has attracted artists for decades who spent time there or resided there, no hassle with recent flows of tourists neither. I guess that the bad experiences are rarely published for the sake of that tourism industry. I can imagine though it gets more relaxed as the economy of that city is booming and attracting more and more companies opening offices there, including those that send some staff over to Morocco.
> 
> Anyways, to get back on topic... Spain withdrew from the Sahara in 1975. Mauritania and Morocco would each get a portion of it under their control. So far the Spanish involvement. Mauritania withdrew in 1979 and Morocco took over the entire Sahara, which since then has been disputed territory between Morocco and the Polisario front which is backed by Algeria. The total occupation by Morocco happened in 1979, 4 years after Spain withdrew. I don't see how Spain is to blame by any means, they are not involved in this conflict and IMO it is wise not to choose a side in cases that are more complex than one knows about. If the Spanish government considers itself not well placed to judge the situation, it is better to stay neutral. This whole conflict is a matter for the UN anyway, Spain is not an involved party as things got out of hand several years after Spain had left the territory.
> 
> ...


Not (of course) the entire Sahara.

Sahara - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> The Sahara covers large parts of Algeria, Chad, Egypt, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Western Sahara, Sudan and Tunisia.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

gerrit said:


> Anyways, to get back on topic... Spain withdrew from the Sahara in 1975. Mauritania and Morocco would each get a portion of it under their control. So far the Spanish involvement. Mauritania withdrew in 1979 and Morocco took over the entire Sahara, which since then has been disputed territory between Morocco and the Polisario front which is backed by Algeria. The total occupation by Morocco happened in 1979, 4 years after Spain withdrew. I don't see how Spain is to blame by any means, they are not involved in this conflict and IMO it is wise not to choose a side in cases that are more complex than one knows about. If the Spanish government considers itself not well placed to judge the situation, it is better to stay neutral. This whole conflict is a matter for the UN anyway, Spain is not an involved party as things got out of hand several years after Spain had left the territory.
> 
> Also, Laayoune is a relatively safe and peaceful city, it is the border zone between the Polisario-controlled area and the Moroccan-controlled area that is a minefield. Laayoune has been under Moroccan control for a long time and only recently began to get involved in the conflicts.
> 
> For sure this is not a matter Spain is involved in, and it is not up to Spain to resolve the issue. The UN should take a clear opinion here.



I disagree that Spain has no responsibility for the situation. Any colonial power which just walks out and abandons a people to its fate must share responsibility for problems caused directly by its withdrawal, whether that be the British in India, Belgium in the Congo, or France in Algeria. 

The UN has been trying to sort out the Western Saharan issue for years, but Morocco has consistently ignored all calls for negotiation and blocked all proposals for independence. Not surprisingly, because there are rich mineral deposits there.

Meanwhile 100,000 people have languished in refugee camps for over 30 years suffering appalling human rights abuses and now the Moroccans are clamping down violently on the independence campaigners (POLISARIO) in a way disturbingly similar to Israeli activities in Gaza and the West Bank. And the Spanish government, for fear of upsetting diplomatic relations, won´t even issue a statement of condemnation.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

jimenato said:


> Not (of course) the entire Sahara.
> 
> Sahara - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Quiz night already is it? :clap2:


----------



## Pesky Wesky (May 10, 2009)

One of the main issues is that Spain hasn't condemned the act. Trinidad Jiménez said today they won't until they know the facts, which considering that journalists and officials have been banned from the area might take some time.


----------



## gerrit (Jul 15, 2008)

Alcalaina said:


> I disagree that Spain has no responsibility for the situation. Any colonial power which just walks out and abandons a people to its fate must share responsibility for problems caused directly by its withdrawal, whether that be the British in India, Belgium in the Congo, or France in Algeria.
> 
> The UN has been trying to sort out the Western Saharan issue for years, but Morocco has consistently ignored all calls for negotiation and blocked all proposals for independence. Not surprisingly, because there are rich mineral deposits there.
> 
> Meanwhile 100,000 people have languished in refugee camps for over 30 years suffering appalling human rights abuses and now the Moroccans are clamping down violently on the independence campaigners (POLISARIO) in a way disturbingly similar to Israeli activities in Gaza and the West Bank. And the Spanish government, for fear of upsetting diplomatic relations, won´t even issue a statement of condemnation.


Fact is that the Spanish withdrew from the Spanish Sahara in 1975 after a recognised agreement with Mauritania and Morocco, that agreement was fully valid. The big problems began when Mauritania withdrew and Morocco took control over their part, but by then Spain was already out of the area for 4 years. It would be quite odd to now say Spain has to take a position in this matter : they were already gone for 4 years when Morocco annexed the Mauritanian part of the territory, and Spain has not been involved in the clashes between Morocco, the Polisario and indirectly Algeria (who have backed the Polisario since the beginning).

It seems a UN issue, regardless how often they already failed to resolve the matter. That doesn't mean Spain suddenly is an involved party. The issue is and remains a UN issue until there is a long-term solution.


----------



## gerrit (Jul 15, 2008)

Pesky Wesky said:


> *One of the main issues is that Spain hasn't condemned the act. Trinidad Jiménez said today they won't until they know the facts*, which considering that journalists and officials have been banned from the area might take some time.



And rightfully so. Spain, like all other countries, should not stick their noses in other countries' internal affairs, that is why there are supranational organisations. And especially if the entire situation is not fully known, it can be very risky to make a statement which they may have to withdraw later when the full truth is becoming more clear. I think the Spanish government is doing quite well in this case, I rather see this attitude than the attitude of some other countries who always feel like they should have their say and be a moral compass for the entire world. It is not a Spanish issue and they are not aware of the exact circumstances, so I don't see this as defending Morocco but mainly as being careful with making wrong statements.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

gerrit said:


> And rightfully so. Spain, like all other countries, should not stick their noses in other countries' internal affairs, that is why there are supranational organisations. And especially if the entire situation is not fully known, it can be very risky to make a statement which they may have to withdraw later when the full truth is becoming more clear. I think the Spanish government is doing quite well in this case, I rather see this attitude than the attitude of some other countries who always feel like they should have their say and be a moral compass for the entire world. It is not a Spanish issue and they are not aware of the exact circumstances, so I don't see this as defending Morocco but mainly as being careful with making wrong statements.


I´m surprised you take this view Gerrit. Doesn´t the very fact that Morocco have banned Spanish journalists from entering WS ring any alarm bells?


----------



## gerrit (Jul 15, 2008)

Sure, but I assume they banned ALL journalists, not just the Spanish? Fact is that there is something going on there, but what exactly happened, who started the conflict, ... ??? Because of lack of knowledge, I guess this is why the Spanish government waits to take an official stand. Don't forget that Algeria is an involved party too since they back the Polisario, and that Spain needs to look after the safety of those in Melilla and Ceuta as well.

I think the UN should take action, is it on their agenda yet? The new conflict is a good occasion to try to finally resolve the issue on the long term as previous attempts to do so all failed.


----------



## Pesky Wesky (May 10, 2009)

gerrit said:


> I think the UN should take action, is it on their agenda yet? The new conflict is a good occasion to try to finally resolve the issue on the long term as previous attempts to do so all failed.


Is it on their agenda?? Hahaha!!
They are going to talk about it in November and a decision will be taken in December!!
So that's hat's what the UN means when they say it's on the agenda  !!


----------



## gerrit (Jul 15, 2008)

Well, we are november, so I guess the talks should be ongoing ? The UN doesn't really work as it should be, but it's still the closest we have for an international referee. I prefer the UN in charge rather than one nation becoming the de facto superpower. Without saying the UN couldn't do with some improvements ...


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

Pesky Wesky said:


> Is it on their agenda?? Hahaha!!
> They are going to talk about it in November and a decision will be taken in December!!
> So that's hat's what the UN means when they say it's on the agenda  !!


It´s been on the UN agenda since ... 1988.
The United Nations and Western Sahara: A Never-ending Affair | United States Institute of Peace

This is the same sort of stalemate as Israel and the Palestinian territories. The UN can make recommendations and resolutions till it´s blue in the face, but it can´t make things actually happen unless all parties are in agreement.

The Spanish government knows perfectly well what is happening there, despite the prohibition of its journalists from entering, because aid workers in the refugee camps are sending out reports daily. But it doesn´t want to upset the Moroccan regime because there are potentially huge contracts for Spanish firms to exploit mineral deposits in WS territory.


----------



## Xose (Dec 10, 2008)

I think one should learn the facts, as far as known, at least before making any pre-judgements.

Starter for 10 then. Spain did not simply "withdraw" and just leave. Why would they. The rich minerals don't mine themselves and Spain invested huge amounts creating the mining opportunities in the first place. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean they own the place, but one doesn't invite Shell or whomever to setup a massive Oil op because they're broke, then ask them to ****** off and leave the exploration for one....does one?!

However, it got to the point of shooting thousands of women, children and monkeys... yes, monkeys (really, actual monkeys), or leaving. Thankfully they chose to leave. But they certainly didn't "just leave".

Just a bit of clearing up on how Spain got to leave the area. Power Vacum or not, it was not of their choosing.


----------



## gerrit (Jul 15, 2008)

Well in that case it's certainly not Spain's business anymore. Opening a can of worms after they were violently forced to leave the territory??

Again, the UN is not perfect but it's the best we got for now. I rather see the UN interfere than to see certain other countries always feeling as if they need to play international police for the rest of the world (usually USA and UK in the first place)


----------



## Xose (Dec 10, 2008)

gerrit said:


> Well in that case it's certainly not Spain's business anymore. Opening a can of worms after they were violently forced to leave the territory??
> 
> Again, the UN is not perfect but it's the best we got for now. I rather see the UN interfere than to see certain other countries always feeling as if they need to play international police for the rest of the world (usually USA and UK in the first place)


More like forced to leave the country because they didn't want to use violance. Unfortunately, seems that Morocco doesn't share the same reservations.

As for the USA and UK, wouldn't worry about that. No oil fields there.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

Well it looks like Hillary Clinton is on the case, so it should all be sorted out by Christmas. 
España aboga por que la ONU vigile los derechos humanos en el Sáhara · ELPAÍS.com

Here's an interesting article about the actual circumstances of the handover to Morocco (very shady) and why Spain is so paranoid about it now:
Spain's lie still hurts Western Sahara | Miguel-Anxo Murado | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk


----------



## Xose (Dec 10, 2008)

Wow!! is it just me, or does that guardian report fit so many global issues today?!!!

Iraq and WMD's was screaming at me at virtually every carefully placed statement.

I'm surprised at how the Guardian allowed this article to be delivered this way. Obviously the question left unanswered then is how can the free world let this happen to a people? Don't tell me that I've (and the rest of the planet) have been right all this time and if there's no financial interest, the rest is lip service.... which leads us neatly back to WMD's... Just one brief note on it, "they didn't want them to be indipendent because.....". Says it all really.


----------

