On 10 December 2020, President Trump announced
that he had recognised Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara.
Not only does this represent a fundamental reversal of 30 years of US policy, it's widely
seen as a setback for UN-led international efforts to settle this long-running dispute.
But the big question now is will the Biden Administration reverse it?
[MUSIC]
Hello and welcome. If you're new to the channel my name is James Ker-Lindsay
and here I take a look at international relations, conflict and the origins of countries.
Western Sahara is one of the most important cases
of outstanding decolonisation in the modern international system.
It's the largest and most populous of the 17 areas on the United Nations list
of non-self-governing territories.
However, while it should have become an independent state 45 years ago,
its right to self-determination - a right confirmed by the International Court of Justice,
the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council - has never been realised.
Instead, in a move that's never been accepted by the wider international community,
it was invaded and claimed by Morocco.
It's against this backdrop that the Trump Administration's decision to recognise
Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara is such an important step.
Not only does it go against various UN decisions,
it also marks a break with all Washington's closest partners.
But, in a wider sense, the decision also raises
interesting questions about the recognition of sovereignty in the international system.
Who gets to decide on it? What part does the wider international community play in such decisions?
And what, if anything, can be done to reverse such decisions?
This in turn prompts the key question: will the incoming Biden Administration
rescind the decision?
I won't go into a lot of detail about the background to Western Sahara
as I've looked at it in several other videos.
I've put a link above and in the description below.
However, by way of a brief background, Western Sahara lies on the western coast of north Africa.
Colonised by Spain in the 19th century,
in the 1950s and 60s Madrid came under pressure to decolonize the area.
But as well as an indigenous independence movement, the Polisario Front,
the territory was also claimed by neighbouring Morocco and Mauritania.
In 1974, they referred the matter to the International Court of Justice,
which rejected their claims and reaffirmed the territory's right to self-determination.
Soon afterwards, the Moroccan government organised
a mass march into the territory - forcing Spain to withdraw.
This was completed on 27 February 1976.
The same day, the Polisario Front declared the creation
of an independent Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.
However, the new state never took root as Western Sahara was by now
under Moroccan and Mauritanian occupation.
While Mauritania withdrew in 1979,
Morocco consolidated its control on the ground over the following decade - establishing a
fortified sand wall across most of the territory to keep out Polisario forces.
However, despite its best efforts to claim sovereignty,
no country recognised its claim to Western Sahara.
In 1988, Morocco and Polisario reached a UN-brokered agreement
to hold a referendum offering a choice between independence and Moroccan rule.
Three years later,
the UN Security Council established a mission to oversee a ceasefire and arrange the vote.
But the referendum never happened.
While, officially, this was prevented by differences over who should have a right
to participate in the vote, Morocco had by now changed its mind.
In 2006, it unveiled an autonomy proposal offering Western Sahara extensive self-rule,
but with Morocco handling its defence and foreign affairs.
Although the plan received some limited support, most notably from France, the
general international position was that the people of Western Sahara continue to enjoy the right to
self-determination and that the referendum should proceed as per UN Security Council resolutions.
Despite this, Morocco continued its diplomatic
offensive to win support for its claim to the territory.
This has recently started to produce some significant results.
Since the end of 2019, over 15 countries have opened consulates in Western Sahara.
It was against this backdrop that the White House announced, on 10 December 2020,
that President Trump had recognised Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara.
Stating that the US Government no longer believed that independence was a feasible option,
the proclamation made it clear that Washington now saw
Morocco's autonomy proposal as the only basis for a just and lasting solution.
Additionally, and to cement the decision,
it was also announced that the US would open a consulate in the territory.
Needless to say, the announcement is hugely significant.
For a start, it reverses the long-standing US position supporting the right of the people
of Western Sahara to self-determination and endorsing a plan for a referendum.
It also means that the United States is now the only Western country
to recognise Morocco's sovereignty.
More broadly, it potentially turns the whole dispute on its head.
With US support the push for the autonomy proposal could now really take root.
All this prompts the question as to why Trump did it?
Simply put, it was tied to his re-election efforts.
The fundamental foreign policy plank of the campaign was securing Arab state recognition
of Israel - something that played incredibly well with key elements of his base.
In August 2020, the United Arab Emirates recognised Israel - becoming only the
fourth member of the Arab League to do so, after Egypt, Palestine and Jordan.
In September, Bahrain followed. And then Sudan, in October.
In this context, the recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara
was the carrot Trump offered Morocco in return for recognising Israel.
Of course, the decision came after the vote.
In this regard, rather than as a way to win the election, it instead became part of his legacy.
Indeed, these recognitions may well come to be seen as Trump's most significant
foreign policy achievements.
But unlike the other recognitions,
which were widely hailed, this one produced very mixed reactions.
Obviously, Morocco was delighted - even going so far as to post pictures of the
US ambassador in Rabat deleting the line on the map separating Morocco and Western Sahara.
It also posted messages of support from a few other countries - increasing suspicions
that others may now follow Washington's lead.
However, most other countries that spoke up signalled that they in fact
distanced themselves from the decision.
Some, including Britain, while welcoming Morocco's recognition of Israel nevertheless stressed that
their positions on the right of self-determination for the people of Western Sahara was unchanged.
Even France, while again expressing support for Morocco's proposals for autonomy,
stated that it continues to support a political solution within the framework
of international law and in accordance with UN Security Council resolutions.
Some others, such as South Africa, condemned the decision in no uncertain terms;
arguing that it represented a violation of international law.
But some of the strongest criticism came from within the United States.
Indeed, there was even outright anger from a number of senior Republican figures.
James Baker, a former Secretary of State who served as UN envoy on the Western Sahara,
accused trump of having cynically traded away the
rights of self-determination of the people of Western Sahara.
John Bolton, the former US National Security Adviser under Trump said the decision had been
made for very narrow political purposes and argued that the Israel-Morocco deal would
still have been possible without abandoning 30 years of US policy on Western Sahara.
Even Jim Inhofe, the staunchly Republican chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
agreed - calling the decision "shocking and deeply disappointing".
More widely, the move has raised fears that it will lead to renewed fighting in the territory -
especially given Polisario's recent announcement that it's ended the 29-year ceasefire.
So, given all this, can anything be done about it?
In terms of external steps to reverse the decision,
the room for manoeuvre is extremely limited.
First and foremost, decisions on recognition are a sovereign right of state.
Even though it has wider international effects, it's essentially an internal matter.
Of course, this is not to say that the decision can't be politically or legally challenged.
But the options for this are limited and would have little, if any, real effect.
A Security Council resolution condemning the move is just impossible.
The United States would veto it.
And while a General Assembly resolution might be achievable,
and would certainly carry a degree of moral weight, it also is unenforceable.
The United States could simply ignore it.
The same applies to legal routes.
For instance, an effort could be made to secure an advisory opinion from the International
Court of Justice on US recognition - a step that requires a resolution from the General Assembly.
But even if the issue made it to the Court, and the Court agreed to take it up,
any decision would merely be advisory.
Again, the US could simply ignore it.
And even a follow-up resolution from the General Assembly could also then be cast aside.
The most realistic option is for other friendly countries to apply
diplomatic pressure on the incoming administration to rescind the decision.
But even if this were to happen, how likely
is it that the Biden Administration would in fact reverse course?
At this stage, it's unclear what they think.
So far, the transition team has been notably quiet on Trump's decision.
But what we can say is that any decision to rescind the move
is perhaps not as straightforward as it may seem.
From a legal perspective, there are likely to be two main differing views.
The first is that such a major decision on sovereignty cannot,
and should not, be subject to the whims of different administrations.
Now that the United States has recognised Morocco's sovereignty,
it should abide by that decision unless and until Morocco agrees otherwise.
In other words, now that Western Sahara is regarded as Morocco's sovereign territory,
it's incumbent on the US to treat the matter as an internal
issue and respect Morocco's territorial integrity.
The other view is that Trump's move goes against basic principles of international
law concerning the non-recognition of territories taken by force.
It also disregards the decision of the International Court of Justice,
ignores relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions
and subverts an internationally agreed settlement process.
It therefore can, and should, be rescinded - as
difficult and embarrassing as it would undoubtedly be for the United States
to admit that the President had made a fundamentally wrong and unjust decision.
But there's also a political dimension to the problem.
It has to be remembered that Trump's decision on
Western Sahara was a central plank of Morocco's recognition of Israel.
And it's this that will matter most to US voters - far more than Western Sahara.
If a decision to rescind the recognition of Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara were
to be followed by a decision by Morocco to rescind its recognition of Israel, this would inevitably
be presented by Biden's opponents as a diplomatic failure that had weakened a key US ally.
Of course, one could argue that Biden has a degree of bipartisan latitude on the issue
given the senior Republicans who have criticised trump's decision.
Likewise, others have argued that Morocco wouldn't in fact rescind its recognition of Israel;
especially given that the two countries have long actually had good unofficial ties.
Nevertheless, it would be a politically risky move early in his presidency.
But even if Biden doesn't rescind a decision, there's still some latitude to correct things.
Trump's decision actually has two parts to it.
One part is the recognition of Morocco's sovereignty.
The other is the decision to abandon the call for a settlement based on a referendum.
While the United States may now recognise Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara, and can
even support the autonomy proposal as a basis for a settlement, it can still choose to support the
call for an ongoing political process that offers the people a chance to vote on their future.
It would certainly take a few diplomatic and legal contortions, but it is certainly possible.
After all, although it hasn't recognised Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara,
France nevertheless accepts Morocco's autonomy proposal as a basis for discussion;
all the while supporting a political solution in accordance with UN Security Council resolutions.
President Trump's decision to recognise Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara as
part of a deal that saw Morocco recognise Israel represents a fundamental change of US policy.
Not only does it go against various UN resolutions,
it sets the US apart from the wider international community, which continues to support a
settlement based on a free and fair expression of self-determination with independence as an option.
Ultimately, however, there's little that can be done about it.
Legally and politically, the ability of outside actors to
change the decision is extremely limited.
Moreover, and leaving aside the debate about whether the US can rescind the move,
it also carries significant domestic costs.
That said, even if it doesn't rescind the decision, the new administration could still
continue to support a peaceful settlement within the framework of UN resolutions
and a free and fair expression of the will of the people of Western Sahara.
In the meantime, there's no doubt that President Trump's decision - a move made
for narrow political gain - has made the search for a settlement of this
long-standing issue that much harder.
The question now is what does an incoming President Biden do about it?
I hope you found that interesting. If so, here are some more videos that you might like.
And don't forget to Like, Subscribe and turn on notifications bell
to be alerted when I upload new videos.
I post new ones every Friday.
Thanks so much for watching and see you in the next one.