Security Council Resolution 2797, adopted on October 31, 2025, marks a decisive turning point in the Western Sahara issue while also revealing a peculiar maneuver: Algeria's attempt to manipulate the final text before its publication. The United Nations Secretariat confirmed that the exceptional 24-day delay in the text's release was due to Algeria's persistent interventions. Algeria objected to the Arabic translation of the phrase"the parties" and worked behind the scenes to replace it with "the two parties." This move aimed to influence the resolution's meaning by erasing Algiers' direct responsibility in the conflict and attempting to reduce the political process to a dialogue between Morocco and the Polisario Front.
The members of the Security Council expressed their irritation at the Algerian pressure exerted on Secretariat staff, maneuvers which notably hindered the official publication of the text for more than three weeks. Ultimately, these attempts failed. The resolution was published in the six official UN languages, retaining the phrase"the parties," clearly confirming, once again, that the political process involves four actors (Morocco, the Polisario Front, Mauritania, and Algeria), not two, as Algiers had hoped. The resolution mentions Algeria and the Polisario Front only once. This establishes a perfect equivalence between the two entities and confirms Algeria's status as a party to the conflict, on equal footing with the Polisario Front. The adoption of the resolution by eleven votes in favor, with no votes against and three abstentions, constituted a further setback for Algiers, which chose not to participate in the vote. The Russian veto, long brandished by Algerian proxies, never materialized, allowing the text to easily pass the required threshold. This adoption enshrines autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty as the most feasible solution and specifies that negotiations must be conducted based on Morocco's autonomy proposal. The resolution thus definitively rules out the referendum option and refocuses the UN framework on the only initiative deemed credible and practicable. Consequently, having completely lost the battle, Algeria has since been resorting to semantic maneuvering and elbowing its way through, including within the Security Council. It's pathetic, to say the least.
The adopted and published text provides further essential clarification. For the Security Council, the true state party involved in the conflict is Algeria. By referring to"all parties" and never to "two parties," the Council confirms that negotiations must include Algiers and not be limited to discussions between Rabat and the separatist movement. The parties are called upon to engage in discussions based on the autonomy plan and without preconditions, thus precluding any Algerian attempt to impose new prerequisites. The Secretary-General must also submit, within six months, a strategic review of the mission's mandate, taking into account the results of future negotiations. Algeria may try to stall, but time is running out.
Meanwhile, the failure of Algeria's attempts to amend the text illustrates its now complete diplomatic isolation. By seeking to replace"the parties" with "the two parties," Algiers attempted to manipulate the UN framework to obscure its role. The faithful publication of the original text therefore constitutes a clear repudiation.
Sterile Counterattacks
Algeria's actions are also part of a long history of distorting reality. While the resolution was being adopted in New York, Algiers pursued a full-scale diplomatic offensive aimed at influencing the UN resolution on the Sahara by attempting to include a reference to a broader proposal attributed to the Polisario Front. Presented as a counterweight to the Moroccan autonomy plan by Amar Bendjama, the Algerian regime's representative to the UN, this impromptu initiative was met with a complete lack of official basis and international support. Despite sustained activity within the UN and the breaking of the silence procedure initiated by the United States, which signaled the end of amendments, no member of the Security Council supported the Algerian approach, which was quickly perceived as an attempt to disrupt a text now structured around the autonomy plan presented by Morocco.
Read also: Algeria reacts to resolution 2797 with lies and denial
This last-minute strategy ultimately backfired on Algiers. Marginalized from the negotiations after persisting in a position deemed rigid and unrealistic, Algeria had no choice but to boycott the vote on Resolution 2797. By clearly reaffirming the autonomy plan as the only serious and credible basis for a lasting settlement, the Security Council enshrined an international consensus that the Algerian maneuver failed to undermine. The failure of this attempt to alter the text marked yet another setback for Algiers and confirmed the strengthening of Morocco's position on this issue.
Be that as it may, the proponents of Algerian diplomacy persisted in their perversion. In an interview/reaction given to the Algerian public channel AL24 News on November 3, Ahmed Attaf, the Algerian Minister of Foreign Affairs, attempted to downplay the historical significance of Resolution 2797. Attaf launched into a series of denials: distorting the role of the major powers that overwhelmingly supported the text, making unfounded accusations against Rabat, but above all, falsely claiming that the resolution provided for a referendum, even though the word does not appear anywhere in the document.
Even more seriously, the minister reiterated that the resolution calls on both parties, Morocco and the Polisario Front, to negotiate. However, the Security Council speaks of"parties," specifically mentioning Algeria, thus dispelling the fiction of an observer role that it had maintained for decades. Attaf's insistence on preserving the illusion of only two parties comes at a time when Algeria is being held accountable for half a century of colossal expenditures, amounting to several hundred billion dollars, committed to supporting the Polisario Front.
It is in this same twisted spirit that Attaf himself went so far as to offer to mediate between Morocco and the Polisario Front. This occurred on November 18, 2025, during a press conference. By attempting to present itself as a neutral and, suddenly, benevolent actor, Algiers is trying to mask its own involvement in the conflict. This did not, however, prevent Ahmed Attaf from spreading his venom by claiming that the resolution endorsed neither the Moroccan position nor Morocco's sovereignty over the Sahara. This is obviously false. He asserted that the UN had not taken a position on the basis of the negotiations or their outcome, while insisting on self-determination as the only possible path. Clearly, the final text, now available in six languages if needed, will need to be reviewed. This discrepancy between the facts and the Algerian discourse is nothing more than an attempt to politically rewrite the resolution, intended to preserve the image of the regime.
Deciding today to withdraw from the conflict by presenting itself as a concerned neighbor or feigning to play a mediating role conceals a repositioning imposed by diplomatic realities and a maneuver designed to manage a crushing defeat that has become difficult to hide. This is also the final maneuver of Algeria, a non-permanent member of the Security Council, which tried with all its might, and beyond what is permissible, to halt the historic advance of autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty. The Algiers regime has not only failed, but is leaving the Security Council on December 31st, humiliated.
