The Polisario Front welcomed the statements of the Algerian Foreign Minister, Ahmed Attaf, regarding his country's readiness to mediate the alleged conflict in the Western Sahara. Its Foreign Ministry official, Mohamed Yeslem Beiset, was quick to praise the initiative during the opening of a forum supporting the Front, stressing that the invitation reflects a will for a solution and responds to what he described as the"requirements of a just and lasting settlement," before pointing out that "the Front's acceptance of any mediation remains contingent on its position within the UN framework and its reliance on the relevant Security Council resolutions."

However, this friendly response to the Algerian offer has raised questions among those following the manufactured conflict, who believe that the Polisario Front is attempting, through this stance, to bolster the political and diplomatic nature of its relationship with Algeria and legitimize its intervention in the matter. Observers noted that “the swift welcome reflects the Front’s continued reliance on Algerian support and its attempt to steer the discussion in directions outside the realm of political realism imposed by regional and international developments.”

Analysts believe that the mediation initiative is nothing more than an attempt to distance Algeria from its status as a major party in the conflict, by marketing it as a neutral party despite the facts confirming its direct role in fueling tension and prolonging the dispute within the Maghreb region. According to the same readings, this would “entrench a political discourse and practices that do not serve the efforts to calm the situation or the endeavors to build a stable regional climate based on cooperation and integration, instead of alignment and fueling division.”

Achilles' heel

In this regard, Daddai Bibout, a political activist and researcher in contemporary and modern history, said that the observer is perplexed by the fluctuation of the positions of the Algerian authorities with the fluctuation of the mood of international decision-making circles regarding the issue of the Moroccan Sahara, without regard for what it has accumulated in terms of initiatives, maneuvers and firm or rigid positions towards the Kingdom, until the UN Resolution No. 2797 was issued, which considered the Moroccan autonomy initiative as a basic basis for any just, serious and negotiated political solution regarding it, in a way that restores respect for international peace and security and responds to the aspirations of the inhabitants of the Moroccan Sahara, including those who have been forced to remain in the Tindouf camps for fifty years.

In a statement to the Hespress electronic newspaper, Bibout added that the matter is not about envying the rulers of Al-Muradia for their ability to come up with ideas whose intentions are difficult to believe, but rather about calling for reason and conscience to dismantle the foundations of those proposals and test their credibility after a long history of maneuvers and offenses against the Moroccan neighbor, who has remained committed to the ethics of neighborliness, the values of humanity and high diplomacy, avoiding directing political blows below the belt.

The political actor stressed that accepting the Algerian state as a mediator in a file that it has made the “Achilles’ heel” of its foreign policy since the mid-seventies, after it financed armed militias and allocated an important part of its economy to support a proxy war against Morocco, is illogical; because whenever the voice of recklessness and glorification of war subsides, Algerian diplomacy puts forward proposals that are more frightening than direct involvement in hostilities against its northern neighbor.

Bibut pointed out that Algeria’s call for the United Nations to divide the Sahara region does not reflect diplomatic maturity or awareness of the mechanisms for resolving conflicts peacefully, but rather reveals a frantic pursuit of geo-strategic gains, the least of which is to seize control of the Dakhla-Oued Ed-Dahab region to manage its internal crises and emerge as the victor from a war that was not its battle. The evidence, according to him, is manifested in “attempts to infiltrate the Sahel and the Sahara to satisfy the sadism of the military.”

The same spokesperson stated that Algeria’s rejection of the international community’s initiative led by the United States last October, its abstention from voting on the Security Council resolution, and its escalation towards France and Spain during the last two years, do not help it to seek the favor of the international community or to appear as a neutral mediator, especially since it did not respond to King Mohammed VI’s friendly letters with a reply that would resolve the dispute and uphold unity and the building of a strong Arab Maghreb. Rather, it remained attached to an old settlement record in the Polisario file, before it severed ties with Morocco when it was reminded of the Kabyle issue and their historical aspirations.

The person concerned with the Sahara conflict continued, saying that the late call for mediation is nothing more than an Algerian concern imposed by the current international context that supports realistic solutions based on the rules of international law, and backed by broad international support and a firmly established popular legitimacy among the inhabitants of the Sahara with its various tribes and political and civil components, who have not lost their faith in the unity of the homeland despite attempts to undermine security and stability.

Biboute concluded his remarks to Hespress by emphasizing that what is most perplexing is the Polisario’s continued inherited subservience to the Algerian decision-maker, in the absence of any awakening that would unite the Sahrawis on their land and end the ongoing tragedy. The opportunity for reconciliation available today under Security Council Resolution 2797 will not be repeated, and any attempt to obstruct it will mean aborting the future of the Maghreb and the aspirations of its peoples, prolonging the period of tyranny within Algeria, and burying the dream of the Sahrawis to return with dignity to their homeland within a political and social embrace rich in its diversity and capable of facing challenges with determination and perseverance.

phased tactic

For his part, Mohamed Fadel Bekada, head of the Center for Political and Strategic Studies of the “Sahrawis for Peace” movement, noted that the post-October 31st phase is radically different from what came before it; the Sahara issue has moved from managing a conflict that is proceeding at a slow pace and has no clear horizon to an advanced stage of resolution that has become clearer, based on international guidance signals and a gradual implementation plan, the basis of which is the historic Security Council Resolution No. 2797.

He added: “Since Algeria was and still is the main party, albeit indirectly, in confronting Morocco, which seeks to settle its historical border issues, Minister Ahmed Attaf announced his country’s desire to play a mediating role between Morocco and the Polisario Front, which the latter naturally welcomed.”

In a statement to Hespress, Boukada emphasized that discussing this initiative necessitates raising legitimate questions for the Algerian regime. These include President Tebboune's rejection of any Arab mediation for reconciliation with Morocco in October 2021, and the severing of relations and closure of all borders after accusing Morocco of what Algeria termed"hostile acts." Furthermore, the official Algerian discourse, until recently, considered Morocco a"colonial power" and the Sahara "occupied territory," raising questions about the rapid shift in position, whether it was forced or driven by strategic calculations related to managing the issue.

In this regard, the head of the Center for Political and Strategic Studies of the “Sahrawis for Peace” movement pointed out that these changes may be related to the American project in the region, after the envoy of US President Donald Trump to the Middle East, Steve Wittkopf, spoke about the possibility of reaching a “peace agreement” between Morocco and Algeria in no more than two months, which reinforces the hypothesis that the Algerian leadership is looking for a face-saving mechanism before resuming relations, especially since Morocco has not taken any similar escalatory step.

The same spokesperson continued that the Algerian regime has become more aware, albeit belatedly, of the nature of the geopolitical and security siege surrounding it to the south in Mali and Niger, to the east in Libya, and to the north with the French diplomatic shifts and the cancellation of the migration agreement, and with the approaching end of the contracts for exporting Algerian gas to Spain, in the context of the European response following the adoption of the positions of Paris and Madrid supporting the Moroccan autonomy initiative, in addition to the field developments along the Moroccan security wall and the growing strategic partnership with Mauritania.

Baqada pointed out that this diplomatic and political accumulation, including the historic meeting at the Royal Palace in Casablanca between King Mohammed VI and Mauritanian President Mohamed Ould Ghazouani in their traditional attire, and the subsequent institutional, military and security changes in Nouakchott, are all indicators that reveal the extent of the transformations taking place in the region, and constitute an objective context for understanding the motives of the “Algerian mediation initiative,” which seems closer to an attempt to cover up the retreat in front of the domestic public opinion that has become accustomed to hearing a speech that says that Algeria does not compromise on its positions.

The same source explained that what Algerian diplomacy is pursuing today is not so much about serving the settlement process as it is reflecting an urgent need to realign its relations with Western and Arab powers and avoid international isolation in the face of a new reality emerging around a realistic and practical solution to the Western Sahara conflict under Moroccan sovereignty. Mediation, in his estimation, “is merely a transitional phase to adapt to geopolitical and legal shifts that have become entrenched in the Maghreb region.”

Mohamed Fadel Bakada concluded that the background of Minister Attaf’s statements is consistent with this shift; as it aims first and foremost to protect Algerian interests before any other consideration, at a time when the balance of diplomatic, legal and political power is clearly leaning towards the option of autonomy as the only viable solution, which makes the bet today on opening a new page entitled regional stability and joint development, instead of wasting more time in a conflict that has been overtaken by international facts and developments.