One of the lesser known criticisms of the recent "Odyssey' film is that parts were shot in the Western Sahara. I believe Emily Wilson herself was critical of this.
I've never quite understood the nature of this criticism. At best I'd describe it as deeply intellectualized tribalism. But I think I'm being a little too kind.
It's fascinating. Basically the entire world's phosphate comes from this (it has 70% of the world's proven reserves). No country on earth recognizes Morocco's claims over this Saharawi land. At least they didn't until 2020 when Trump became the first in exchange for Morocco normalizing relations with Israel. The case has been taken to international court multiple times and always ruled against Morocco's claims.
Despite basically the whole world recognizing this unjust occupation, neither the Soviets, the US, Europe, nor China cared to do anything and disrupt this crucial aspect of the global fertilizer industry. The only allies the Saharawi had was Algeria.
Dakhla is actually pretty tourist-friendly, and spending time there will quickly do away with the notion that nobody lives in Western Sahara. It's well-known for kiteboarding and windsurfing, since it's got pretty consistent wind and surf and a hot-comfortably dry climate. Pretty heavy police presence and you're supporting Moroccan arguable-occupation by heading there, though, so it's a tradeoff.
A series of enormous sand walls separate the morocco-occupied region from the sahrawi controlled region. These are one of the largest minefields in the world.
It's impressive to look at satellite images of this. Just a huge sand wall, with hundreds and hundreds of military outposts.
It is interesting that Western Sahara never developed piracy enterprises similar to Somalia. Is it some combination of:
* stronger government control from Morocco than Somalia has had internally
* little indigenous sea-faring populations outside of controllable cities
* sea lanes with less hospitable currents
* something else?
I drove through, and the map on vehicle showed it as a separate country. Many, many people warned me the military in Morocco would be pissed and likely not let me in.
They seriously do not want people talking about it being a separate country, or occupied or anything like that.
I cut that corner off the map before I went into Morocco, and at more than one checkpoint they looked at it super carefully.
A couple of misconceptions about Western Sahara I've seen pop up over the past few days:
- most (90%) of Morocco's phosphate mining is done in non-disputed territories (it's mentioned in the article). The most disputed resource is actually fish, and to some degree predicted oil reserves.
- Tribal allegiances to the Moroccan crown date back from way before colonial times. Today, part of the Sahrawi population supports Morocco and another part supports independence.
- There are efforts on both sides to bolster their numbers: Moroccans emigrate to the disputed territories, and Polisario brings in migrants to its refugee camps. That's partly why organising a referendum is almost impossible: no-one agrees on who's allowed to vote.
- Morocco and Algeria (/ the Ottomans before Algeria) have been fighting over access to southwards trade for centuries. Geopolitically, the endgame for Algeria is to encircle Morocco.
- Polisario itself is quite antidemocratic. Only two leaders in 50 years of existence, and lots of corruption.
- Morocco's plan is actually of "advanced autonomy", which would let Sahrawis get their own parliament, amongst other things.
- Today, Sahrawis on the Moroccan controlled areas basically enjoy a welfare state with free transport, no VAT, and many other benefits.
All in all, it's far from the colonial story we'd reflexively apply onto this situation. I'm biased as I am Moroccan. In my opinion, Morocco is already a deeply multi cultural country, and we need a stable political environment to unite.
This conflict keeps the North Africa region one of the least economically integrated areas in the world. It prevents us from building sustainable people power against oligarchic and authoritarian powers, who are at least just as bad on the Algeria/Polisario side as they are on the Moroccan side (Algeria and Polisario are military dictatorship, Morocco is a constitutional monarchy, pick your poison).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_March exactly the same thing as what they tried to pull off in Ceuta last week, and with the support of the US. Since the occupation began, Morocco settled hundreds of thousands of its own people. Not surprising that another settler colonial state, Israel, is Morocco's ally.
I visited the Saharawi refugees camps around 15 years ago or so in the south-west corner of Algeria.
They have been living in a limbo for 50 years at this point, but they still feel like they will be able to go back to their land therefore they don't really settle there (they are also in the middle of a desert). Some people gave up on the idea to return to their land (but still feel temporary), others were really frustrated with the fact nothing moved and you could see this frustration at the annual demo in front of the "Muro de la Verguenza", which is the "wall" erected by the Moroccans with landmines and strongholds along the front line.
There is a lot of simplistic, one-sided information in this thread. Truth is it's a complicated matter to decide how long and how strongly one has to hold a piece of territory before it is considered legitimately theirs. And what about language or cultural differences? Does that change things?
Should the Canaries be Spanish or African? Catalunya? Basque country? Should Gibraltar be British? Sicily Italian? The list goes on and on. In all these cases you will find people who will hold opposing opinions on this.
Moroccans firmly believe Western Sahara to be historically Moroccan. They also believe that Ceuta and Melilla are Moroccan, despite the fact they've been in Iberian hands for 500 years. They are called the colonized cities of Ceuta and Melilla on the TV and Radio.
The Moroccans I spoke to believe the government looked the other way to show displeasure at Spain because a Spanish minister visited Algeria to buy gas and oil. Obviously with the Iran war, Algeria's revenues and importance has grown.
Morocco and Algeria both view a side gaining influence as a zero-sum: if it's good for Morocco it is bad for Algerian interests and vice versa.
Meanwhile if all the north African countries united and built international infrastructure and cooperated like the UAE did, the entire southern Mediterranean coastal region would have been much better off.
One thing is clear: This cold war is a total waste of potential and a socioeconomic poison.
20 comments
[ 2.2 ms ] story [ 12.5 ms ] threadDespite basically the whole world recognizing this unjust occupation, neither the Soviets, the US, Europe, nor China cared to do anything and disrupt this crucial aspect of the global fertilizer industry. The only allies the Saharawi had was Algeria.
Surprisingly, the best researched documentary I've seen on this came from a Youtuber called Cogito: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T2ha4a_AuE
EDIT: oh yeah and ofc Kissinger is involved in this :(
It's impressive to look at satellite images of this. Just a huge sand wall, with hundreds and hundreds of military outposts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moroccan_Western_Sahara_wall
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Western_sahara_walls_moro...
https://www.tiktok.com/@mrcodydahler/video/76701977955375710...
https://www.ynetnews.com/opinions-analysis/article/byrfqojbz...
They seriously do not want people talking about it being a separate country, or occupied or anything like that.
I cut that corner off the map before I went into Morocco, and at more than one checkpoint they looked at it super carefully.
- most (90%) of Morocco's phosphate mining is done in non-disputed territories (it's mentioned in the article). The most disputed resource is actually fish, and to some degree predicted oil reserves.
- Tribal allegiances to the Moroccan crown date back from way before colonial times. Today, part of the Sahrawi population supports Morocco and another part supports independence.
- There are efforts on both sides to bolster their numbers: Moroccans emigrate to the disputed territories, and Polisario brings in migrants to its refugee camps. That's partly why organising a referendum is almost impossible: no-one agrees on who's allowed to vote.
- Morocco and Algeria (/ the Ottomans before Algeria) have been fighting over access to southwards trade for centuries. Geopolitically, the endgame for Algeria is to encircle Morocco.
- Polisario itself is quite antidemocratic. Only two leaders in 50 years of existence, and lots of corruption.
- Morocco's plan is actually of "advanced autonomy", which would let Sahrawis get their own parliament, amongst other things.
- Today, Sahrawis on the Moroccan controlled areas basically enjoy a welfare state with free transport, no VAT, and many other benefits.
All in all, it's far from the colonial story we'd reflexively apply onto this situation. I'm biased as I am Moroccan. In my opinion, Morocco is already a deeply multi cultural country, and we need a stable political environment to unite.
This conflict keeps the North Africa region one of the least economically integrated areas in the world. It prevents us from building sustainable people power against oligarchic and authoritarian powers, who are at least just as bad on the Algeria/Polisario side as they are on the Moroccan side (Algeria and Polisario are military dictatorship, Morocco is a constitutional monarchy, pick your poison).
https://www.livescience.com/64677-stone-structures-discovere...
They have been living in a limbo for 50 years at this point, but they still feel like they will be able to go back to their land therefore they don't really settle there (they are also in the middle of a desert). Some people gave up on the idea to return to their land (but still feel temporary), others were really frustrated with the fact nothing moved and you could see this frustration at the annual demo in front of the "Muro de la Verguenza", which is the "wall" erected by the Moroccans with landmines and strongholds along the front line.
Should the Canaries be Spanish or African? Catalunya? Basque country? Should Gibraltar be British? Sicily Italian? The list goes on and on. In all these cases you will find people who will hold opposing opinions on this.
Moroccans firmly believe Western Sahara to be historically Moroccan. They also believe that Ceuta and Melilla are Moroccan, despite the fact they've been in Iberian hands for 500 years. They are called the colonized cities of Ceuta and Melilla on the TV and Radio.
The Moroccans I spoke to believe the government looked the other way to show displeasure at Spain because a Spanish minister visited Algeria to buy gas and oil. Obviously with the Iran war, Algeria's revenues and importance has grown.
Morocco and Algeria both view a side gaining influence as a zero-sum: if it's good for Morocco it is bad for Algerian interests and vice versa.
Meanwhile if all the north African countries united and built international infrastructure and cooperated like the UAE did, the entire southern Mediterranean coastal region would have been much better off.
One thing is clear: This cold war is a total waste of potential and a socioeconomic poison.
Inside Morocco's Secret War for Western Sahara
https://youtu.be/-T2ha4a_AuE