Despite some recent optimism and new talks starting on 18 June, the conflict in Western Sahara – with its heavy continuing costs on all the parties – won’t be resolved without a fundamental change in the UN Security Council’s approach.The International Crisis Group releases two reports on the conflict today. (11-JUNE-07)

Based on an alert received from the International Crisis Group today, this article has been dited for republication here by HRH F / Niels Jacob Harbitz.

The first of the two reports; Western Sahara: Out of the Impasse, examines the long-running stalemate between Morocco, the Polisario Front – which has been fighting for independence for over 30 years – and Algeria, focusing in particular on the role played by the UN Security Council. The second report, Western Sahara: The Cost of the Conflict, addresses the human, political and economic price of the impasse. For the peoples concerned the costs have been varying degrees of displacement, exile, isolation, poverty and denial of political freedom; for the countries, there have been, variously, financial and diplomatic costs, slower national development, and border security tensions.

Gareth Evans 100.jpgUN is part of the problem
-There are vested interests in the status quo, and most of the leading actors have underestimated or ignored its costs, says Crisis Group President Gareth Evans, right. -But when they are understood, the case for finally resolving this conflict becomes overwhelming. The combination of Morocco’s recent proposal of a Sahara autonomous region, the Polisario Front’s counter-proposal of independence with guarantees for Moroccan interests and the Security Council’s 30 April resolution calling for negotiations between the parties, has been hailed as a promising breakthrough. However, the underlying dynamics of the conflict have not changed, and the formal positions of Morocco and the Polisario Front are still far apart. The UN has unfortunately been part of the problem: it has insisted, understandably, on treating the conflict as a case of decolonisation entitling the Sahrawi people to self-determination, but at the same time it has not insisted on the necessary referendum, thus allowing Morocco to block the proper exercise of this right.

For the Security Council, it is an either-or situation
The Security Council has just two choices. It must discharge in full the responsibility it assumed to secure the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara. Or it must accept that it cannot and encourage Morocco, the Polisario Front and Algeria to resolve matters among themselves on whatever basis they can. -The Security Council should not keep fudging this issue, says Crisis Group’s Middle East and North Africa Director Robert Malley. -Either it must find the political will to persuade Morocco to agree to a referendum including the option of independence. Or it should let the three main parties negotiate the terms of a settlement for themselves, without prejudicing its outcome in any manner.

Contacts: Andrew Stroehlein (Brussels) 32 (0) 2 541 1635
Kimberly Abbott (Washington) 1 202 785 1601
To contact Crisis Group media please click here
*Read the full Crisis Group reports on our website: http://www.crisisgroup.org

The International Crisis Group (Crisis Group) is an independent, non-profit, non-governmental organisation covering over 50 crisis-affected countries and territories across four continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.