Rabat - A high-profile event took place in London on May 12, 2016, entitled “The Anti-Corruption Summit,” with important international figures attending from all over the world representing governments, civil society and NGOs.

David Cameron, the British Prime Minister and the host of this function, mentioned, in camera, that Afghanistan and Nigeria, two Muslim countries; one poor and in the throes of extremist violence and the other one rich but, also, unstable politically speaking, are the most corrupt countries in the world: “fantastically corrupt countries.”

As for the American Secretary of State John Kerry he said to the press that corruption tears apart the very fabric of society and is as dangerous as extremism and repeated that in his opening remarks:

"We are fighting a battle, all of us. Corruption, writ large, is as much of an enemy, because it destroys nation states, as some of the extremists we are fighting or the other challenges we face."

However, one wonders, quite rightly, why hold this meeting now, bearing in mind that the West has known for ages that corruption is as lethal and dangerous to world stability as violent extremism.

Honestly, this summit sounds more about tax evasion and tax havens, in the wake of the Panama Papers scandal and its damaging effect on the economies and reputation of democratic countries than combating efficiently the scourge of corruption worldwide, which is, very much, a huge octopus with tentacles reaching out everywhere evil is.

London’s reputation hampered by money-laundering practices

In an op-ed published by the very serious British newspaper The Guardian, David Cameron presented the issue of corruption, prior to the summit, in the following terms:

“Corruption is the cancer at the heart of so many of the world’s problems. It destroys jobs, traps the poorest in poverty, weakens security and even undermines the sports we love. The longer I have been in this job, the more I have come to the conclusion that the things we want to see – countries moving out of poverty, people benefiting from their nation’s natural resources, the growth of genuine democracies – will never be possible without an all-out assault on corruption.”

To show to the world that Britain means business, Cameron is proposing to introduce a new corporate money-laundering offence whereby companies are obliged to register.

For many critics, however, London and its famous financial hub in the City, have always been the biggest money-laundering site in the world, encouraging dictators, criminals, tax evaders, corrupt officials to bring their dirty money to invest and fructify away from any possible scrutiny, control or instability, especially in their undemocratic environments.

As such, billions of dollars came to London over the years fortifying the British economy and driving, at the same time, property out of the reach of the locals, who many of which, as result, flew the capital because of its unbearable costs not only in property but, also, in food staples and transportation costs. For many Londoners, the rich foreigners are taking control of their city and pushing them to migrate to the provinces.

[caption id="attachment_186463" align="aligncenter" width="679"] Luxury apartments in Central London, UK[/caption]

Donald Toon, the director of economic crime at the National Crime Agency declared to The Times:

“I believe the London property market has been skewed by laundered money. Prices are being artificially driven up by overseas criminals who want to sequester their assets here in the UK.”

The West and double standards

When Baghdad fell to the Americans in 2003 and Paul Bremer assumed occupational authority of Iraq from May 11, 2003 until June 28, 2004, he distributed millions of dollars of bribery money to the Sunni tribes to gain their allegiance to the Pax Americana, showing to the world, quite convincingly, that you can have your cake and eat it, too.

In the Gulf States, corruption is almost as acceptable as if it were a constitutional right. All ruling officials when they are negotiating deals with foreign companies require between 10% and 15% commission, payable in hard currency on a foreign offshore bank account. Most of the companies that do business with Middle Eastern countries come prepared for this and even encourage it to gain contracts. Western governments know very well this practice and often look the other way, giving the impression to the officials that there is nothing wrong with this practice because they know that in the end this money will be invested in their countries in property or different businesses or bonds.

To be honest, both the US (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (1977)) and Britain (UK Bribery Act (2010)) have enacted stringent laws on foreign corruption, with supposedly extra territorial reach, but one wonders to what extent these laws are activated and are efficient in eradicating practices of bribery, corruption and fraud, bearing in mind that these two countries are among the biggest business partners of the Middle Eastern countries.

[caption id="attachment_186464" align="aligncenter" width="677"] 20 Février Moroccan movement denouncing corruption during the Arab Spring[/caption]

For EY organization, the practice of bribery, in the form of kickbacks or backhanders, is still very common in the business arena in the Mideast, in spite of foreign legislation:

As Middle East economies have developed and become increasingly sophisticated, so too have the methods of committing fraud in the region. Despite high profile efforts by governments to combat fraud, bribery and corruption, they remain common in the Middle East. Management boards of organizations vary widely in their approaches to stamping out fraud. Some companies appear willing to tolerate fraud.

In the Middle East, especially among officials, bribes and kickbacks have been made to become a cultural expression of gratitude and thanks ikramiya, besides being a privilege imtiyaz that goes with the office in almost a “constitutional” form. The respondents to the research conducted by EY on this phenomenon, point out that bribery in business is considered legitimate:

“Respondents said that in the Middle East, the practice of bribery had come to be widely regarded as a legitimate way of doing business. They indicated this mindset would be difficult to challenge and pointed out the culture of the region could make identifying a bribe difficult: “In Middle East culture, people are not fully aware of what bribes are. If you refuse a gift it is offensive. There is a lack of awareness of what are gifts and what are bribes. Gifts may be expected during the awarding time, but intentions are misunderstood or misused.””

In 2011, the Arab uprisings called for an immediate change in political practices and philosophy and denounced, in no doubtful terms, the incapacitating corruption, bribery, fraud and nepotism, which were and, still, are in practice today. But, other governments came into power and corruption is still alive and kicking.

In many countries of the world, corruption is used by undemocratic governments to reward their supporters, followers and backers, be they officials in power or political parties and civil society organizations. Corruption is used as a carrot and those who refuse it and denounce its presence get the stick, instead.

Life goes on and so does corruption

An immediate setback to David Cameron’s Anti-Corruption Summit, is the decision of the British Virgin Islands to rebuff his call for British overseas territories and crown dependencies to make public the identity of owners of offshore firms. It must be pointed out that British Virgin Islands, Panama as well as FIFA were not invited to the conference because of their fraudulent history.

At the end of the conference, David Cameron triumphantly declared:

"Today the world has come together in a coalition of the committed to expose, to punish and to drive out corruption."

But, his general remarks did not spell out a precise strategy with field measures to combat corruption, or to be, more specific; he did not come up with a prescription medicine for this ailment, he, himself, called “cancer”:

"the cancer at the heart of so many of the problems we need to tackle in our world"

The results are of this international meeting are definitely meager, they are as follows:

• Global plan to help recover stolen assets;
• Launch of public registers of true company ownership, and
• Property crackdown in London, UK.

So after this one-day conference presented in the British press as a “landmark,” life will go on as usual and so will corruption and fraud.

However, the only hope and beacon of light, in the long fight against corruption, today, is undoubtedly Transparency International, an NGO founded in 1993 and based in Berlin, Germany, that though it is lacking in funds, yet it is very active in denouncing corruption and proposing a pedagogical approach to combat it, in a comprehensive strategy.

You can follow Dr. Mohamed Chtatou on Twitter @Ayurinu

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

The post Story of Insidious Enemy Called Corruption and the Blatant Hypocrisy of the West appeared first on Morocco World News.

By Abdelmohsine El Hallouati

Rabat - In the context of the global fight against the fossil fuel industry, Morocco should not pretend that it does not have a role in the ongoing campaign.

As it demonstrated in the face of the “Arab Spring,” the country is well poised to play its own effective and peaceful part in the ongoing collective effort against oil barons and their malicious practices. Through engaging civil society organizations, raising awareness, and educating its youth, the host of the COP22 can carry its share of the burden in mitigating climate change and preserving democracies from the threats stemming from oil corporations’ dirty cash. Ahead of the November 2016 UN climate change conference in Marrakech, Moroccans need to examine the examples of the Break Free campaigns currently happening around the world and determine their own Moroccan way to “break free.”

The Break Free campaign is a protest movement which aims at exerting pressure on fossil fuel corporations and is taking place in many locations around the globe. In South Africa, for instance, protests broke out in the northeast of the country against the coal mining industry operating in the region. The protests mobilized civil society, coal mining impacted communities, farmers, and NGOs against the climate crises and corruption plaguing the coal mining sector there. The country has in fact seen a massive corruption scandal which involved senior government officials.

The biggest oil producer in Africa, Nigeria, one of numerous examples of countries suffering from oil-related corruption cases, is witnessing a wave of protest actions. Nigeria’s Break Free from fossil fuel campaign began on May 10 in Oloibiri, which houses the nation’s first oil well, and ended on May 12 in Ogoni to denounce the polluting actions, devastation, and poverty which oil extractors leave behind once oil reserves are depleted.

In the United States, Break Free actions are taking place in the form of “peaceful civil disobedience” nationwide. This includes rallies and extends for four full days (from May 12-15). In New Zealand, Australia, and the Philippines, similar demonstrations are occuring as well. The level and scale of the Break Free campaign should be considered by Morocco ahead of its edition of COP.

Given the very tense context in the Middle East and North Africa, calls to protest often are taken for an incitation for unrest of some sort. However, the Moroccan “exception” has always proven to win in times of crises, and climate change presents many of the same political and socio-economic challenges we have faced previously. What prevents our country from taking serious action is the clear lack of education and absence of civil society engagement in the areas of environment and climate change. Additionally, the media, through its various outlets, is still sparing little air time to educational programs to raise awareness about the matter at hand.

Also notable is the complete absence of social media channels targeting youth, the presence of whom is vital. Some skeptics of such campaigns claim that in non-oil producing countries like Morocco,fossil fuel industries do not directly operate in our country. Yet if you simply think about the investments Morocco solicits every year, you will realize that many of them have the potential of originating from fossil fuel industry funding – likely fraudulent. Authorities should encourage responsible, peaceful activities and campaigns. Morocco has, time and again, proven its ability to be a leader in peaceful change in the region and the world, and if these small challenges can be overcome, many emerging countries will look to Morocco as an example.

Though inspired by those already ongoing, our actions should be compatible with our society, mindset, and values. The Moroccan civil society should be involved accordingly in “our own” Break Free campaign. As much as planning for summer camps and other activities matters, organizing events aiming at inculcating environmental and climate change basics and, especially, incorporating them into the summer plans and fun activities will draw wider attention from young citizens, facillitating the process of engaging and mobilizing.

Furthermore, by taking kids to some of the endagered beaches or mountainous areas, where camping is popular during the summer, civil society activists can educate their pupils by allowing them to experience the harm inflicted on their favorite summer retreats firsthand. Civil society leaders, in addition, should ensure that young members of their community be fully sensitized and ready to contribute to conducting “our own” Break Free action, to which we will assign a nickname in Darija (Moroccan Arabic) and inspire our regional neighbors. Even though we do not have coal mines to which to shut down roads, or oil companies to protest against publicly, what will set our Break Free campaign apart is our peaceful, aware, and engaged movement, and that will undoubtedly prove to the world our true commitment to the common cause.

Beyond the actual ominous threat the fossil fuel industry represents to our climate and environment, it also has the potential of undermining democracies by deploying all possible means, including corrupt and fraudulous activities in order to fulfill its ends.

The promising Break Free campaigns around the globe are the only way that those concerned about their democracies being harmed – the world is full of examples of corruption and money laundering related to giant oil operators and involving politicians as the recent Panama Papers clearly show – can counter this rising threat. Morocco should not further itself from the actions happening globally. The country has the potential to join the effort through molbilizing all the different components of its civil society groups, calling upon those accountable for destroying the climate and democracies to leave fossil fuels “in the ground where they belong!”

Photo credit: Takver

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

The post Why Morocco Should Have Its “Own” Break Free Campaign appeared first on Morocco World News.

Rabat - Youth and political science studies have both produced extensive research on youth participation in politics.

The classical approach to youth participation arises from the socialization theories of the 1950s and 1960s, namely those of Eisenstadt (1956), Coleman (1961) and Parsons (1952). These authors define the political participation of young people as the process of their assimilation into the structure of society through internalizing dominant social norms. Youth participation is ensured through their involvement in existing institutions and arrangements. Participation is then seen not as the process of controlling young people and their activities in accordance with the requirements of the state system but is rather about their autonomy or self-fulfillment. However, this theory has been criticized for being biased for perceiving youth as passive recipients of the society’s values.

In the 1990s, a radical shift occurred in youth and political science studies. Youth participation trends differed from those of the 1970s and 1980s. Inglehart (1997) argues that younger generations are participating in politics but in “loose, less hierarchical informal networks and various lifestyle-related sporadic mobilization efforts.” Stolle, Hooghe and Micheletti (2003) also stress young people’s inclination to participate in less bureaucratic and hierarchical organizations.

A study carried out by the British Council (2013) on youth participation in politics in the Arab world showed that young people are disenchanted with and disengaged from the current political structure. The study revealed that the youth voter turnout is very low and does not come close to representing actual youth populations.

Figures of Moroccan youth participation in political parties are far below the global average. Just 1 percent of young people are active in political parties in Morocco. This figure could be explained by the fact that Moroccan youth often associate political parties with corruption and favoritism. Parties are seen as having lost their moral values and forfeited public trust. Another reason for this low participation rate is historical: in the past political participation often meant persecution and jail.

Moroccan young people’s disenchantment with political outlets can be attributed to three main factors: the widespread lack of trust in the structure of established political parties, youths’ frustration at limited chances to engage as key actors in public life and the recent availability of new alternatives of self-expression and political participation.

Political science literature outlines three basic forms of political participation (Chisholm & Kovacheva 2002): traditional participation in institutional politics through elections and political party membership, demonstration activities through street protests and new social movements and civic engagement expressed through involvement in associations and volunteer work.

However, it seems that new political participation patterns are taking place through the use of communication technologies due to young people’s frustration with their limited opportunities to meaningfully engage in public life.

Alternative Patterns of Youth Participation in Morocco

A huge shift has occurred in youth participation in political life. Youth participation has drifted away from traditional forms of participation, such as elections, campaigns and political party membership, that were common in the 1970s and 1980s. Young people are participating in politics but in less bureaucratic and hierarchical organizations. The new patterns of political participation defined by Inglehart (1997) are motivated by many factors in the Moroccan context.

Frustrated with older generations’ dominance in politics and with the corrupt political parties in their country, younger generations in Morocco are breaking down traditional models of participation and are instead establishing new patterns of political participation.

New Patterns of Youth Political Participation

Digital Media: With the availability of new communication technologies and readily accessible media tools, Moroccan young people increasingly rely on new digital media to express themselves and voice their ideas, thus creating new spheres and forms of political and civic participation. Some patterns of public participation that once took place on the street are now occurring in the virtual realm (via social networks); digital activism has also proven capable of mobilizing large numbers of people to demonstrate in the streets.

Religious groups: Increasingly distancing themselves from traditional political establishments and?institutions,?some categories of Moroccan youth have found?alternative?mechanisms, often?with a?religious?dimension, for self expression. Participation in religious groups often takes place in the private sphere and frequently includes the formation of small groups to discuss different societal issues and give youth participants a sense of belonging.

Political self-expression through arts: There is a new tendency for young people to express themselves through graffiti on school walls and public institutions’ external façades. Graffiti is seen as a channel for the youth to voice their opinions often unheard by the political elite, political parties and traditional public institutions.

Social entrepreneurship: Practiced widely in Morocco, social entrepreneurship is becoming a new means for young people to work to solve societal problems. It is one of the fastest growing sectors in NGOs and youth activism, with new programs that aim to achieve social benefits throughout society on a sustainable basis.

Additionally, young people are responding to appeals from organizations with environmental concerns, calling for consumer boycotts and combating sexual abuse of children without necessarily becoming members of relevant organizations or involved in any political outlets.

In the case of Morocco, these patterns are a reflection of the inaccessibility of the existing political process. Moroccan young people, if given the opportunities to be meaningfully involved with political parties, would likely demonstrate high degrees of commitment and engagement in the political process.

Political participation is a fundamental democratic right. Traditional political institutions should help remove existing barriers to youth political participation. From a pragmatic perspective, if young people have the perception that formal political processes are not attractive or accessible, this can shape their attitudes for a lifetime, with potentially long-lasting negative impacts on Morocco’s political culture.

Edited by Kelsey Fish

The post Moroccan Young People Create New Ways to Participate in Politics appeared first on Morocco World News.

Fez - As part of Morocco’s new policy of diversifying its economic and political partners, the royal visit to China comes at a time when Morocco is witnessing a sustained human development. The major objective of this visit is the promotion of investment and trade between the two countries.

After the consolidation of economic, social, and political relations with Africa, India, Europe, Russia and the Gulf States, Morocco is turning to China, which is one of the richest and most developed countries, and the most populated worldwide, with a population of just less than a billion and a half.

With the signing of a number of commercial, social, and cultural agreements between the two countries, China will become one of the largest investors in Morocco in almost all sectors. Last year, Chinese investments in Arab and Islamic countries reached more than $ 64 billion.

Within this context, the Chinese Central Bank has signed with its Moroccan counterpart, Banque du Maroc, a three-year partnership agreement with a grant estimated at $1.53 billion.

The agreements signed during the royal visit will double the size of Chinese investments in Morocco, as well as the volume of trade and cooperation between the two countries, which will contribute to job creation and the promotion of economic, social, and cultural exchanges.

Morocco's vision geared towards strengthening relations with the Republic of China is part of a new strategy to overcome the threshold of cooperation with its traditional partners. This new approach also aims to strengthen cooperation and diversified global partnerships for the creation of huge industrial and commercial projects in areas such as automotive, aviation, infrastructure and manufacturing, as well as health and food security, culture and other vital sectors. This vision of Morocco comes in the wake of political changes facing the world today, especially regarding the strengthening of security, stability and management of regional crises.

Moroccan and Chinese officials signed 15 agreements concerning public-private partnerships. The first one plans for the establishment of an industrial and residential park between Morocco and the Chinese group Haite, which operates in several sectors such as civil and military aviation, aerospace components, energy, mining,  Insurance and Real Estate . This industrial park will be located in the Tangier region, north of Morocco.

Haitea Group also signed a memorandum of understanding with Morocco-China International and BMCE Bank of Africa. This marks the creation of another Sino-Moroccan industrial park, an investment fund of one billion dollars, targeting the sectors of aeronautics, financial, industrial parks and infrastructure, the launch of a fund management company and the strengthening of partnership in the life insurance field in China, the aircraft leasing and technical partnership to initiate a new bank dedicated to the sector of new technologies in China.

The second agreement signed is a cooperation agreement in the field of investment and finance between the Government of Morocco and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC).

An agreement was also sealed between the bus manufacturer Yangtse, the Energy Investment Company (SIE), Marita Group, and Banque Centrale Populaire. It aims for the purchase and construction of an electric bus manufacturing unit in Morocco. This manufacturing unit, which will require an investment of 1.2 billion Dirhams, will manufacture electric buses of the new generation.

The strategic partnership between Morocco and China will also encourage Chinese and Moroccan investors, facilitate the transfer of capital and expertise, and strengthen tourism, particularly after the royal decision to facilitate the travel of Chinese citizens to Morocco, through the abolition of visas, which were in force in the past.

This partnership is a great opportunity for Morocco, for the next phase of bilateral relations will be characterized by the activation of cooperation related to the creation of new businesses, and by accelerating the pace of global political, economic, security and cultural cooperation.

This initiative strengthens the role of Morocco in the world, which has become more present with a leadership increasingly independent in its regional and international geostrategic orientations, whether on the political or commercial levels.

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

The post Promoting Inclusive and Diverse cooperation between Morocco and China appeared first on Morocco World News.

By Yassine Elkaryani

Teaneck, New Jersey - For a year now, I have had conversations with officials from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Department of Homeland Security, the US Department of State, and Congress, and they all seemed to agree that American mosques are a shield against extremism. Yet to my disappointment, none of the officials I spoke with could (wanted to?) offer any concrete assistance to mosques so as they improve their reach and attract more young Muslims or promote a message of peace to the Americans who do not have any encounter with Muslims other than what is showcased on some movies or news about terrorism.

I still believe that American mosques have the right message that America strives for in order to combat extremism. I emphasize the following:

Al Qaida or ISIS are only symptoms of a larger problem. Military and intelligence operations cannot exterminate an ideology that is not bound by geography.

Extremism can only be nullified with another ideology (let us for the sake of this article call it “Moderate Islam”) though I personally believe that there is only one Islam, and that extremism does not have much to do with Islam).

American mosques are a great source of Moderate Islam. American mosques have the right intentions but lack the skills, tools, and funding.

Here are the reasons that make using taxpayer money to leverage moderate Islamic knowledge on the internet an urgent must.

Islamic jurisprudence that is Not Made in the USA

American Muslims, especially first generation Americans who understand an Eastern language (Urdu, Arabic, etc…) and who are not well connected with an imam or a mosque that has steady educational programs, rely, to a high extent, on knowledge coming from the East, which neglects the peculiarities of the American society.

Scholars and preachers from certain countries benefit from their funding to propagate their message across satellite channels and now on the internet.

It is a no-brainer that some foreign scholars have views that are strange to America (e.g. a woman should not go to school, etc…). But what is dangerous is that several of these scholars declare America as an enemy of Islam, or that for Muslims to flourish, they must conquer other countries.

On the other edge of the spectrum, there are other preachers who do not even have academic credentials, but give themselves the authority to preach about Islam on television in a way that is misleading or overly liberal for the average Muslim.

For instance, Dr. Khaled Montasir, an Egyptian gynecologist with no academic credentials in Islamic studies, had his own TV show in which he discussed Islam.

Another example is Turkey’s Adnan Oktar (Harun Yahya), who has his own TV channel where his main talk show about Islam features him and a set of very seductive bombshells whose way of dressing may not be accepted even in American TV channels.

It is also worth mentioning that the Middle-East is going through a Sunni-Shiite ideological war, which requires governments to spend money to promote their ideologies.

In the midst of this chaos of Islamic knowledge imported from the East, coupled with a scarcity of Islamic knowledge “made in the USA,” a Muslim individual may get lost spiritually, which can lead to distance from religion, or to extremism.

US media Contribute to a bad image about Muslims

Today’s media are more interested in bad events. Bad events sell. As a result, when Muslims are mentioned in the media, it is almost always because of a bad event: terrorism most likely.

When millions of Muslim Americans witness that their media are against them, would it be unreasonable to say that out of these millions, a few thousands may develop an anti-American sentiment, and that out of these few thousands, a few hundreds may engage in terrorist activity? No, it would not be unreasonable.

Terrorism has evolved

In the past, a potential terrorist would be known for being peculiar, for being unfriendly, and for having some deviant habits. Mohamed Ata, one of the 9/11 hijackers, was described as “someone who had the face of death,” and who allegedly was addicted to cocaine.

However, recently, the profiles of terrorists have changed. The 2015 Boston Marathon bombing gave birth to a new type of terrorists: your average Joe. He is friendly, dances at parties, hangs out with coworkers and classmates, he dates, everyone loves him in the neighborhood, etc.   The San Bernardino terrorist attack confirms this profile (i.e. coworkers and neighbors did not suspect anything unusual about the behavior of Rizwan Farook, the main suspect).

If I were John, a person who is not Muslim, such profiles would lead me to doubt my neighbor Ahmed, although I have known Ahmed for years and have not seen anything bad from him.

Add to this, in the past, media attacks on Islam were a habit that was exclusive to right wing media. But this has changed. Today, liberals such as Bill Maher and Sam Harris devote a good deal of their media presence to bash Muslims and Islam not only by criticizing Islam (which would be acceptable in a country that guarantees freedom of expression), but by making categorical generalizations about Islam and Muslims.

Muslims in America are surrounded by a spider-web of anti-Muslim messages. A lot of Muslims are in the pressure-cooker.

While mainstream media are free to broadcast what would bring them more viewers, and therefore more ad revenue, it becomes compulsory to create a balance –somehow- by stimulating pro-Muslim content and moderate Muslim knowledge, especially on the internet.

The lack of this positive content paints a terrible image about Muslims in America, and eventually causes a lack of trust between Muslim Americans and other Americans, and between Muslim Americans and their country as a whole.

Funding media and youth activities of some predominant American mosques in this case can be presented as a necessity that is not necessarily a first amendment issue or a violation of separation of church and state, just like holding prisoners without trial at Guantanamo Bay or extra screening that some Muslims go through at American airports are presented as security necessities.

I would not exonerate the Muslim American community from any responsibility for insufficiently outreaching to the American public, but, since extremism is a national security issue, and that the Muslim community in America is able to offer a long term weapon against extremism, taxpayer money should be spent on American mosques.

The post Taxpayer Money Should Be Utilized to Promote American Mosques appeared first on Morocco World News.

Rabat - Mohammed VI is quite a taciturn monarch in comparison to his late father Hassan II, an eloquent speaker, keen on public speaking and giving interviews to foreign press. The son unlike the father believes more in deeds than words and, indeed, since his accession to the throne, he hardly gave any interviews to the media, be it national or foreign.

However, Mohammed VI, very much like his forefather Hassan I (1873–1894), a sultan who was always on his horse, travelling all over the country collecting taxes and enquiring about the well-being of his subjects, is a jet-set monarch visiting different capitals in search of diverse markets and cooperation schemes that could bring investment to the country and provide jobs to Moroccans.

The Moroccan monarchy is one of the oldest in the world, it dates back to the Idrisid dynasty (788–974) and has always strived to strike a balance between different religious currents, social tendencies and economic interests and achieve equilibrium for the sake of stability. The task has always been difficult, if not impossible, but this political system has been successful through time in keeping the country united and inclusive.

Monarch’s religious clout

The monarch in Morocco is the head of the state, but, most importantly, he is “the Commander of the Faithful;” amir al-mu’minin, a religious office that gives him a quasi-sacrosanct status. Ordinary people would often criticize his political acts, his worldly decisions in running the affairs of the country, but, hardly, his religious clout or actions. Interestingly enough, his religious status is, even, recognized in many countries of Western Africa, who acknowledge his religious title of “Commander of the Faithful,” especially among the Tidjane communities in Western Africa.

Mohamed El Mansour,[i] a prominent Moroccan historian writes that Mawlay Sulayman (1792 – 1822), an Alouite sultan was vanquished by Berber tribes near Meknes and made prisoner. He thought, deep down, that the Berbers, who contested his temporal role, would kill him, but he was wrong. They put him in a tent, fed him and took off his djellaba (robe-like garment with a hood), cut them into hundreds of pieces, which they distributed evenly among their warriors, for divine grace Baraka purposes, and went back to their mountains happy and satisfied with their accomplishment.

In the 19^th century, Morocco was divided into two political territories, but it was yet one country. There was bled al-Makhzen, land under total control of the central government and bled as-siba, land of dissidence, made generally of mountains inhabited by Berbers, who recognized the religious authority of the sultan but not his temporal one since they often refused to pay taxes to him.

But in spite of this quiet and muted rebellion of the Berbers against the sultan and his power, yet his religious clout remained intact. The inhabitants of the mountains made Friday prayers and the ensuing sermon khutba in his name, as well as, all other prayers, especially prayers for the rain followed by a procession, called taghunja.

After the independence in 1956 and the reunification of Morocco, King Mohammed V, King Hassan II and the present monarch all practiced their religious office, written in gold in the various constitutions, solemnly and diligently, by leading Friday prayers, religious feasts and Ramadan daily lectures.

Because of the importance of the religious field, the Ministry of Awqaf and Religious Affairs was always located in the Mechouar (palace’s precinct) so that the Monarch can walk to the ministry, whenever he deems it necessary, to oversee personally the management of religious affairs of the country.

During the reign of Hassan II (1961-1999), a very conservative monarch, he made it a rule to always start and end his numerous speeches to the nation with verses surats of the Koran and intersperse them with sayings of the Prophet Muhammad hadiths, which gave his words a kind of sacredness and his message utmost importance, even though most of the people did not understand such speeches because they were delivered in classical Arabic and not in darija, the local Arabic idiom.

Islamists’ Frustration in Morocco

Following the Iranian revolution in 1979, and the subsequent rise of political Islam in the Muslim world. Islamists took easily control of the religious matters in most Muslim countries because local political leadership had either secular inclinations or did not consider religion as an important issue of daily life. To give their campaign importance and gain in membership, they, also, invested effort, money and dedication in social affairs, a good example of that is the Ikhwan in Egypt, assisting poor people with education, health and living expenses.

In Morocco, the Islamists frustrated by the predominant role of the conservative monarchy in religious affairs, epitomized by the yearly act of allegiance bey’a, presented by officials to the “Commander of the Faithful” on the day of his accession to the throne, to give his office a religious blessing, divide into three factions of different opinions:

• Moderate Islamists willing to accept the monarchy and its omnipresence in Moroccan life and represented by today’s Parti de la Justice et du Développement –PJD-, currently in power;
• Rejectionist Islamists, al-‘Adl wa al-Ihsan, who question the legitimacy of the monarchy but abstain from overthrowing it and condemn any idea of recourse to violence and extremist action to change the political system; and
• Foreign legion of violent Islamists formed and financed by Al-Qaeda, ISIS or other, with the agenda of overthrowing the monarchy and replacing it with a caliphate political system.

The latter group tried their hand at violence in the events of Casablanca bombings of May 3, 2003, leading to the death of 47 innocent people. This dramatic event served as a wakeup call to Mohammed VI to review his management of the religious faith in Morocco.

[caption id="attachment_186739" align="aligncenter" width="681"] Mohamed Abbadi, spiritual guide of Al-‘Adl wa al-Ihsan[/caption]

Proactive management of the religious field

It turned out that most of the attackers of the Casablanca bombings of 2003 were young recruits coming from the poor and marginalized shanty town of Sidi Moumen. Nabil Ayouch, a Moroccan film maker, immortalized this important even of Moroccan history in a long feature film entitled: “Horses of God.”

As a follow up to this dramatic event, Mohammed VI launched on May 18, 2005 the National Human Development Initiative (INDH), a national solidarity project aiming at empowering the needy and alleviating poverty.

This was followed by a rigorous program of training of Imams (religious preachers) in the conservative and moderate Malekite doctrine and school of thought and for the first time women religious were included as clergy and were trained to initiate womenfolk to the moderate Islam. They were called mourchidate and have achieved an incredible success in counseling women in religious affairs to the extent that many countries copied this experience to halt them from becoming violent and serving as vehicles for time bombs of the extremists.

However, the most important achievement in the present monarch’s progressive management of the faith issues is the opening, on March 27, 2015, of Mohammed VI Institute for the Training of Imams, Morchidines and Morchidates, slated to play a leading role in fighting religious radicalism and violence related to extremist interpretation of the Islamic faith in Morocco and the world. 

[caption id="attachment_124409" align="aligncenter" width="600"] Poster of the film[/caption]

Ilan Berman, in an article published in Foreign Affairs, views this experience in rather positive light, as a progressive approach that can be easily grafted on the religious establishments of other countries of the Muslim World:

“For years, the Kingdom of Morocco viewed itself as an exception to the radical political problems of the Middle East—a designation that suggested its experience was both unique and not easily translatable to the outside world. Increasingly, however, Morocco appears to be transitioning into the role of an intellectual model that is both willing and able to take a stand against Salafism and jihadism. In the words of one Moroccan religious official, the kingdom today “sees itself as a natural leader” in the battle of ideas taking place in the Muslim world, on account of its religious credibility and its tolerant teachings.

For the United States, this should come as welcome news. Washington, deeply invested in countering violent extremism in its various forms, would do well to take note of Morocco's soft-power innovations. It would do even better to leverage them in the global fight against Islamic radicalism.” 

The Imam Academy is, probably, the first organized reaction to the massive fundamentalist tsunami in religious preaching and education. Until now, radical Islam, quite aptly, had the upper hand in religious education or rather religious indoctrination, brainwashing the youth in hating anyone standing against their philosophy and teachings and especially the West, for its secularism and democracy.

This institute is training at the moments Moroccan students as well as clergy from such countries as: Nigeria, Chad, Guinea, Côte d’Ivoire and France. Soon students from Tunisia and the Russian Federation will join.

The Institute provides curriculum in religious topics such as Koranic interpretation, exegesis, Sayings of the Prophet Hadith and his doings Sunnah in addition to Islamic law shari’a, etc. Besides, it, also, provides education in humanities, mainly; history, geography such subjects as philosophy, psychology and sociology that are despised by the Islamists because teach critical and free thinking.

The duration of the training is one full year for Moroccan students and two years for the others, the French, instead, will have to spend three years after which they will be granted a degree to become official Imams in their own countries.

[caption id="attachment_155049" align="aligncenter" width="508"] Mohammed VI inaugurating the Imam Academy on March 27, 2015[/caption]

Morocco leading the way towards brotherhood of men

Mohammed VI has not only succeeded in keeping Morocco safe from the Islamist Tsunami and the ill-fated Arab Spring and its dire consequences, but has, also, successfully initiated a paying strategy to combat radical religious indoctrination, which for the moment is available in Morocco but can be easily copycatted in other countries of the Muslim world.

So, not only Morocco has survived miraculously the Islamist undertow, but it is, also, leading the way toward a more moderate Islam, accepting of other faiths and cultures and respectful of their difference. And it was about time Muslim moderates stood up to extremism in an orderly manner.

Endnotes:

[i] Mohamed El Mansour: Morocco in the reign of Mawlay Sulayman. xiv, 248 pp. Wisbech, Cambs.: Middle East and North African Studies Press Ltd., 1990.

You can follow Dr. Mohamed Chtatou on Twitter @Ayurinu

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

The post Mohammed VI Imam Academy: Another Success Story in Faith Management in Morocco appeared first on Morocco World News.

Casablanca - I recently went home to Morocco after my grandmother’s death. During my trip, I experienced unexpected efficiency and kindness by government employees. But I also experienced the utter indifference and inefficiency that our bureaucracies have perfected. This is my story.

I worried as my plane landed in Casablanca that I would have a hard time at passport check. In my scatterbrained state, I had remembered my American passport but forgotten my expired National ID card. I recalled from past experiences that the officers at passport check were dour, humorless sorts who disapproved of my dual citizenship and marriage to a non-Moroccan and harangued me about never forgetting who I was. One had said to me once, “You couldn’t find a Moroccan to marry, you had to go marry a foreigner?” So I was expecting unpleasantness. But the policeman at passport check at Mohammed V Airport welcomed me home. When he learned the reason for my trip, he said “Lbaraka frassek.” He asked me for my National ID card. I told him “I forgot it,” and thought “Here comes the lecture.” But he didn’t try to shame me.

Instead, he said “No problem, give me your name and your father’s name, I’ll find the number, and I’ll write it down in your passport so you don’t have to worry about it anymore.” I thought “My goodness, how terribly efficient, and a little scary” (but we know this about our security services, they are good at their jobs). I also thought “What kindness.” And when I told Facebook about the kindness of strangers on my trip home, I included thanks for this gentleman.

But in case you thought that this attitude has spread to other government agencies, I am here to reassure you that it’s business-as-usual in the Ministry of the Interior Office of Vital Statistics.

After my experience at the airport, I thought I should apply for a new National ID card when I returned to the US. I would need official copies of my birth certificate. I don't really need to do this, you understand. I have my expired card. The police database at the airport knows me. I also have a Certificate of Foreign Birth, which the US Consulate gave my mother when I was born. So I already officially exist in two countries’ government databases.

But the Ministry of the Interior has been doing a PR campaign saying that the bureaucracy has been streamlined and it's easier to get what you need from them. And the Moroccan Embassy website said I could apply for my ID card online. So I thought "I'm here, why not?"

The Office of Vital Statistics was an ancient building with numbered doors and barred windows around a courtyard. People wearing sabr (a cross between patience and endurance) like a second skin stood in lines. Some people sat or milled around in the courtyard. My father and I stood out as people who looked like we believed things would work out for us. After all we had a copy of my expired card, and the “Carnet de Famille,” or family booklet, listing my birth.

We waited to see the lady who would issue the copies. In good time, a policeman called us into her office. Another woman sat there trying to get papers. The vital statistics lady looked me up in the big paper registry for 1971. She found it, which didn’t surprise me, but then she said:

"I can't issue copies of your birth certificate because the person who registered your birth made a mistake, scratched it out, and corrected it. You have to go to court to get a judgment that this is the right date, and then come back." I wasn't sure I understood her correctly because 1) my Darija is rather mediocre and 2) it seemed shockingly wrong, so I asked my father to translate. He confirmed what she said, and said to the lady, "but here's the family booklet issued by the state, it has the right date." That didn’t make a difference.

My dad said "So your employee made and corrected his mistake in 1971 but we have to get a judgment to confirm the fixed mistake?" That earned him a frown.

I thought I would offer a solution. I said "Look. Here's a copy of the expired card, issued by this office, my birth date is on here. Here’s my American passport, my birth date is on here too." She wouldn’t budge. In a split second I thought of the efficient police database, and the contrast with the paper registry where someone used a Bic to write down my birth in 1971. I thought of the Ministry of the Interior’s PR campaign. I looked at the lady bureaucrat’s face, which had closed like a fist, the citizen who was looking at me with sympathy, and the policeman who was just watching to see what would happen next. And I made a decision.

"Never mind, Dad, let's go." That surprised them all. "Blesh,” I said. “I don't need it. I don't even need the citizenship. I'm an American." And we left. Because having experienced the courtesy and efficiency of airport police (believe me, that is not something I thought I would ever write), I knew what I could expect from a government agency, and I wasn’t willing to settle for less.

When my father and I left, the courtyard was still full of people trying to get something vital out of Vital Statistics. I am sure some of them will be told, like me, that they have to get something important from another labyrinthine government agency first, by someone with a huge paper registry that looks like it dates from the administration of Maréchal Lyautey. Most of them will make remarkable displays of sabr and humor, and some will feel forced to deploy the weapon of last resort of Moroccans faced with broken bureaucracy: the MAD 200 bill.

Asking a citizen to hire a lawyer and go to court to get a judgment nullifying a mistake made by a government employee that the employee had corrected is asking them to live in an Ionesco play. Is it any wonder so many Moroccans want to live elsewhere? Or resort to bribery?

I have heard from friends that my story is quite common. Here’s what I would like you to take from it, aside from the fact that I clearly failed sabr class in the school of Moroccan life:

• Morocco has made some great progress. The way I was treated at the airport is proof.
• But parts of the bureaucracy are stuck in an old, rigid way of doing things that strips citizens of their dignity and encourages corruption, regardless of government PR.
• The majority of Moroccans can’t say “Blesh” and turn their backs on the absurdity and indignity of some of these interactions, as I did secure in the knowledge of my American citizenship. I share my story with them in mind, hoping that one more voice demanding efficient government services for all Moroccans will make a difference. It can happen, it must happen, and we all deserve it.

Maimshi m3akoum bass.

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

The post Postcard from Moroccan Bureaucracy appeared first on Morocco World News.

Rabat - Why do American media insist on equating Zionism to antisemitism? How can they explain that many Jews reject Zionism, criticize it and judge it rather severely.

While one can understand the pressure which U.S. financial centers on State legislatures apply on European businesses and organizations that adhere to the worldwide BDS campaign to boycott Israeli commodities produced in the occupied territories, it is less easy to understand why the intellectual elites fail to convince their countrymen and countrywomen that consuming these products means supporting apartheid, racism, the systematic violation of human rights, illegal occupation of the lands of others, crimes of war and against humanity, assassination and cold blooded murder.

The notorious Asia Minor Agreement more known as the Sykes-Picot deal that designed the region without caring to take into account the opinion of the local populations as if they had been mere cattle is still generating effects that could have been anticipated and for which responsibility is still Sykes' and Picot's and their respective countries. In fact, the experienced and skilled foxy French and British negotiators as well as the Russian observers that had validated the partition were smart enough to know that borders drawn artificially did not last long and that their deal could therefore in no way be final.

But it so happened that they also knew they held the most decisive weapon in all wars, namely, finance and that they could handle it in any way necessary to silence voices, tame rebellions, break necks and impose steps and a march to all. I am aware that this observation by itself qualifies in some minds as evidence of antisemitism and therefore as cause enough to accuse, indict, judge and condemn.

Furthermore, the failed British promise to Belford to grant his organization land in Palestine to create a Jewish state when designing the Asia Minor Agreement was premonitory of violence and instability that could not at the time be identified as Zionist terrorism that would generate a few decades later the resistance of revolutionary and militant groups that would be identified as freedom fighters, jihadists and rebels and that would be driven by such motivations as fundamental nationalistic religious extremism and radical secularism.

The severity of the opposition of native populations to the imperialistic foreigners coming from parts of the world in which they had been discriminated against, humiliated and abused could have been a predictable outcome of the decision. In fact, one can hardly expect a population whose land had been stolen to welcome the spoliator with milk, dates and cookies. Had the historical and religious arguments been of any validity at all, the principles underlying them would have had to operate to give back their lands to the natives of the Americas, Australia and many other parts of the world.

Just as Sykes and Picot knew that they were seeding the germs of a monster, those fiddling with the map of the region should know that they are sowing causes of discord, discontent, conflict, hatred and war. Their interventions are setting up channels through which extremism, radicalism and terrorism will infiltrate and settle in the region. In the end of the day, the bomb they are manning will detonate in their hands and the monsters will turn against them.

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

The post In the Beginning There Was Sykes-Picot deal appeared first on Morocco World News.

By Karim Bejjit

Casablanca - Is Morocco overreacting to the Human Rights Report 2015 issued by the US State Department? The 40 page report posted on the official State Department website contains numerous references to alleged abuses of human rights committed by the Moroccan authorities in various parts of the country including the southern provinces.

On Tuesday 17 May, the Moroccan interior ministry issued a statement denouncing the report on the ground that it contains unverified information and pure fabrications based often on hostile and unreliable sources. The Moroccan authorities, the statement affirms, have regularly pointed out the danger of drawing hasty conclusions on the basis of isolated and individual cases. Since the report was issued on April 13, Moroccan officials met members from the US embassy in Rabat to discuss the alleged cases of abuse and hoped the evidence they provided would dispel the confusion and straighten out the facts. On his part, the US State Department spokesman, John Kirby declared that the State Department continued to hold firm to the report. Could this have triggered the upgrade in Moroccan official reaction? On Wednesday 18, the Moroccan foreign ministry summoned US ambassador to Rabat to protest against the conclusions of the annual report.

This new spat comes only weeks after a resolution passed by the Security Council S/RES/2285 (2016) demanding the return in three months’ time of MINURSO civil servants expelled by Morocco a month earlier. The original draft of the resolution submitted by the US ambassador to the UN had adopted a hardline position which provoked a great deal of concern and bitterness in the Moroccan official circles and among the public. The statement issued by the Moroccan foreign ministry carried unmitigated words of rebuke stating that Rabat “regrets […] that the member of the Security Council, which is responsible for the formulation and presentation of the first draft resolution, has introduced elements of pressure, constraints and weakening, and acted against the spirit of partnership with the Kingdom of Morocco.”

In the light of the established relations between US and Morocco dating back to the late 18^th century, and the strong economic ties and solid military and intelligence cooperation that exist between the two countries, these recent developments may not look as somber and worrying as the media portray them. Summoning ambassadors in itself is not a dramatic event. In the last few months US ambassadors in Turkey, Italy, Uganda and Thailand have been summoned by the official authorities in a gesture of protest over some unpleasant issue. Annual country reports produced by US Department of State are typically records of alleged abuses and should be treated with adequate interest and attention. The report on some European countries such as Spain, France and Ireland themselves were not entirely devoid of cases of alleged abuse.

On the other hand, as a Moroccan academician who has spent years studying and teaching American culture and politics, and has visited different parts of the US, I am confident to say that in standing as a champion of human rights and upholder of universal values, the United States government has still much room for improvement. The reports of international organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have portrayed a rather grim picture of the Human rights conditions in US often citing for illustration the high number of death sentences passed by American courts, police prosecution of African Americans and other ethnic minorities, economic disparity, labor rights, rights of non-citizens etc. The Human Rights Watch report for 2015 stated that “US national security policies, including mass surveillance programs, are eroding freedoms of the press, expression, and association. Discriminatory and unfair investigations and prosecutions of American Muslims are alienating the communities the US claims it wants as partners in combatting terrorism”.

The challenge which the respect of Human Rights poses is a real one and is not restricted to developing countries. Recent history has shown that the path of democratization in Europe and more notably in US has never been a bed of roses. And yet it must be said that there is a great deal to be learnt from Western democracies. The pressures exerted on Moroccan government from international Human Rights organizations, European and North American governments are not new and over the last three decades they have contributed to creating the ripe conditions for a benign transition toward a fair and just society. The course of transition may have been a little circuitous, but for someone like myself who grew up in the 1980s and 1990s, I am fully and genuinely appreciative of the will that both the civil society and official authorities have shown to turn the dark page of the years of lead, and create a better social, political and economic environment for positive change.

Today there is a growing sense of optimism in Morocco perhaps not fully shared by the impoverished segments of the society and certainly not by radical activists whether Islamists or leftists and much less by scores of vocal pro-Polisario separatists. There is certainly a long way to go to appease this discontentment and reassure the sceptics. Nonetheless, the enduring political and economic stability of the country in a region plunged in unprecedented social and political unrest is clear proof that progress is being made and that the political elite is sensitive enough of what is being at stake.

What should be remembered is that Morocco is seeking recognition for its new regional role and its new political visage. The many reforms introduced, the successes achieved, and the experiences accumulated are not always properly acknowledged and valued by Morocco’s strategic allies. As a dynamic partner of the US, Morocco demands respect and understanding of its deep concerns and refuses to be mistaken for a failing state.

Karim Bejjit IS Director of the Moroccan American Studies Research Laboratory, Dept. of English, Hassan II University of Casablanca www.karimbejjit.com

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

The post Morocco and US: The Price of Friendship appeared first on Morocco World News.

New York - Following his visit to Russia in March, King Mohammed VI visited China on May 11 and 12, his second visit to the country, his first having been in 2012.  During the visit, he and Xi Jinping, China’s head of state, signed a strategic partnership between the two countries, and chaired the signing of 15 agreements and memoranda of understanding aimed at strengthening their economic partnership and their cooperation in various fields.

Context of King Mohammed VI’s Visit to China

What gives great importance to the Moroccan monarch’s visit is its timing. It comes after two months of tension between Morocco and the Secretariat of the United Nations, following Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s controversial statement describing Morocco’s presence in the Western Sahara as an “occupation.” It also is only a few days after the Security Council renewed the mandate of the UN mission in the territory, known as MINURSO, and against the backdrop of Morocco’s disappointment with the United States as a result of its unsupportive stance towards Morocco in the Security Council.

The visit is also significant in light of a new orientation in Moroccan diplomacy in recent years, marked by Rabat’s resolve to diversify its economic and political partnerships with various influential countries, including Russia, China, and India.

The timing of the visit has given rise to a great deal of optimism and enthusiasm in Moroccan public opinion and among observers. The common denominator of observers’ analyses is that the visit came at the right time, and will help Morocco strengthen its leading role in South-South cooperation. Analysts believe that the visit will also lay the groundwork for a real win-win economic partnership with China, that is likely to enable Morocco to achieve some political gains with regards to Beijing’s position on the Western Sahara.

Unlike countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom, China does not advocate the establishment of micro-states based on the narrow principle of self-determination. Stemming from its history with the foreign occupation of parts of its territory, such as Hong Kong and Macau, in addition to its own problems with separatism both in Taiwan and Tibet, China is one of the few influential countries that does not support the concept of self-determination as necessarily leading to independence. It can be argued that this political doctrine is one of the main reasons behind China’s positive neutrality on the Western Sahara dispute.

However, in international relations, what determines the positions of states is not only their political doctrine, but also, and most importantly, their economic interests. This highlights the need to analyze the partnership between Morocco and China with caution, put it in its regional and international context, and avoid any rush to conclude that this partnership will push China toward open support of Morocco’s position on the territorial dispute.

Trade Between Morocco and China Below Trade Between China and Algeria

An accurate comparison of the value of trade exchange between Morocco and China versus economic trade between China and Algeria shows that Morocco still has a long way to go before garnering China’s political support in the foreseeable future.

While the value of trade exchanges between Morocco and China does not exceed $2.3 billion, the value of trade between China and Algeria, as of 2013, had reached $8.6 billion according to the latest available data.

In addition, while China is Morocco’s third economic partner after the European Union and the United States, it has become, since 2013, Algeria’s first supplier, replacing France. Algeria is also the most important market for China in the Maghreb, accounting for 41% of its trade with the region. In the same vein, in the past few years China was awarded contracts worth over $20 billion to build several structural projects in Algeria, such as the east-west highway, the Grand Mosque of Algiers, and the new building of the Algerian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Accordingly, if one speaks in terms of interests, China’s interests with Algeria exceed its interests with Morocco. Hence, it is difficult to imagine that China would adopt a position openly in favor of Morocco just because it has signed several agreements with Rabat. Supporting this claim are the strong commercial ties between China and other countries that are hostile to Morocco, particularly South Africa, Nigeria, and Angola.

China is South African’s first economic partner, with the value of exchanges between the two countries amounts to $20 billion. China is also Angola’s first economic partner, with a volume of trade worth $36 billion, according to the latest available statistics. Beijing is also Nigeria’s first supplier. The value of trade between the two countries reached $ 14.9 billion in 2015.

GCC-Morocco Alliance Plays in Favor of Rabat in its Relations with Beijing

There is a very important factor that will play out in favor of Morocco and will give great significance to a Chinese-Moroccan rapprochement, as well as the regional alliances that Morocco has begun to forge lately. This factor is the strategic alliance between Morocco and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which was given a new impetus in April. What gives meaning to this Chinese-Moroccan partnership is the strength of economic relations between the GCC and China and the unique importance these countries represent for the Chinese economy.

Despite the high value of trade between China and Morocco’s adversaries - Algeria and South Africa, Nigeria, and Angola - it does not match the value of trade between Beijing and the Gulf states. Despite the fact that Algeria, Nigeria, and Angola are considered, to some extent, among the suppliers for the Chinese market with oil, these countries are, in addition to South Africa, considered primarily a market for Chinese goods and investments and not a key source of energy.

Conversely, the Gulf States are not only a market for Chinese goods, but also a fundamental source of energy. Since China has established itself among the world's greatest economic powers, the Gulf States have played a pivotal role in supplying the Chinese market with the essential energy to fuel its economy's growth.

While China's oil imports from Algeria, Nigeria, and Angola can be considered complementary (Algeria’s exports did not exceed 37,000 barrels per day in 2013), imports from Gulf countries are an irreplaceable pillar for the Chinese economy’s increasing energy demands. At present, China's oil imports from the GCC account for 43 percent of its total imports. Among the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia is China’s main supplier, accounting for 17 percent of Chinese imports of oil.

In the same context, while the value of trade between China and the four African countries mentioned above does not exceed $70 billion, the value of trade exchanges between Beijing and the GCC exceeds $250 billion. According to McKinsey and Company, the value of trade between the parties is expected to reach $350 billion by 2020. In addition, the added value of the GCC for China is the ability of these countries to pump huge investments in the Chinese economy in several areas, especially in petrochemical industries, tourism, and real estate.

To gauge the impact of oil on China’s foreign policy decisions, one should recall that it opposed for four years, between 2004 and 2008, the Security Council’s attempts to adopt a binding resolution regarding the crisis in Darfur.  China chose to abstain from voting for most of the resolution and strived to weaken their language to avoid placing Sudan under heavy pressure or sanctions. For several years, Beijing opposed all members of the Security Council and ignored the pressure of international public opinion in order to preserve the 270,000 barrels per day it imported from Sudan.

Based on these facts, although the level of trade between Morocco and China may not be sufficient to enable the former to garner the latter’s clear support regarding the Western Sahara, the strategic importance of the Gulf oil for China, coupled with the strength of relations between the GCC and Morocco, may play in its favor and lead China to gradually support its position.

Special attention should be given to the symbolic place where King Mohammed VI announced his visit to China. The Moroccan monarch's decision to announce the visit during the first Morocco-GCC summit, held in April in Riyadh, was not a coincidence. It was a message from Morocco and its Gulf allies, that the partnership between Morocco and China is part of the partnership between the latter and the Gulf states. Therefore, rapprochement between Rabat and Beijing should be understood as an extension of the strategic alliance between Morocco and its Gulf allies.

Based on the above, one should be very cautious and avoid conferring that the strengthening of the economic partnership between Morocco and China in itself will push Beijing to adopt positions in favor of Morocco in the Western Sahara. If Morocco were to rely on the volume of trade with this country, it would be difficult to imagine that Beijing would sacrifice its commercial relations with the countries that support the Polisario for the sake of Morocco.

Nevertheless, the unity of destiny between Morocco and the Gulf States and these countries’ importance for the Chinese economy makes China's support for Morocco likely to develop in the medium and long term. However, even in the event China were to take such as step, this would not go beyond maintaining the status quo and thwarting the attempts that will be made by some parties in the near future to put pressure on Rabat and conduct a comprehensive review of the political process launched in 2007.

Samir Bennis is the co-founder of and editor-in-chief of Morocco World News. You can follow him on Twitter @SamirBennis

The post What Impact of Morocco-China Strategic Partnership on Western Sahara? appeared first on Morocco World News.

Washington D.C. - After more than three decades of advocacy, the women’s movement in Morocco, supported by a large segment of civil society, has had high expectations that the long awaited Combating Violence against Women bill will finally provide a comprehensive legal and institutional framework that would protect women’s rights.

These expectations are in the context of the 2011 Constitution, which women and civil society activists have praised for including articles guaranteeing gender equality, equity, and protection of women’s rights in general (Articles 19 and 164) and calling on the government to issue legislation and adopt public policies to effectively implement these rights (Articles 22 and 171). High expectations emanate also from the fact that a bill of this kind is long overdue. Gender based violence is a phenomenon that threatens the social fabric of Moroccan society, with alarming numbers indicating that more than 60% of women are subject to violence, according to a 2009 Survey conducted by the High Directorate of Planning in Morocco.

However, women’s rights groups and activists are raising concerns about the government’s proposed draft law’s (known as draft Law 103-13) as it has many shortcomings. A number of women’s rights activists and NGOs have described this draft as unconstitutional as it does not translate the essence of the articles in the Constitution calling for gender equality and equity and is not in conformity with the international conventions of which Morocco is a signatory, in terms of women’s rights and protection against violence and discrimination. This while the Constitution clearly affirms Morocco’s adherence to these conventions.

These concerns are growing even more serious as the Parliament’s Legislation and Justice Committee, dominated by the ruling government coalition, has just adopted another draft organic law for the establishment of the Commission for Equity and Combating all Forms of Discrimination despite the boycott—as an act of protest—of opposition members of the last review session in early May. The reason for the boycott was the refusal of Bassima Hakkaoui, Minister of Solidarity, Women, Family, and Social Development and the entity in charge of drafting this law, to take into consideration any of the opposition’s proposed amendments, which would have addressed civil society concerns regarding this law.

Concerns over this draft law are not new. This is the second time that the government is sending it to the legislative branch, the first being in 2013. This first draft of the law that the government presented to Parliament received vocal criticism and generated much controversy, especially among women’s rights groups and civil society activists. At the time, the Head of the Government, Abdelilah Benkirane, decided to withdraw it and formed a special commission to prepare an improved version of the law that would take into consideration the concerns raised by civil society. Contrary to expectations, this revised draft law continues to be controversial as a number of leading women activists and female MPs in Morocco have spoken out against it. In addition, women’s rights groups and other segments of civil society have mobilized to conduct advocacy both at the grassroots level as well as at the level of policy makers as they consider the new draft law to be worse than the first one for a number of reasons.

First, the proposed draft is thought to circumvent the law in general because it neither respects Morocco’s Constitution nor the international human rights treaties to which Morocco is a signatory. Women’s rights activists also argue that this draft law purposefully shies away from adopting a gender based approach and consequently fails to offer an effective tool for protecting women victims of violence. They also consider prefacing the draft law by an Introductory Memorandum instead of a Preamble, which is legally binding, as a clear indication of this circumvention.

Second, while women activists have welcomed some of the limited gains in the draft that among other things include penalties for preventing the victims returning home, forced marriage, corporal violence, forced return of victims to their home, waste of marital common property, and sexual harassment. However, they raise significant concerns, indicating that the proposed draft cannot be considered as comprehensive since the majority of its articles refer to the Penal Code, which is also on the Parliament’s agenda to be amended. It is another clear example of how this draft law is circumventing the law. To add to the lack of innovation, the few newly introduced articles are phrased in generic language.

Third, the draft law lacks comprehensive and proactive tools to address violence against women i.e. prevention, protection, and deterrence. It is short of preventive measures and weak on protection of the complainant. Article 1-480 in the draft law allows an alleged attacker to be set free if the victim decides to drop the case, without authorities taking any measures to verify the reasons behind dropping the case. In thousands of cases it has been demonstrated that women take such an action under pressure and force. Further, the draft law does not consider marital rape to be an act of violence. Women activists also note the bewildering mix of terms addressing women, spouses, and children in the draft of a law that is intended to address specifically violence against women. This mixture of terms is seen as further evidence that this draft is shying away from adopting a gender-based approach.

Fourth, the draft law lacks a precise definition of “violence against women.” While the law uses very ambiguous and generic language, international conventions and protocols, which Morocco has signed, offer a clear definition. Such ambiguity would leave women victims of violence at the mercy of the discretion and interpretation of their interlocutors at relevant authorities at whatever time they seek help. Consequently, many women victims will not receive necessary protection and intervention in a timely manner when they are subject to acts of violence. The use of such generic language defeats the purpose of devoting specific legislation to address violence against women, a phenomenon that, as mentioned above, threatens the social fabric of Moroccan society and hinders its political and economic development.

Fifth, just as problematic as the language of the draft is the process that created it, leading women’s rights NGOs and activists have consistently expressed complaints that Minister Hakkaoui did not consult with them as her Ministry was preparing the draft law. Instead, Mrs. Hakkaoui adopted a very selective consultation process, involving only like-minded NGOs with conservative stands on women’s rights. As evidence of this, women’s rights NGOs and activists point to the Introductory Memorandum of the draft law, which states that the draft is the outcome of a joint effort between the Ministry of Solidarity and Women and the Ministry of Justice. Furthermore, Mrs. Hakkaoui and her allies in the government ruling coalition have taken a firm stand to ignore all proposed amendments from civil society as well as from some other MPs, especially members of Parliament’s Justice and Legislation Committee.

Finally, Moroccan civil society and women’s rights group, in particular, have relentlessly led advocacy campaigns since the 1980’s to remove the taboo on raising the issue of violence against women and bring it to the forefront of public debate. They have also conducted an immense grassroots effort to document cases of violence and have offered psychological, legal, and social assistance in the absence of government services. Suffice it to mention that the first women’s shelter in Morocco was created by an NGO and has been for many years operated in secrecy because of the lack of a legal framework, and the Moroccan government’s resistance to acknowledging the issue of gender-based violence. Instead of taking advantage of this experience and capitalizing on it, relevant women’s rights NGOs are left no role to play in the national, regional, and local committees proposed in the draft law, which are to be created as immediate new bodies to oversee women’s protection from violence.

In her statement in the 2^nd Edition of her Ministry’s Women’s Distinction Award, Mrs. Hakkaoui said that she is confused because some people accuse her of being very liberal while others accuse her of being very conservative, referring to the controversy about the draft laws related to Combating Violence against Women and the Commission for Equity and Combating all Forms of Discrimination.

I will conclude by reminding Ms. Hakkaoui and her allies in the ruling coalition, who are trying to strike a political deal at the expense of essential women’s rights in the view of the upcoming parliamentary elections next October, as well as Members of Parliament who will be reviewing and voting on this draft law in the coming days, that there should be little confusion when one has a clear social contract and legal framework, i.e. the Constitution. Mrs. Hakkaoui’s own political party, Justice and Development, called on Moroccans to cast a “Yes” vote on this Constitution in 2011. This same Constitution contains articles 19, 164, 171, and 22 which all guarantee protection of women’s rights and call for laws and public policies that will institutionalize and consolidate this protection.

If passed as it stands, the current draft law will not only be a setback for Morocco’s stated commitment to advancing the status of women’s rights. It will also be a setback to the 2011 constitutional reform promises that the country made to itself , as a response to February 20^th Movement protests that took place in Morocco in parallel with the Arab Spring Uprisings, under the slogan of “Freedom, Dignity, and Social Justice.”

Hanane Zelouani Idrissi is a Moroccan American policy analyst. She works with the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington DC. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent any institution.

You can follow Hanane Zelouani Idrissi on Twitter @Lala_Fatna

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The post Combating Violence against Women Draft Law, a Constitutional Test in Morocco appeared first on Morocco World News.

By Majid Morceli

San Francisco - Is Hillary Clinton harming her chance to be nominated for the highest office in the land by standing up for Muslims?

The answer is, sadly, a resounding yes. Americans in general, Republicans or Democrats (and surprisingly Independents), have a very unfavorable opinion of Islam, and as Hillary Clinton continues to oppose Donald Trump’s call to ban Muslims from entering the US, she is alienating many Americans who would otherwise vote for her. 76 percent of Independent voters (see graph) who would make a difference in the election view Islam unfavorably, and it is likely that vote for Trump than seeing someone in the Oval Office who goes against their values.

When Donald Trump decided to run for the presidency, many thought that he was nothing but a nuisance and he would eventually drop out after getting free publicity for his assets. They never expected that by simply calling Mexicans rapists he could change the rules of the game.

Blaming immigrants for all ills is not something new; it happens all over the world. But this time, Trump was able to double down when he said that America should ban Muslims from entering the US.

This is exactly what Americans want to hear, and they credit Trump as someone who “tells it like it is”, free from any political correctness.

In 2009, the unemployment rate in the US was 10 percent. Today it is 4.9 percent, which is the lowest rate in 15 years. Obviously Americans cannot blame the economy, when the numbers speak for themselves and we have more people working. Who is to blame when the economy is doing well? Trump was able to find a scapegoat for America by demonizing Mexican immigrants and Muslims.

During the Republican primaries, Hillary was ahead of Trump by double digits. We now see some polls that show that Trump is actually beating her.

The reason for Trump’s success is that his rhetoric is different from everyone else, while many Americans feel that Hillary is just more of the same.

They have grown fatigued of more of the same and they are now starting to feel hopeful when they hear Trump’s empowered speeches. When Hillary says that Americans need to work with Muslims to beat terror, Rambo-mentality Americans believe that they don’t need to work with them, they just need to cluster bomb them and make them disappear from the face of the Earth. Since 9/11, the majority of polls show clearly that Muslims are on America’s most hated list. In order for Hillary to win the hearts and the mind of those who are not sure who to vote for, she needs to steer away from defending Muslims. She can work with the Muslim world when she becomes president.

Muslims themselves should advise Hillary that she does not need to side with them when she starts debating Trump. She should simply avoid talking about a subject that clearly favors Trump. Politics is a game, and in order for Hillary to win, she will sadly need to play dirty. Otherwise, Mr. Trump will win and America will be lost as the country of hope, freedom, and democracy, where there is no difference between Muslims, Jews, Christians, or any religion or lack thereof.

We are now seeing people who just recently were so sure that they would never side with Trump or for what he stands for, scrambling to support him, fearing they will be left out if he becomes the President.
Trump will say and do anything and everything to get elected. Hillary should be smarter and beat him at his own game. If Immigration and Muslims issues are issues that help him, Hillary will need to find a way to demonstrate to the American people that immigration and Muslims are just a ruse invented by Trump, and that falling for his trap is not the solution. Hillary Clinton will also need to understand that that more of the same will not cut it this time. She needs to remember that during her last try, she was ahead of Obama, and we all know the rest.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The post By Defending Muslims, Hillary Clinton Will Lose to Donald Trump appeared first on Morocco World News.

New York - Perhaps what is most striking in the analysis of Morocco’s efforts in recent years to defend its position on the Western Sahara at the global levelis the quasi-absence of parliamentary and partisan diplomacy in defending and promoting the Moroccan autonomy plan as a solution to the conflict. An example of the failure of Moroccan parliamentary diplomacy is the recent recognition of Chilean parliament of the so-called Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR).

While Moroccan diplomacy has fervently defendedits national position on all fronts, whether at the multilateral or bilateral levels, most Moroccan political parties are still in deep hibernation on the subject, with a few exceptions. This happens at a time when Moroccan political parties, especially leftist parties, know very well that the majority of governments that support the Polisario are of leftist and radical backgrounds.

Moroccans had to wait for the speech delivered by King Mohamed VI at the opening of the autumn session of parliament in October 2014 to see some parties-some from the opposition and others not represented in the parliament-to take initiatives to playtheir role in partisan diplomacy.

It would be delusional to think Morocco would be in a position to win all the diplomatic battles it engages in without the active participation of civil society and political parties. If Morocco had political parties with a clear vision and strategy to open dialogue with the leftist political parties of countries that sympathize with the Polisario, it would have succeeded in convincing some of them, especially in Latin America, to reconsider their stances on the conflict, or at least in preventing the Polisario from making new breakthroughs.

In light of the recent developments in the conflict,and the determination ofAlgeria and the Polisario to mobilize support in Latin America, it is now incumbent upon Moroccan political parties to let go of their empty slogans and hollow language and unleash all of their potential to approach their Latin American counterparts-which traditionally oppose Morocco’s position on the Sahara-in order to convince them to reconsider their positions.

However, this objective cannot be achieved through sporadic visits to Latin America, but rather through the creation of permanent and active channels of communication, the intensification of exchange visits, the organization of seminars and lectures in the parliaments and universities of these countries, and a presence in their media.

The best and only way to make these efforts successful and meaningful is to utilize the right people; those who truly know the multiple facets of the conflict, including its legal, historical, political, and economic aspects. These people should also have a great command of Spanish and be familiar with the cultures, histories, and political systems of Latin American countries.

What Morocco truly needs today more than ever is not political parties or personalities whose concern is to make short visits, visits that often have little or no impact on the position of the countries they visit. Morocco needs political parties and leaders who have clear-cut goals and well-thought-outwork plans and who work to achieve them through initiatives that promote Morocco’s positions and the efforts it has been making to put an end to the conflict.

Lessons Learned from Morocco-Sweden Friction

The tension between Morocco and Swedenlast autumn,as a result of Stockholm’s intention to recognize the so-called SADR,has proved beyond any doubt the pivotal role partisan diplomacy can play. During the short-lived friction, Moroccans witnessed how Nabila Mounib, the Secretary-General of the Unified Socialist Party, succeeded in easing the conflict between Morocco and the leftist Swedish government and building bridges of mutual trust between the two parties. Mounib’s diplomatic move eventually resulted in Stockholm’s decision to put such recognition on the backburner.

While it is not possible to determine whether Nabila Mounib’s talks with Swedishofficials were directly behind the Swedish government’s decision, one can argue that Mounib played an important role in convincing the Swedish government to listen to Morocco’s concerns and to take them into consideration, which ultimately spared the two countries a diplomatic crisis.

Need to Build Communication Channel with Spain’s Podemos

Morocco should build on this experience and draw lessons from it on how to deal with countries where the Polisario enjoys support, such as in Spain. In recent years, Podemos has emerged as a strong radical leftist party whose leaders have expressed direct support for the Polisario on many occasions. The high status that this party now enjoys on the Spanish political scene highlights the urgent needfor Moroccan leftist parties to approach it and attempt to open communication channels with it.

Podemos’s presence in the Spanish parliament as its third largest political party will enable it to put pressure on the future Spanish government by systematically bringing up the conflict over the Sahara and overtly adopting the Polisario’s stance. It is very likely that Podemos will make impassioned calls on the Spanish government to recognize the so-called SADR. Despite the fact that these maneuvers will not yield the expected results, they could, however, strainrelations between Rabat and Madrid and provide moral support to the separatists. Additionally, Podemos may also launch political and media campaigns to challenge the agreements between Morocco and the European Union, especially with regard to fishing and Morocco’s eligibility to grant Europe licenses to fish in the territorial waters under its sovereignty in the Western Sahara.

At a time when the Moroccan government is striving to strengthenits relation with Spain, it should also strengthen its presence in Spanish media and academia to educate the Spanish public aboutRabat’s position and the merits of its autonomy plan, in order to counterbalance the efforts made by the Polisario to demonize Morocco.

Such efforts, however, will not succeed unless Moroccan political parties, especially the leftist parties, assume their full role. Moroccan leftist parties should adapt to the new political reality in Spain. Instead of the empty chair policy they have adopted thus far, they should try to build channels of permanent communication with the Spanish leftist parties, especially with Podemos. These moves could ultimately soften this party’s positions towards Morocco and avoid that it become the ‘spokesperson’ of the Polisario in Spain.

Moroccan political parties should draw lessons from the experience of Nabila Mounib, which showed the complementary role political parties could play to back up Rabat’s official diplomacy and build bridges between governments led by leftist parties and Morocco.

Yet this partisan diplomacy should not be occasional. Instead, it should be implemented throughout the year based on a clear strategy. Morocco’s opponents are working tirelessly to mobilize support for their position the world over. Therefore, Moroccan political parties should remain constantly vigilant to help their country win the diplomatic battles it will fight in the future.The road toward winningthe media and diplomatic war Algeria and the Polisario are waging against Morocco is still strenuous. Therefore, the mobilization should be global with the involvement of all stakeholders who can help promote and strengthen the Moroccan position and pave the way towards achieving a mutually political solution to the Western Sahara conflict.

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The post Partisan Diplomacy: Missing Link in Morocco’s Advocacy on Western Sahara appeared first on Morocco World News.

El Jadida - Contemporary media Islam has invented a new religious public sphere beyond governmental control across national borders, located in cyber spaces and on satellite channels. It is a transnational “mediascape” propagating an opinion Islam without identity and culture.

Opposite to cultural Islam that emanates from the living experience of societies with proportionally state-controlled fixed authoritative centres of morality, media Islam is delocalized and decentred between Paris, London, Los Angeles and Dubai with entrepreneurial organizations commoditizing the doctrinaire discourse and practical discussion of religious celebrities such as Amr Khaled, Mohammed Hassan, Rachid al-Afasy, Moez Masoud and other televangelists.

Satellite television and the internet are becoming fertile public spheres where not only old religious meanings are impoverished and deformed but also new Islamic meanings are introduced and mediated transnationally. This delocalisation of Islamic authority beyond the traditional sources of state is generating new producers and locales of religious meaning.

Thus, Muslim subjectivity turns into a networked terminal paying allegiance to a simulated reality, being the outcome of the impact of media technologies. Local subjectivities may be relativised as a consequence of the emergence of cosmopolitan diasporic transnational Muslim subjectivities.

The moral crisis media Islam generates is the retribalization of Islamic communities from local nationalism to a new form of religious transnationalism based on the concept of umma, the imagined holistic community of Islam, which devalues the importance of national loyalties and manures the ground for religious resistance and potential local civil disorder. The cost may get higher if the Muslim networked terminal identity catches signals from the carefully-built persuasive Jihadists' discourse dispersed via blogs and websites online.

Wandering across satellite channels and cyber networks, local Muslims may transfer their sense of belonging to virtual communities online or satellite stations broadcasting variable cocktails of religious ideologies.

In short, state control of local Islamic worship is bound to herald its demise owing to the delocalization of central religious authority, and frantic competition between virtual preachers across the Islamic World to gain audience's support; modern youth citizens are inclined via technological determinism to adhere to imams rooted on TV screens or lurking in remote websites. Hence, the risk of a crisis of national identity and sense of belonging to a mother-nation, especially if we keep betting on religious ties alone to culturalize citizenship.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

The post The Perils of Media Islam appeared first on Morocco World News.

By Irina Tsukerman

New York - The Obama doctrine of balancing interests in the Middle East, presumably Arab and Persian, Sunni and Shi’a, is not only failing on its face, but was never about achieving a balance to begin with.

As indicated elsewhere, Obama has talked about normalizing relations with Iran since running for office. As we further know now, Iran has made overtures with regards to what has become known as the “nuclear deal” in 2009. At no point has Iran indicated its willingness or interest in giving up its geopolitical ambitions of achieving regional dominance.

The secret, and later open, negotiations that took place did not take into account Iran’s meddling in and instigation of conflicts in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, as well as an attempted coup in Bahrain. Allowing the deal to proceed without taking the interests and concerns of any of the Arab allies of the US into consideration indicates that the administration was never concerned about balancing the interests of all parties against one another, but rather, in empowering Iran at the cost of weakening all the rest.

Months preceding and following the announcement of the negotiations showed the cooling in the relations between the administration and Saudi Arabia. Some tensions have been evident in the last few years; furthermore, the attempted coup in Bahrain, narrowly prevented did not meet much resistance or condemnation from the State Department. More recently, President Obama, visiting Riyadh, met with a very cool reception.

The courts have allowed the exposure of the Saudis to the 9/11 restitution claim, and just now, US blocked the delivery of cluster bombs to the royal family. Elsewhere in the Arab world, tensions continued, in part over the U.S. taking sides with Iran and Russia in Syria, and heavily critiquing Saudi Arabia, but not Iran, for involvement in the Yemen proxy war. In part on a more diplomatic level over a harder and selective line the US has started to pursue against some of its closest Arab allies, such as Morocco, in contrast to a toned down approach towards Iran.

During the past several years of the Obama Administration, there have been several attempts to the pass resolutions critical of Morocco’s alleged human rights violations in Western Sahara. Most recently, the U.S. proposed a punitive resolution that would penalize Morocco for the reduction in MINURSO staffing. The resolution was renegotiated in Morocco’s favor, but the country, the first to officially recognize the U.S. at its independence, and a staunch ally on many fronts ever since, was stunned with the unexpected and unbefitting acrimony in public.

 Though some believe that the current U.S. hard line on Morocco’s position vis-à-vis resolution of the conflict in Western Sahara is in the hands of the National Security adviser Susan Rice, heavily influenced by corrupt and fraudulent human rights activists, such as Kerry Kennedy, if we look at the broader scope of the Administration’s activities with respect to its Arab allies, a presidential decree makes more sense. Rather than being a result of rogue activities by overeager human rights-obsessed clique within the Cabinet, the resolution, and general failure to stand up for Morocco with respect to its territorial integrity and resolution of the conflict indicates a part of a wider strategy.

The National Security Adviser has more of a focus on defensive and security related issues than human rights, which generally fall under the guise of the State Department. Secretary of State John Kerry may or may not have associated with Ms. Kennedy, but he was at the center of the nuclear deal, and thus, was one of the most interested parties in keeping Iran happy and making sure the deal would not fall through.

To wit, the Administration recently admitted that it stopped sanctioning Iranian human rights violators after the deal. The Administration has made it clear that human rights are of no concern except when they can be used to support its political moves. President Obama, visiting King Salman at the height of the Raif Badawi campaign, failed to mention the activist by name, much less press the monarch over the wider issue of human rights abuses inside the country. Thus, the U.S. distancing itself from the Saudis has been based on considerations of pivoting towards Iran, which given the upper hand Iran has held throughout the negotiation process, could have only gone one way – U.S. was forced to choose between the old allies and the new, and was not allowed to play nice with both equally.

Further evidence of similar sacrifice of human rights considerations at convenience, has been the faux red lines drawn over Syria. Once again, the administration has admitted that its policy of untruthful promises of humanitarian intervention were never intended to be carried out. Rather, the administration stalled to see what Iran’s position would be, and saw no reason to aggravate Tehran’s man in Damascus, nor had any intention of working with its Sunni Arab allies to resolve the conflict. In the meantime, it pursued secret contacts with Assad. One does not plan invasions or military strikes if one is engaged in secreted outreach efforts. Obama was perfectly willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of lives in Syria, so long as the negotiations with Iran proceeded smoothly.

The fear of aggravating the Khamenei regime, the real hand behind the nuclear deal, despite the apparent usage of the “moderate” Rouhani, was evident even in the State Department’s failure to release the mandatory human rights report on Iran which is normally issued on a regular basis. Senator Ted Cruz, in staunch opposition to the administration, battled until the report was finally released. Nevertheless, the issue of human rights was never addressed as part of the deal, and the observers were led to assume that this administration simply does not believe that human rights is a central issue in politics.

After all, it was Secretary Kerry’s predecessor, Hillary Clinton, who, criticized China for promoting women’s rights. Yet, the administration’s position shifted with respect to Morocco. Without delay, it issued a highly damaging and disingenuous human rights report on Morocco, in addition to proposing the aforementioned resolution. After Ambassador Bush was summoned to Rabat for rebuke over the error-ridden document, the State Department admitted to “making mistakes”.

Separately, the ill-timed and unnecessary public resolution and the incredible report would seem like the produce of overzealous, amateurish junior diplomats unfamiliar with the strong relationship between the two countries, and wishing to make a breakthrough in the early stages of their career, based more in ideology than in common sense. However, when viewed alongside the parallel treatment of a well known human rights offender such as Iran, as well as the actions of the administration towards other Arab states, these actions emerge as mere pieces of a bigger jigsaw.

 But there is nothing puzzling about the result of the way pieces hold together. The administration is ready to do anything to please its new counterpart and insure the certainty of lucrative deals, alongside its European partners. Morocco is not oil rich, and offers fewer such opportunities at the current juncture. Moreover, Iran is aggressively expansionist in its global ambitions and the Sunni Arab states are not. The Administration chooses to appease the more aggressive, apparently stronger country which is using a stick and carrot approach to lure its new friends into doing its bidding.

Whatever the next Administration ends up deciding vis-à-vis Iran and the Arab world, Obama’s foreign policy will ensure a long process of withdrawing from some of the most damaging aspects of this unhealthy co-dependent relationship and towards restoring trust and ties with the old U.S. allies – if only for the sake of achieving a more balanced policy for the U.S. A foreign policy when one party openly manipulates the other cannot be called a balanced policy nor a balanced relationship. The U.S., in its eagerness to achieve normalization with the Islamic Republic, has negotiated itself into a corner where it has not yet achieved equal partnership with Iran and has already damaged its relationships with others. Let us hope that the next President will be wise enough to figure out a way out of this conundrum.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed

The post Obama Turns Away from Arab Allies Towards Iran, Ignores U.S. Interests appeared first on Morocco World News.

By Justin Bibee

Rabat - Morocco has made great strides in recent years with a series of constitutional and legal reforms.

Morocco’s 2011 Constitution incorporated strong human rights provisions to protect the rights of its citizens with respect to free speech and assembly, and other fundamental rights. However, the implementation of these reforms has so far been slow. In 2015, for example, Moroccans exercised their right to peaceful protest in the streets, but police violently dispersed them, seriously injuring hundreds including women.

Coming to Morocco as an American Peace Corps volunteer, I have witnessed these events and have been profoundly affected. As soon as I arrived I fell in love with Morocco and the Moroccan people. While Morocco is a beautiful country aspiring to join the developed world, extreme poverty, disease, hunger, illiteracy, and gender inequality persist in Morocco. I wish to see the Kingdom and its people prosper, and it weighs heavily on my mind and brings tears to my eyes when I see what many Moroccans are going through.

Morocco has been one of the most progressive countries in the region in adopting human rights advancements and the establishment of institutions aiming at promoting human rights. However, despite the existing comprehensive legal and institutional framework, effective implementation is lacking, and significant challenges persist. The circumstances of people especially in rural areas across the country is appalling, as they live in extreme poverty without access to basic services such as adequate health, decent housing, or even drinkable water. These are of concern to me as human rights issues that cannot wait to be addressed and require immediate attention from the highest levels of national government.

Morocco has the wealth, knowledge, and awareness to take better care of its most needy people. What Morocco seemingly lacks is the political will and action on the part of the government. The leaders of Morocco need to take stronger steps toward advocating for and addressing human rights as a measure to ensure the economic growth of Morocco.

Many people mistakenly believe that in the absence of violence, there is peace. However, oppression and marginalization of people may still exist, not as loud or as visible, but just as devastating to the development of people and nations. Governments should stop viewing human rights as a problem, and instead view the commitment to human rights as a tool for development.

A peaceful, stable, and prosperous Morocco is one that can be delivered only through responsible, accountable leadership, a culture of respect for human rights, institutions for good governance, and most important, the sanctity of the rule of law. All of these factors contribute to economic stability and growth.

But it is not only the government's responsibility. There is a great deal that Moroccan citizens can do on their own, proactively. Moroccans should not use “dysfunctional government” as an excuse for inaction. Moroccans should not wait for the government to introduce laws protecting freedoms. The citizenry should demand that they do. But do so peacefully, and legally. You yourself can make a difference by ensuring that you are not violating anyone else’s human rights and by standing up for those whose human rights are being violated.

Unfortunately, my term here is over, and I leave Morocco well aware of the challenges Moroccans face, yet optimistic about Morocco’s future. I hope that the potential I have seen in Morocco for a bright future will be realized.  I believe that what happens to Moroccans is largely up to Moroccans, as it has always been and always will be. No challenge raises a bigger threat to Morocco’s economic development than continuing human rights violations. Eradicating them is a challenge. But no challenge Morocco faces lies beyond the power of Moroccans to surmount.

Photo by Cris Toala Olivares / Reuters

Justin Bibee served as United States Peace Corps Envoy to Sidi Kacem, Morocco from 2014-2016

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed

The post Development in Morocco: Using Human Rights as a Tool appeared first on Morocco World News.

New York - The Moroccan-American relationship is going through one of its worst periods since the Treaty of Peace and Friendship was signed in 1787.

While observers thought that Washington’s lack of support for Morocco in the Security Council in April was only a passing cloud, the U.S. State Department’s annual report on human rights in Morocco came along to add insult to injury. The report gives a grim picture of human rights in Morocco. This reflects America’s double standard in dealing with countries it considers among its “strategic allies.”

This policy goes in line with Obama’s foreign affairs orientation, which has alienated many allies, such as Saudi Arabia. All current indications attest to the fact that Washington is letting down a strategic ally that helped it significantly during the Cold War through the use of oil as a weapon to weaken the Soviet Union.

That Morocco - which has always considered the United States one of its main allies - denounced the Department of State’s report with scathing language and summoned the U.S. Ambassador to Rabat means that the relations between the two countries have entered a new phase that is fraught with risk.

The dark image the report drew about human rights in Morocco shows three principal points: First, the statements the U.S. administration made during meetings with Moroccan officials were mere camouflage.

Second, the current U.S. administration most likely had the intention to use the report’s findings to revive its 2013 proposal to the Security Council, which called for the establishment of a mechanism to monitor human rights in the Western Sahara and Tindouf camps.

Third, the American administration bases its human rights reports on organizations known for their hostility to Morocco, especially the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights. Led by Kerry Kennedy, this organization is infamous for fabricating reports that have nothing to do with reality to defend the positions of groups it supports. An example that illustrates its lack of credibility is that Kerry Kennedy once worked with a law firm in New York to write fake and anonymous reports in order to extort money from oil company Chevron. After a two-year investigation, a New York court concluded that Kennedy’s allegations against Chevron, which she published in U.S. newspapers, were false and based on false reports of which Kennedy was fully aware.

The U.S. policy of double standards in regards to Morocco

To many observers, the United States’ ambiguous position with regards to the Western Sahara is surprising. Never before has Washington taken such a hostile position in total disregard of its strategic alliance with Rabat. A review of the statements released during the last seven years by U.S. officials shows they all emphasize that the U.S. position on the Sahara issue has not changed: the United States considers the Moroccan autonomy plan “realistic, serious and credible” and describes it as providing “ground to reach a consensual political solution.”

However, these positive statements did not prevent the U.S. administration from proposing the aforementioned draft resolution in 2013. Following the friction caused by the draft resolution, Washington returned to using the same statements in which it hails the “credibility and realism of the Moroccan plan.”

What many observers overlooked is that those statements were mere camouflage used by an American administration that does not sympathize with Morocco and does not consider it one of its priorities. Many officials in Obama’s second presidential term are well-known for their sympathy with the Polisario.

Susan Rice, who proposed the draft resolution to the Security Council in 2013, became National Security Adviser; John Kerry was appointed Secretary of State; and Samantha Power was made U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. These officials are not only known for not sympathizing with Morocco, but also for their support of the Polisario. For example, Kerry submitted a request to Congress in 2001 calling for Sahrawis to exercise self-determination.

Since January 2013, there has been a shift in the U.S. administration’s position towards Morocco. As soon as Hillary Clinton left office, things began to take a different turn. While Clinton was sympathetic with Morocco to some extent, the new team who took the lead took a different direction in regards to Morocco. The U.S. administration’s most recent report on human rights in Morocco not only reflects this new trend in the U.S. administration, but also the breakup of mutual trust between the two countries.

In light of the new orientation of Obama’s administration, it is unlikely that relations between the two countries will revert back to normal and that the bonds of mutual trust will be restored. Therefore, Morocco has realized that no good can be expected from the current U.S. administration.

A cloud that may unfold with the change of the U.S. president

It is important to note that American positions on a range of issues often change with the arrival of a new president. This means that Morocco cannot renounce its strategic alliance with the United States altogether or give up efforts to reverse or neutralize its position on the Sahara. The United States is the most influential country in the United Nations, and none can downplay the positive or negative role it can play in the Sahara issue.

Although predictions say that Hillary Clinton is likely to be the next U.S. President, Morocco should draw lessons from its experience with the current administration, and not consider American officials’ sweet talk as support regarding the Sahara. Despite all these statements, the U.S. has not taken any clear action to translate such talk into actual support for Morocco. Had there been real will to support Morocco, things would have not reached this level of uncertainty and distrust, and Washington would have not taken positions hostile to Rabat.

The distinguished relationship between Clinton and King Mohammed VI does not necessarily imply that she will provide unconditional support to Rabat. American politics are complex and the decision-making process is determined by many political and economic considerations. Many foreign policy decisions are based on studies carried out by think tanks that serve as guidance for American policy-makers.

Therefore, Morocco should deal cautiously with the next U.S. administration. Moroccan officials should reach out to various stakeholders and influential figures in decision-making circles in Washington. Moreover, Morocco should keep track of all the studies that shape American foreign policy and its priorities. Any future Moroccan policy regarding the United States must be built on accurate data and according to the orientations of the U.S. administration.

Morocco should also handle the current friction while being mindful of the importance of the United States on the world stage. Morocco should not deal with this country the same way it can with France or Spain. While Morocco is an integral part of the economic policies of these two countries, as well as their national security, this does not apply to the United States, which does not consider Morocco a priority in its foreign policy.

New American foreign policy shifts require a full mobilization of all Moroccan stakeholders, including universities and research centers, so as to understand their implications and explore the best way to enable Morocco to deal with them proactively.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed

The post Is the United States Abandoning its Alliance with Morocco? appeared first on Morocco World News.

By Majid Morceli  

San Francisco - Polisario Leader Mohammed Abdelaziz’s life ended on Tuesday after a lifetime lived as a puppet for the Algerian regime. Did it never occur to him that the lives of the thousands of Sahraouis that he pretended to defend, are simply hostages subjected to hellish living conditions, locked inside the gates of Tindouf in the Algerian territory.

The Algerian official news agency APS announced the death of the leader before any other news media, to this author a sign that the Algerian regime is the one making decisions for the Sahraouis, including the announcement of the death of their supposed protector.

Under normal circumstances, one typically feels sorrow for those who die, but not for this puppet, who was responsible for the imprisonment of Moroccan prisoners of war (POWs) for decades upon Algeria’s orders. Moroccan POWs were the longest ever held POWS in the world.  Yet, he never had to face any consequences for his

actions. Instead, he died riddled with lung cancer, and even while dying, he had no choice but to meet the UN secretary general when he visited the camps.  Perhaps it never occurred to him that he could have saved the entire Tindouf population by simply giving up his false dream that

one day Morocco would relinquish an inch of the Sahara.  Although he received many offers to mend fences with Morocco, he refused, choosing instead to please Morocco’s enemies in the El Moradia palace in Algiers and perpetuatethe miserable lives of innocent men, women, and children in the harsh living conditions in Algeria.

As of the writing of the article, Moroccan officials have not commented on his death, nor have they sent any condolences. They are well aware that the death of the puppet will not end the conflict.

His replacement has already been carefully selected by Bouteflika’s clan. How odd that Bouteflika himself is suffering from exactly the same malady, but that apparently it has not crossed his mind that it is time for a united Maghreb, and to perhaps extend an olive branch to Morocco, as did Morocco’s King on several occasions.

One thing is sure, the death of a man whom many regard as a traitor will not change anything. Quite the contrary, it is good news for the Algerian regime. It will allow it to select someone who is in good health as the new Polisario leader and who will allow it to maintain its rule over the Sahraouis. Morocco, unfortunately will have no choice but to continue tofiercely defend itself against its many enemies.

The people of Morocco will simply have to come to terms with that for as long as Algeria is its neighbor. Nothing will change even after Bouteflika and his clan are no longer at the helm.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed

The post The Death of the Polisario Leader: A Moroccan Who Betrayed His Country appeared first on Morocco World News.

Washington - The American decision not to back Morocco’s decision to expel the U.N. mission in the Western Sahara is not an anti-Morocco position but rather a policy declaration consistent with prior American stances in similar conflicts. If Moroccan officials were hoping for a different outcome, they should have had a strategy and a plan to sway the White House. Unfortunately, Rabat did not have either.

Moroccan diplomats’ inability to convey to the White House the Kingdom’s vital role in sustaining American national security interests in North Africa, the Sahel and the Mediterranean Sea opened the door to the State Department’s diplomat-activists to adopt pro-Algerian positions.

Washington's decision to include language in the United Nations latest resolution on the Western Sahara referring to the self-determination of the people of the region was a slap in the face of old friend Morocco.

Moroccan diplomats, politicians and parliamentarian’s unfamiliarity with the American political system and their obliviousness to the nature of the Obama administration’s style of foreign policy have pushed the relations between the two nations into the predicament we see today.

To understand The Obama administration’s position on the Western Sahara and formulate a diplomatic counter-attack, the Moroccan embassy in Washington should have studied the case of “the independence of South Sudan”.

Why South Sudan? Foreign policy observers see former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and current White House National Security Adviser Susan E. Rice- who is credited with the independence of South Sudan as an architect of the White House’s policy in the Western Sahara. It is not a secret in Washington that White House officials and staffers micromanage the work of the State Department.

Following the same trend, Ambassador Rice perceives the “struggle of the Sahrawi people “in the same light as South Sudan’s drive for independence. As such, Rice’s unsuccessful attempt in April 20103 to amend the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) chart to include human rights monitoring in the Moroccan Sahara, was a prelude to an American endorsement of the concept of a Sahrawi self-determination.

It is painfully obvious that Moroccan officials have not learned their lessons.  Despite the crisis that erupted after Ambassador Rice maneuvers at the U.N., Moroccan officials did not change course in Washington. In fact, the same meek, incoherent and reactionary approach that led the 2013 crisis remains the thesis of Rabat’s foreign policy in Washington today.

It took Morocco a long time to realize that Washington does not have friends but rather interests. For now, the North African nation is not on the White House radar and therefore, American diplomats’ approach the Western Sahara conflict with an idealistic and "nonrealistic" modus.

In calling for the return of the MINURSO to the Sahara and not supporting Rabat’s position, the State Department has avoided setting a precedent. Morocco is not that important for Washington to venture in calling for a U.N. mission to suspend its work based on the whim of a U.N. member state.

The White House’s ambivalent attitude is due in large part to Morocco’s lack of strategy underscoring its strategic importance to American military and intelligence efforts in the region, the State Department never felt political heat from either the White House or the Pentagon to adopt an understanding tone with Morocco. The United States reacts only when its national interests are at stake.

Morocco’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs should have seen America’s “unreceptive” positions coming.  After all any diplomatic observer following the U.N. could have predicted that U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power, known for her support of human rights and self-determination causes, will likely call for a return of the MUNIRSO .

It was naïve for the Moroccan diplomats to think that Power will back Rabat’s decision to expel U.N. Personnel. To the contrary, they should have predicted that the U.S. Ambassador would recommend a resumption of the U.N. mission if for no other reason than on humanitarian grounds.

The absence of permanent, credible, articulate and knowledgeable Sahrawi public advocates of Morocco’s positions have hurt the image and the message in Washington and Europe. These campaigners need to be on the move all the time and on the ready to tackle predicaments as they rise.

As long as Moroccan officials keep shying away from international media and rely on lobbyists and publicists to advocate for their cause, the damaging results will remain the same. Similarly, Morocco has struggled to formulate a strong, clear and concise case for its positions in the Western Sahara dossier.

Morocco’s diplomatic shortcomings in Washington, and not the “defunct” Algerian diplomacy, are behind the recent series of crisis between Rabat and Washington. It is time for a new and bold diplomacy in Washington.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy

© Morocco World News. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten or redistributed

The post Morocco-USA:  Moroccan Diplomats Stumble Again in Washington appeared first on Morocco World News.

New York - Mohamed Abdelaziz, former leader of the Polisario Front, died on Tuesday, May 30 at age 68. For the members of the Polisario, he was a “leader who fought tirelessly for independence,” while for Moroccans he was a “traitor who betrayed his country and sold his soul to Algeria.” His death offers an opportunity for observers to shed light on the life of this controversial personality, his political motivations and his goals.

Mohamed Abdelaziz was born and raised in Morocco until he joined the Polisario in 1973. His father was born in 1912 and lived his life in Morocco, serving in the army until 1976. Unlike his father, who joined the Liberation Army upon Morocco’s independence in 1956 to fight the Spanish presence in southern Morocco and then Moroccan Royal Army, Abdelaziz dreamed of establishing an independent state in the so-called Western Sahara. His determination to achieve this dream sat well with Algeria, whose leaders were adamant in preventing Morocco from achieving its territorial integrity.

Like other members of the Polisario, such as El Oualid Mustapha Sayed, the founder of the separatist movement, and Bachir Edkhil, one of its early leaders who later defected to Morocco, Mohammed Abdelaziz studied at Moroccan universities and held Moroccan degrees. He and his acolytes were all part of the leftist movements that developed in Morocco starting in the 1960s.

Following the death of Abdelaziz, many are wondering if his passing will signal a change in the Polisario’s handing and approach to the Western Sahara and if new leadership will bring a new dynamic to the conflict. The main question that observers are asking is whether the new Polisario leader will have any willingness to open up to Morocco and show readiness to negotiate a political solution or stick to Abdelaziz’s legacy and maintain his call for the establishment of an independent state in southern Morocco.

Abdelaziz’s successor will follow Algeria’s agenda

Given the history of the conflict over the past four decades and Algeria’s upper hand over the Polisario leadership, it would be both premature and naïve to think that his death might bring a new or positive dynamic to the conflict and that his successor might have a different vision for a political solution.

If things were different, we could say that the designation of a new leader might bring a positive change that would likely help Morocco and the Polisario put an end to the conflict.

However, those who have the last word in the Tindouf camps are the Algerians who will only select a new leader who will stick to the same approach defended by Abdelaziz for 40 years, which is the demand for the establishment of an independent state in the territory.

Abdelaziz was just a simple civil servant faithfully implementing the instructions given to him by the Algerians. What we should not overlook is that the Polisario is not the master of its own destiny. Abdelaziz remained at the helm of the Polisario simply because he was serving the Algerian agenda. Those who knew him and know the basics of Algeria’s foreign policy doctrine towards Morocco since the mid 1960s have always been aware that Abdelaziz was a tool used by Algeria to weaken Morocco and prevent it from achieving de jure sovereignty over the Western Sahara.

Abdelaziz was the perfect docile “leader” for Algeria

Abdelziz owed his longevity at the helm of the Polisario to the Algerians. Had Algeria not decided to place him in charge of the separatist movement, he would have never dreamed of being its leader. Since the early days of the movement, the Algerians realized how malleable Abdelaziz was and how he could be used as a tool in their struggle against Morocco. The Algerians are believed to be the ones who killed the Polisario founder and first leader El Ouali Mustapha Sayed.

Many former Polisario operatives who fled to Morocco argue that Sayed was not killed in battle against the Mauritanian army; he was killed by the Algerians after they realized that he was open to negotiating a solution with Morocco in a way that would have put an end to the conflict and guaranteed the Sahraouis rights within the framework of Moroccan sovereignty over the territory.

According to the same version of events, over a year after Algeria started lending military and financial support to the Polisario, Sayed realized that Algiers’ goal was not to help the Sahraouis achieve their goal of independence or lead a dignified life, but to use the conflict as a tool to weaken Morocco. This prompted Sayed’s decision to open up to Rabat in order to explore the best way to end the conflict. This decision cost him his life.

To achieve their goal of perpetuating the conflict, the Algerians found no “leader” more docile and loyal than Mohammed Abdelaziz.

Bachir Dkhil, one of the founding members of the Polisario, remembers how former Algerian President Houari Boumedien said that he wanted to turn the Sahara into “a stone in Morocco’s shoes.”

Since the Sand War that pitted Morocco against Algeria in 1963 and the ensuing humiliation the Moroccan army inflicted on its Algerian rival, one of the main tenets of Algiers’ foreign policy has been to weaken Morocco, prevent it from achieving its territorial integrity and stop it from being the main regional power in the Maghreb.

By resorting to this strategy, Algeria does not only seek to weaken Morocco, but also to prevent it from laying claims to large swaths of Algerian territory such as Tindouf and Colmbe Bechar, which, before the French occupation of Algeria, always belonged to Morocco. The cause of the Sand War was Algeria’s decision to declare the inviolability of borders inherited from colonialism, in total disregard of the promise made in 1958 by Algeria’s Farhat Hashad to return the aforementioned territories to Morocco once Algeria achieved independence from France.

A solution to the conflict can only come from Algeria

Following Abdelaziz’s death, the only person who can bring a positive dynamic and put an end to the ongoing impasse is the president who will succeed to Bouteflika in Algeria. There will only be a solution to the Western Sahara conflict if the Algerians change their foreign policy doctrine toward Morocco, come to terms with the fact that there can be no establishment of an independent state in the region and become willing to negotiate directly with Rabat in order to explore the best way to put an end to the conflict.

It is an undeniable fact that the conflict over the Sahara is not between the Sahraouis and Morocco, but between Morocco and Algeria. The Sahraouis have been used as tool in the proxy diplomatic and media war that Algiers has waged against Rabat for 40 years.

Regardless of the new Polisario leadership’s course of action with regards to Morocco, the most important element to take into account in the coming weeks is what will happen inside the camps. In recent years and more intensely in recent weeks, many opposition movements have been calling for a change in the way the Polisario has handled the conflict so far. One of these movements is that of Khatt Ashahid, who called on many occasions for the Polisario leadership to open up to Morocco in order to put an end to the conflict.

The only fear is that the vacuum caused by Abdelaziz’s death might cause some unrest in the Tindouf camps. It would be hard to predict what could happen next if this occurred.

At this time of uncertainty for both the leadership of the Polisario and the Algerian government, the international community has to step up more than ever before, look at the conflict with realism and push for a mutually acceptable political solution that would preserve stability in the region.

An earlier version of this article was published on the New Arab

Samir Bennis is the co-founder of and editor-in-chief of Morocco World News. You can follow him on Twitter @SamirBennis

The post Western Sahara: Why Nothing Will Change After Mohamed Abdelaziz’s Death appeared first on Morocco World News.