updates

Slid bar

The Occupation We Choose to Ignore’

Do you know who I am? I am a Sahrawi. The land to which I refer is what is known today as the non-self-governing territory ofWestern Sahara. My country was colonized by the Spanish and the French between 1884 and 1975, divided in two and occupied by Moroccan and Mauritanian forces thereafter, and has been ruled exclusively by the Kingdom of Morocco from 1979 until the present.

The Western Sahara: forgotten first source of the Arab Spring

this is one part of the Arab Spring that western governments don't want to talk about. And their silence, and the UN's complicity in it, is why that repression continues, and a terrible injustice is perpetuated.

ISS - News - The Western Sahara and North African People’s Power

Respect the right of individuals to peacefully express their opinions regarding the status and future of the Western Sahara and to document violations of human rights

King of Morocco to be biggest benefactor of EU trade agreement - Telegraph

it has emerged that the single biggest beneficiary of the deal will be the King of Morocco, who is head of one of the three largest agricultural producers in the north African country and lays claim to 12,000 hectares of the nation's most fertile farmland.

North African Dispatches Africa’s Forgotten Colony

Oblivion it seems is the current reality for the arid North African territory of Western Sahara; often referred to as Africa’s ‘Last Colony’. In my opinion, it would be more accurate to describe it as ‘Africa’s Forgotten Colony’.

1 2 3 4 5

Sep 6, 2011

Joe Dyke: Libya's new Leaders Liberal? They Don't Even Support Self-Determination

Joe Dyke

GET UPDATES FROM JOE DYKE

Libya's new Leaders Liberal? They Don't Even Support Self-Determination

Posted: 5/9/11 00:00 GMT

There's one Arab Spring protest you have probably never heard of. No, it's not Egypt, Tunisia, Libya or Syria - all of which have received thousands of reels of coverage on your TV. It's not even the 'silent protests' in Bahrain, Algeria, Jordan, Oman and Saudi Arabia - where forces more powerful than those of the protesters suppressed the brief flickers of dissent before they took hold. No, I am talking about the people of Western Sahara, the Sahrawis, who have been ruled by the Moroccans since the mineral rich region was annexed in 1976.

If you are not familiar with Western Sahara that is hardly surprising; the struggle of these few hundred thousand people on the west coast of Africa receives almost no coverage in the media. Yet the region is defined by the UN as a "non-self-governing territory", with a distinct language and defined space. Numerous international law rulings have declared the continued occupation by the Moroccans illegal, leading to the region being dubbed 'Africa's last colony'.

Western Sahara is divided by a 1,500 mile wall, the largest in the world, complete with barbed wire and mines and maintained by Moroccan troops. The Moroccan authorities consider any opposition to their rule in Western Sahara as an attack on the country's "territorial integrity" so pro-independence forces are often brutally supressed. Human Rights Watch has repeatedly warned that Moroccan forces "use a combination of repressive laws, police violence, and unfair trials to punish Sahrawis who advocate peacefully in favor of independence or full self-determination for the disputed Western Sahara."

The people of Western Sahara have not been oblivious to the Arab Spring. In February and March, partly inspired by the toppling of Mubarak and Ben Ali, thousands of Sahrawis protested on the streets against Moroccan rule. This Tuesday there will be protests across the world to mark the 20th anniversary of the ceasefire between the Moroccans and the Polisario, the Sahrawi rebel national liberation movement. As part of that ceasefire the Moroccans promised a referendum on self-determination, yet the Sahrawis are still waiting.

What has this got to do with Libya? Last week the new 'liberal' government of Libya, the National Transitional Council, announced it no longer supported an independent Western Sahara. Colonel Gaddafi had, albeit inconsistently, pledged Libyan support for the Sahrawis' struggle for recognition. Now the NTC has quietly backed the Moroccans as the true and legitimate rulers of the region.

This must be recognised as hypocritical. The NTC came to life as a movement fighting for independence from Colonel Gaddafi and, most importantly, the right to democracy. When Gaddafi was set to retake Benghazi, it urged the West to act based, on these same liberal democratic principles and the right to self-determination. In March, the movement's spokesperson, Mustafa Gheriani, said that "the revolution was started because people were feeling despair from poverty, from oppression. Their last hope was freedom." Now they have assumed control, they have refused to back the legitimate demands of the Sahrawis for the same rights.

The reasons for this shift are based on regional alliances - the NTC leaders have fallen out with the Algerians because they have so far refused to recognise them as the legitimate government of Libya. The Algerians have always supported an independent Western Sahara, in part at least to aggravate the Moroccans. Therefore the NTC has made the calculated decision that to state their support for Moroccan control of Western Sahara they will bring the country on side and isolate the Algerians. It is also partly because there have been claims, largely unverified so far, that members of the Polisario were employed by Colonel Gaddafi as mercenaries to put down the protests in Libya.

Yet how alarming it is that one week into Libya's new administration 'real-politik' is already the name of the game. Even if it were the case that people affiliated with the Polisario were involved in Libya that does not mean that the Sahrawi's right to self-determination should be so summarily dismissed.

If it really wants to reshape North African politics, the NTC should be supporting the struggle of a people in a nearby region illegally suppressed by an occupying power. Instead it has put its own local and strategic interests. The National Transitional Council's stance on Western Sahara seriously undermines its claims to be in favour of national self-determination in the region. So much for the new liberalism of the Middle East.

Follow Joe Dyke on Twitter: www.twitter.com/joedyke



Sep 1, 2011

Kosmos Energy signed new petroleum agreement - wsrw.org


kosmosboujdour_25.04.2011-21.08.2011.jpg

US oil company Kosmos Energy has signed a renewed petroleum agreement for offshore occupied Western Sahara. The new area reduces its illegal acreage off Western Sahara with a third.
Published: 23.08 - 2011 10:21Printer version
In a report filed by Kosmos Energy to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on 11 August 2011, the Texas company explained that it in July 2011 signed a Petroleum Agreement with ONHYM, “covering the Cap Boujdour area offshore the Kingdom of Morocco.”

The agreement is a new version of an old licence they have held in the waters offshore the occupied territory since the time the company was privately owned.

No information were given in the SEC filing that the Kosmos licence in fact does not lie offshore the Kingdom of Morocco, but offshore the territory of Western Sahara, which Morocco occupied in 1975. The oil company’s plans severely contribute to maintaining the brutal occupation of the territory, and are in violation of international law as described by the UN.

Changes made last week on Kosmos’ webpages show that the block has changed in size. The area is now two-thirds of what it previously was.

kosmos_block_2006_180.jpgThe new acreage of the Boujdour block, as reported on Kosmos Energy’s webpages today, is 29.741 sq.km (7.3 million acres). The previous size was 43,988 sq.km (10.87 million acres). A prospectus from 12 May 2011 puts the size at 10.89 million acres. As seen on map to the right, the block was even bigger back in 2006, constituting an area of 110,400 sq.km (27.2 million acres).

Also the name of the licence area was changed on the webpages from “Boujdour Offshore Block” to “Cap Boujdour Block”. The firm furthermore amended the name of the operator from “Kosmos Energy Offshore Morocco” to “Kosmos Energy”. See the webpage change below.

The reduction of the licence area had already been anticipated by Kosmos. In May 2011, two months before the new agreement was signed, Kosmos wrote:

“Regarding our license in Morocco, under the petroleum agreement covering the Boujdour Offshore Block (the ‘‘Boujdour Offshore Petroleum Agreement’’), the most recent exploration phase expired on February 26, 2011, however, we entered a memorandum of understanding with ONHYM to enter a new petroleum agreement covering the highest potential areas of this block under essentially the same terms as the original license. Accordingly, the acreage covered by any new petroleum agreement will be less than the acreage covered by the original Boujdour Offshore Petroleum Agreement”.

…and…

“We have not yet made a decision as to whether or not to drill our Moroccan prospects. We have entered a memorandum of understanding with ONHYM to enter a new license covering the highest potential areas of this block under essentially the same terms as the original license. If we decide to continue into the drilling phase of such license, we anticipate that the first well to drill within the Boujdour Offshore Block will be post 2012.”

The reduction of the licence area can be clearly seen from the two maps above.


Kosmos Energy webpages as of 3 August .....and 19 August 2011


Split EU Council decides to renew EU-Morocco fish pact - wsrw.org


european-council-table_610.jpg

Despite an unseen division on the issue, a slim majority in the Council assured the one-year prolongation of the controversial EU-Morocco fisheries agreement. Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland, the UK, Cyprus and Austria could not agree to the proposal.
Published: 30.06 - 2011 12:15Printer version
29 June 2010
Fishelsewhere


After continuous delays due to concerns on the agreement’s impact on occupied Western Sahara, the final decision to adopt the one-year extension of the EU’s most criticised fisheries agreement was made today by the Member States' ambassadors.

In a surprising last minute turn-around, and in spite of previous reservations, Germany decided to agree to the proposal – tipping the final turn-out in favour of the French-Spanish advocated prolongation. Rationalising their stance, Germany claims that Morocco has sufficiently proven that the local population of Western Sahara benefits from the agreement.

7 other EU Member States were less convinced of the Moroccan reports. Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands voted against, while the UK, Austria, Finland and Cyprus abstained. Their position is backed-up by a legal opinion issued by the European Parliament in 2009, stating that the EU-Morocco fish deal was in violation of international law for failing to take into account the wishes and interests of the Saharawi people.

The provisional agreement suits the interests of Spain, which holds no less than 100 out of the 119 fishing licences available under the FPA. The former colonial power of Western Sahara was eager to underscore that the agreement is not just important in terms of fishing opportunities, but also has a political importance, referring to Morocco’s ongoing cosmetic constitutional reforms.

As far as WSRW understands, some other countries, which ended up supporting the extension, did issue statements that their endorsement is conditional upon the Commission providing “concrete” information on the impact of the investments made through the agreement.

Today's decision will be formally adopted by the European Council of Ministers in the coming weeks. The provisional protocol now has to pass through the European Parliament, which is not expected to express its opinion before October.



Norway: "Saharawi's wishes must be respected" - wsrw.org


children_dakhla_610.jpg

Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs underlines that the wishes of the Sahrawis must be taken into account upon undertaking business in the territory of Western Sahara.
Published: 02.07 - 2011 13:30Printer version
In a statement given by the Deputy Minister mid June, it was clarified that whenever the Norwegian government refers to "the local population" in Western Sahara "we of course refer to the Sahrawi people”.

The debate has now continued between Liberal parliamentarian Trine Skei Grande, and the the Norwegian minister for foreign affairs.

Unofficial translation to English below made by the Norwegian Support Committee for Western Sahara.
Read original debate (in Norwegian).

Question by Member of Parliament Trine Skei Grande (Liberal Party) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, 21 June 2011.

"Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs confirm that the Government considers Western Sahara to be under Moroccan annexation, that this annexation is not recognised and thus is considered illegitimate by the Government, and can the Minister guarantee that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will now actively advise against Norwegian commercial activities in connection with Western Sahara?"

Minister of Foreign Affairs Jonas Gahr Støre’s answer, 27 June 2011:

"The Government’s Western Sahara policy remains unchanged. Norway supports the UN’s efforts to achieve a political solution that entails self-determination for the people of Western Sahara, and we urge the parties to enter into direct negotiations without preconditions.

Since Morocco does not exercise internationally recognised sovereignty over Western Sahara, Norway has never considered Western Sahara a part of Morocco’s territory. In the UN, the territory has status as non-self-governing, and, like most other countries, Norway does not recognise Morocco’s declaration that Western Sahara is a part of the Moroccan state.

This entails consequently that Norway does not recognise Morocco’s annexation of Western Sahara and that we consider it illegitimate. This policy has remained constant during all Norwegian governments since the conflict arose in the 1970s. As I have also previously clarified for the Parliament, this entails among other things that the free trade agreement between EFTA and Morocco is not in force for Western Sahara (parliamentary question by Member of Parliament Dagfinn Høybråten (Christian Democratic Party) about EFTA’s free trade agreements with Morocco and Israel, respectively, on 11 May 2010).

Western Sahara’s unresolved status entails further that exploitation of resources in the area must, according to international law, be carried out in accordance with the wishes and interests of the local population. This, together with the consideration of avoiding behaviour that might be cited in support of a particular outcome of the UN’s negotiation process or be perceived as a legitimisation of the situation in Western Sahara, forms the basis for the Government’s dissuasion against commercial activity in Western Sahara.

I do not share the opinion that the the bureaucracy in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is supposed to have expressed to the business community another attitude than that of the members of the Government in this matter. As I emphasised in my answer in the Parliament to the interpellation by MP Trine Skei Grande in May of 2010, the Government’s attitude to commercial activities in Western Sahara is clear and well known: the question has been commented on in the media frequently during recent years. The dissuasion has since 2007 been available at the Government’s web site. All business people are welcome to seek advise from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or to the embassy in Rabat if they have questions about activities in the area, and many companies get in touch every year for such purposes. The White Paper on Corporate Social Responsibility, in which the Government’s dissuasion against economic activity in Western Sahara is explicitly mentioned, is also available on the Internet. The dissuasion is furthermore constantly passed on in connection with contact between Norwegian and Moroccan authorities with regard to business activities – the last time was in Morocco in June of 2011.

The Government will continue to actively inform about dissuasion in the same manner as earlier. "
By : Western Sahara Resource Watch