Foreign Policy in Focus - A Think Tank Without Walls
Foreign Policy In Focus

FPIF Commentary

Haidar's Struggle

Stephen Zunes | October 7, 2008

Editor: John Feffer

Email this page to a friend

Comment on this article

Foreign Policy In Focus

Aminatou Haidar, a nonviolent activist from Western Sahara and a key leader in her nation's struggle against the 33-year-old U.S.-backed Moroccan occupation of her country, won this year's Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award.

This recognition of Haidar and her nonviolent freedom campaign is significant in that the Western Sahara struggle has often gone unnoticed, even among many human rights activists. In addition, highlighting the work of an Arab Muslim woman struggling for her people's freedom through nonviolent action helps challenge impressions held by many Americans that those resisting U.S.-backed regimes in that part of the world are misogynist, violent extremists. Successive administrations have used this stereotype to justify military intervention and support for repressive governments and military occupations.

Unfortunately, given its role in making Morocco's occupation possible, the U.S. government has little enthusiasm for Haidar and the visibility her winning the RFK prize gives to the whole Western Sahara issue.

Moroccan Occupation

In 1975, the kingdom of Morocco conquered Western Sahara — on the eve of its anticipated independence from Spain — in defiance of a series of UN Security Council resolutions and a landmark 1975 decision by the International Court of Justice upholding the right of the country's inhabitants to self-determination. With threats of a French and American veto at the UN preventing decisive action by the international community to stop the Moroccan invasion, the nationalist Polisario Front launched an armed struggle against the occupiers. The Polisario established the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic in February 1976, which has subsequently been recognized by nearly 80 countries and is a full member state of the African Union. The majority of the indigenous population, known as Sahrawis, went into exile, primarily in Polisario-run refugee camps in Algeria.

Thanks in part to U.S. military aid, Morocco eventually was able to take control of most of the territory, including all major towns. It also built, thanks to U.S. assistance, a series of fortified sand berms in the desert that effectively prevented penetration by Polisario forces into Moroccan-controlled territory. In addition, in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Morocco moved tens of thousands of settlers into Western Sahara until they were more than twice the population of the remaining indigenous Sahrawis. Yet the Polisario achieved a series of diplomatic victories that generated widespread international support for self-determination and refusal to recognize the Moroccan takeover. In 1991, the Polisario agreed to a ceasefire in return for a Moroccan promise to allow for an internationally supervised referendum on the fate of the territory. Morocco, however, refused to allow the referendum to move forward.

French and American support for the Moroccan government blocked the UN Security Council from providing the necessary diplomatic pressure to move the referendum process forward. The Polisario, meanwhile, recognized its inability to defeat the Moroccans by military means. As a result, the struggle for self-determination shifted to within the Moroccan-occupied territory, where the Sahrawi population has launched a nonviolent resistance campaign against the occupation.

Nonviolent Resistance

Western Sahara had seen scattered impromptu acts of open nonviolent resistance ever since the Moroccan conquest. In 1987, for instance, a visit to the occupied territory by a special UN committee sparked protests in the Western Saharan capital of El Aaiún. The success of this major demonstration was all the more remarkable, given that most of the key organizers had been arrested the night before and the city was under a strict curfew. Among the more than 700 people arrested was the 21-year-old Aminatou Haidar.

For four years she was "disappeared," held without charge or trial, and kept in secret detention centers. In these facilities, she and 17 other Sahrawi women underwent regular torture and abuse.

Most resistance activity inside the occupied territory remained clandestine until early September 1999, when Sahrawi students organized sit-ins and vigils for more scholarships and transportation subsidies from the Moroccan government. Since an explicit call for independence would have been brutally suppressed immediately, the students hoped to push the boundaries of dissent by taking advantage of their relative intellectual freedom. Former political prisoners seeking compensation and accountability for their state-sponsored disappearances soon joined the nonviolent vigils, along with Sahrawi workers from nearby phosphate mines and a union of unemployed college graduates. The movement was suppressed within a few months. Although the demands of what became known as the first Sahrawi Intifada appeared to be nonpolitical, it served as a test of both the Sahrawi public and the Moroccan government. It paved the way for Sahrawis to press for bolder demands and engage in larger protests in the future that would directly challenge the Moroccan occupation itself.

A second Sahrawi intifada, which because known as the "Intifada al-Istiglal" (the Intifada of Independence), began in May 2005. Thousands of Sahrawi demonstrators, led by women and youths, took to the streets of El Aaiún protesting the ongoing Moroccan occupation and calling for independence. The largely nonviolent protests and sit-ins were met by severe repression by Moroccan troops and Moroccan settlers. Within hours, leading Sahrawi activists were kidnapped, including Haidar, who was brutally beaten by Moroccan occupation forces. Sahrawi students at Moroccan universities then organized solidarity demonstrations, hunger strikes, and other forms of nonviolent protests. Throughout the remainder of 2005, the intifada continued with both spontaneous and planned protests, all of which were met with harsh repression by Moroccan authorities.

Haidar was released within seven months as a result of pressure from Amnesty International and the European parliament. Meanwhile, nonviolent protests have continued, despite ongoing repression by U.S.-supported Moroccan authorities. Despite continued disappearances, killings, beatings, and torture, Haidar has continued to advocate nonviolent action. In addition to organizing efforts at home, she traveled extensively to raise awareness internationally about the ongoing Moroccan occupation and advocate for the Sahrawi people's right to self-determination.

U.S. Increases Backing for Morocco

As repression increased, so did U.S. support for Morocco. The Bush administration has increased military and security assistance five-fold and also signed a free-trade agreement. The United States remained largely silent over the deteriorating human rights situation in the occupied Western Sahara while heaping praise for King Mohammed VI's domestic political and economic reforms. This year's Republican Party platform singles out the Kingdom of Morocco for its "cooperation and social and economic development," with no mention of Western Sahara.

However, the occupation itself continues to prove problematic for Morocco. The nonviolent resistance to the occupation continues. Most of the international community, despite French and American efforts, has refused to recognize Morocco's illegal annexation of the territory.

As a result, the Moroccan kingdom recently advocated an autonomy plan for the territory. The Sahrawis, with the support of most of the world's nations, rejected the proposal since it would not allow them the choice of independence, as all those living in non-self-governing territories have the legal right to do.

Indeed, the autonomy plan is based on the assumption that Western Sahara is part of Morocco, a contention that the UN, the World Court, the African Union, and a broad consensus of international legal opinion have long rejected. To accept Morocco's autonomy plan would mean that, for the first time since the founding of the UN and the ratification of the UN Charter more the 60 years ago, the international community would be endorsing the expansion of a country's territory by military force, thereby establishing a very dangerous and destabilizing precedent.

In addition, Morocco's proposal contains no enforcement mechanisms, nor are there indications of any improvement of the current poor human rights situation. It's also unclear how much autonomy Morocco is offering, since it would retain control of Western Sahara's natural resources and law enforcement. In addition, the proposal appears to indicate that all powers not specifically vested in the autonomous region would remain with the kingdom.

Despite this, the Bush administration refers to Morocco's autonomy plan as "credible and serious" and the "only possible solution" to the Western Sahara conflict, further insisting that "an independent state in the Sahara is not a realistic option." While visiting Morocco last month, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressed her support for the "good ideas" put forth by the Moroccan occupiers. Referring to the 35-year-old conflict, she proclaimed that "it is time that it be resolved," presumably with the Sahrawis accepting their fate as permanently living under Moroccan rule.

Key House Democrats have weighed in support of Morocco's right of conquest as well, with Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY), who chairs the Subcommittee on the Middle East, joining Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Democratic Caucus Chair Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) in signing a letter endorsing the autonomy plan. Prominent Republicans signing the letter included Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), House Republican Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO), and former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL). Indeed, more than 80 of the signers are either committee chairmen or ranking members of key committees, subcommittees and elected leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives, yet another indication in this post-Cold War era of a growing bipartisan effort to undermine the longstanding principle of the right of self-determination.

Advocacy for Haidar

The RFK Memorial Center for Human Rights' selection of Haidar — one of the most prominent opponents of the U.S.-backed autonomy plan — may make it more difficult for the Bush administration to push acceptance of the Moroccan proposal through a reluctant UN Security Council. Ironically, the United States rejected a more generous autonomy plan for Kosovo and instead pushed for UN recognition of that nation's unilateral declaration of independence, even though Kosovo was legally part of Serbia and Western Sahara is legally a country under foreign military occupation.

Alas, U.S. administrations have gone to great lengths to prevent RFK award recipients from even having the opportunity to tell their stories. For example, the Reagan administration denied entry to the United States to representatives of the 1984 winners CoMadres — the group of Salvadoran women struggling on behalf of murdered and kidnapped relatives and other victims of the U.S.-backed junta. They couldn't even receive their award.

In addition to a modest cash reward, the human rights award includes the expectation the RFK Memorial Center for Human Rights will launch an ongoing legal, advocacy and technical support through a partnership with the winner. According to Monika Kalra Varma, the center's director, "The RFK Human Rights Award not only recognizes a courageous human rights defender but marks the beginning of the RFK Center's long-term partnership with Ms. Haidar and our commitment to work closely with her to realize the right to self-determination for the Sahrawi people."

Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), brother of the slain senator for whom the prize is named, stated, "I congratulate Aminatou Haidar for receiving this honor. All who care about democracy, human rights, and the rule of law for the people of the Western Sahara are inspired by her extraordinary courage, dedication and skilled work on their behalf."

Next Steps

Western Sahara remains an occupied territory only because Morocco has refused to abide by a series of UN Security Council resolutions calling on the kingdom to end their occupation and recognize the right of the people of that territory to self-determination. Morocco has been able to persist in its defiance of its international legal obligations because France and the United States, which wield veto power in the UN Security Council, have blocked the enforcement of these resolutions. In addition, France and the United States served as principal suppliers of the armaments and other security assistance to Moroccan occupation forces. As a result, at least as important as nonviolent resistance by the Sahrawis against Morocco's occupation policies would be the use of nonviolent action by the citizens of France, the United States and other countries that enable Morocco to maintain its occupation. Such campaigns played a major role in forcing the United States, Australia, and Great Britain to cease their support for Indonesia's occupation of East Timor. Solidarity networks have emerged in dozens of countries around the world, most notably in Spain and Norway, but don't yet have a major impact in the United States, where it could matter most.

A successful nonviolent independence struggle by an Arab Muslim people under the Haidar's leadership could set an important precedent. It would demonstrate how, against great odds, an outnumbered and outgunned population could win through the power of nonviolence in a part of the world where resistance to autocratic rule and foreign military occupation has often spawned acts of terrorism and other violence. Furthermore, the participatory democratic structure within the Sahrawi resistance movement and the prominence of women in key positions of leadership could serve as an important model in a region where authoritarian and patriarchal forms of governance have traditionally dominated.

The eventual outcome rests not just on the Sahrawis alone, but whether the international community, particularly those of us in the United States, decide whether such a struggle is worthy of our support.

Stephen Zunes, a Foreign Policy In Focus senior policy analyst, is a professor of politics and chair of Middle East Studies at the University of San Francisco. He is the co-author, along with Jacob Mundy, of the forthcoming Western Sahara: Nationalism, Conflict, and International Accountability (Syracuse University Press.)

 

Subscribe to
World Beat

FPIF's weekly ezine


Support FPIF


Published by Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF), a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS, online at www.ips-dc.org). Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies.

Recommended citation:
Stephen Zunes, "Haidar's Struggle," (Washington, DC: Foreign Policy In Focus, October 7, 2008).

Web location:
http://fpif.org/fpiftxt/5578

Production Information:
Author(s): Stephen Zunes
Editor(s): John Feffer
Production: Jen Doak

Latest Comments & Conversation Area
Editor's Note: FPIF.org editors read and approve each comment. Comments are checked for content only; spelling and grammar errors are not corrected and comments that include vulgar language or libelous content are rejected.
 
Name Obori Berkouki Date: Oct 07, 2008
Good article but you blamed everything on Morocco and its supporters France and US without mentioning the big player here and without it this conflict would have never existed : Algeria. Algeria, Libya and Cuba were the countries that supported the existence of the Polisario, a separatist movement which Haidar belongs to against Morocco to weaken this pro West nation. After 35 years in the conflict, today Algeria with its oil dollars is still the main supporter of a separated Western Sahara. Haidar can travel anywhere she wants and come back to Western Sahara (Morocco) but you have not mentioned what would happen if anyone in the refugees camp in Algeria controlled by the Polisario decides to take side with Morocco. It is better for the USA to support an old good friend and ally Morocco than a pro Soviet Algeria since this conflict is a Moroccan Algerian one.
Name Luis Portillo Date: Oct 10, 2008
Not only is a good article, as Mr. Berkouki says, but an excellent and very truthful article. What Mr. Berkouki says is just the propaganda and poisoning of the Moroccan Makhzen, which is the same as ever: lies and intoxication, against all the UN resolutions. It seems as if Mr Barkouki had not read the article by S. Profesro Zunes!!!

Neither Algeria nor Russia, nor Libya, nor Cuba invaded the Western Sahara.

Morocco is the only country (together with Mauritania) that invaded and militarily occupied Western Sahara. No country in the world recognizes this occupation, much less Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara.

The Saharawi people will be eternally grateful to the Algerian people and all peoples of the world who supported and continue supporting them in their fight against the criminal invaders.

“There will be no oblivion, there will be no rest for the solidarity movement, there will be no hesitation in our efforts, until the day it will be seen the complete restitution of the national sovereignty to the Saharawi people, through the exercise of the right for self determination by the Saharawi people which includes the free option for complete restitution of SADR's authority over the whole territory. This will be the only moment in which it will be considered the process of decolonization as complete.”

STATEMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOLIDARITY WITH SAHARA (SEVILLA, OCTOBER 3 – 5, 2008)

http://encuentrosaharasevilla.wordpress.com/

http://sahararesiste.blogspot.com/2008/10/declaracin-y-conclusiones-del-encuentro.html

http://www.kaosenlared.net/noticia/declaracion-conclusiones-encuentro-internacional-solidaridad-sahara-ce

Name Cyrous Moradi Date: Oct 11, 2008
Probably this crisis mostly belongs to bipolar world. As Messrs (Berkouki and Portilo) say Algeria was in Soviet Block and Morocco in the western Block, therefore France and United States supported and advocated the morocco's stance in this issue. I think for the time being G8 group should play more vital role in the marinating International Security by addressing complex issues like Western Sahara. In the G8 Russia is present and of course United States and France plus Italy are there. These countries have historic influence in the North Africa and without their collaboration the solution for this crisis is not imaginable. Union of Europe is full member in the group of eight and this could be a legal channel to bring in Spain – Western Sahara was under Spain occupation until 1975-that I think her presence in the negotiations would be helpful. Probably the recent global economic crisis causes to establish new world order and in that case most probably G8 will play a centric role to hail the old wounds including the Western Sahara dossier.
Name Mohamed Elgjini Date: Oct 19, 2008
Mr Portillo it seems that you intend to forget that Spain is occupying two Moroccan cities. Remenber also that the time of the Conquistador is over. The game in Moroccan Sahara is too complicated for you to grasp why it has taken so long to solve this territorial problem.

To say that Morocco has invaded its own territory that is taken out of context. Invasion will imply that Morocco has used military force to invade its territory. Except that has not been the case, what has happened then after the withdrawal of Spain constituted an act of annexation of the territory.

Name Sahra Libre Date: Oct 23, 2008
this is the problem! often if there is a fact based article, a pro-Morocco comment would come and try to discredit the facts. I don't want to say that all Moroccan are out of touch, rather still in the Hassan II era, it seems to me that most remain using the late king arguments, yes! the invasion was military, and it is the worst nightmare that I still recall. and if you say Algeria, Cuba and so on I would like to ask you one thing and please answer frankly! with whom did the late King "Hassan II" nigociate in Rabat? ps, it is on the record, and the answer to this question will give you more information that your own late king have recognized dispite misinforming his people. Mr Elgjini, I have plenty of documentry films that would help you overcome the old propaganda, would you like me to send it to you?
Salaam.
Name ME Date: Oct 26, 2008
I have read about that issue from the outside and my argument is neither rooted in propaganda as you claimed nor is it a product of naivity. Personally, I have not mentioned Cuba or Algeria in my comment.

therefore, it seems that you are too emotional about this issue. If you are suggesting that I am a victim of the old propaganda and at the same time you want to feed me with another then your position does not differ you from what you alluded to as "Hassan II era" that you still possessed with.

Conflicts in general generate the pro and the anti- Except in this case the anti are anti only because they do not understand the real politic of the region. If in other vein you insist that the invasion was military then the people who marched to Sahara was the army in a civilian clothes! The army interviened when the conflict has escalated my man. In contrast I do not understand the anti's ambiguity. they claimed that the Sahara is an occupied territory and at the same time they are attained by iternal amnisia vis á vis the occupied two cities.

As I said in my previous comment the game is too complicated for the Antis to grasp. My focus is on how this problem has unfolded but not with whom Hassan II had negociated. Ps Don't tell a Moroccan about "les annees du plomb" none was emmuned from that atrocity. However, as the approach to the conflict has changed and the conflict behavior with it from both sides the antis are losing touch with the evolving pragmatism.

Name Iberkak Date: Nov 19, 2008
I think Luis Portillo is an agent for Algeria. If you care about the Sahrawis to have their own state in the Sahara, then why don't you ask Algeria to give up their Sahara as well. It is 4 times bigger than Western Sahara. Western Sahara was Moroccan before Algeria existed as a country. Everyone today knows if it wasn't to Algeria, the Polisario, SADR or whatever you call it, would have never existed. For your information, the leader Abdelaziz of this entity for more than 25 years, was born, raised and educated in Marrakech, right in the middle of Morocco. that should make you look at the facts from different angle. Algeria doesn't care about Sahrawis. It cares about its interests in the region. It is only a matter of time until Touareg, Kabylies and Algerian Sahrawis ask for their independence. Work for unity not division. God Bless
Name Laura Roldan Date: Nov 20, 2008
I would like to express my congratulaions to Prof.Zunes because in this article about the problem of the last colony in the african continent he has shown his knowledge and competence in this issue and also he has shown his professionalism as a university professor of analizing the roots of this decolonization conflict. Sooner or later the people of Western Sahara will overcome and can live on his free and democratic country.
 
You may add a new comment here. It will not appear on this page until it has been approved by the moderator.
Your Name:
Comment:
 
Contact FPIF's webmaster with inquiries regarding the functionality of this website.
Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies.
 

Support FPIF

You Might Also Like:

 

Related Africa Coverage

Somalia Resurfaces
Nov 17, 2008

Scramble for Africa
Oct 31, 2008

Review: A Thousand Hills
Oct 15, 2008