In a recent interview, Paul Massad, a former senior advisor to US President Donald Trump on Arab, Middle Eastern, and African affairs, offered insights into the ongoing Western Sahara dispute. His comments have sparked renewed interest in the complexities surrounding the issue and the roles of various parties involved.
Massad addressed the original mandate of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO), stating that it was initially established to organize a referendum on self-determination for the Sahrawi people. He emphasized that the decision to hold or not hold such a referendum ultimately rests with the two principal parties in the conflict: Morocco and the Polisario Front.
Regarding recent Security Council resolutions, Massad suggested that they reflect a degree of flexibility, allowing for consideration of all proposed political solutions without predetermining a specific outcome. He contrasted this approach with what he described as the US’s national stance, which he said is guided by its own strategic interests in the region.
A Key Distinction
Massad drew a clear distinction between the direct parties to the conflict and neighboring states. He asserted that Morocco and the Polisario Front are the primary actors, while Algeria and Mauritania are considered observer states due to their geographical proximity, historical ties, and regional connections. He explicitly stated that these neighboring countries are not direct parties to the conflict.
These statements provide clarity on the perspectives of key players and potentially influence the trajectory of future negotiations. His comments underscore the importance of understanding the nuances of the conflict and the diverse interests at stake as international efforts to find a lasting resolution continue.
