Oral 2 Notes

Oral 2 Notes

Created
May 19, 2022 02:26 PM
Study time
May 23, 2022
Deadline
Jun 17, 2022
toppage
toppage
notion image
 
 
Works Cited
Maclean, Ruth. “Build a Wall across the Sahara? That’s Crazy – but Someone Still Did It.” The Guardian, 22 Sept. 2018, www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/22/western-sahara-wall-morocco-trump.
Netsky, Aaron. “The World’s Longest Minefield.” Atlas Obscura, 25 Apr. 2027, www.atlasobscura.com/places/moroccan-wall-of-western-sahara. Accessed 21 May 2022.
“Western Sahara: Freedom in the World 2021 Country Report.” Freedom House, freedomhouse.org/country/western-sahara/freedom-world/2021.
Wikipedia Contributors. “Western Sahara Conflict.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 19 Oct. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Sahara_conflict.
Witness Docs & Atlas Obscura. “The Belt and Berm, Part 2.” Simplecast.com, 2022, the-atlas-obscura-podcast.simplecast.com/episodes/the-belt-and-berm-part-2.
Wood, Callum, and The trumpet. “Battleground Morocco.” TheTrumpet.com, 30 Aug. 2018, www.thetrumpet.com/17661-battleground-morocco. Accessed 21 May 2022. The Philadelphia Trumpet is a free magazine published by the Philadelphia Church of God, also available online. Biased.

Western Sahara conflict - Wikipedia
the subsequent Western Sahara War against Morocco between 1975 and 1991 power vacuum
The Western Sahara War was an armed conflict, lasting from 1975 to 1991
the Polisario Front, backed by Algeria and Libya, desiring instead the establishment an independent Sahrawi state in the territory, fought both Mauritania and Morocco in quick succession, in an attempt to drive their forces out of the region.
Some 40,000–80,000[citation needed] Sahrawi refugees were displaced as a result of the conflict; at present, most still reside in various Sahrawi refugee camps throughout the Tindouf province of Algeria.
The conflict escalated after the withdrawal of Spain from the Spanish Sahara in accordance with the Madrid Accords.
backed and supported by Algeria, waged a 16-year-long war for independence against Mauritania and Morocco
In February 1976, the Polisario Front declared the establishment of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic
The UN addressed the conflict via a resolution reaffirming the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people.[17]
In 1977, France intervened
In 1979, Mauritania withdrew
1989 and 1991, a cease-fire agreement was reached
2005; a series of disturbances, demonstrations and riots, which broke out in May 2005 in the Moroccan-held portions of Western Sahara, and lasted until November
In late 2010, the protests re-erupted
In 1884, Spain claimed a protectorate over the coast from Cape Bojador to Cap Blanc.
In 1958, Spain merged the previously separate districts of Saguia el-Hamra (in the north) and Río de Oro (in the south) to form the province of the Spanish Sahara.
In 1971, a group of young Sahrawi students in the universities of Morocco began organizing what came to be known as The Embryonic Movement for the Liberation of Saguia el-Hamra and Rio de Oro.
The Polisario Front was formally constituted on 10 May 1973 in the Mauritanian city of Zouirate
According to Human Rights Watch, the Moroccan security forces moved to dismantle the Gdeim Izik tent camp
In 2011, new protests erupted again
reaction to the failure of police to prevent anti-Sahrawi looting and rioting in the city of Dakhla, Western Sahara,
On 14 November 2020, SADR president Brahim Ghali announced that he had signed a decree bringing the 29-year-old ceasefire to an end, citing an incident two days prior in which the Moroccan army forcibly entered a crossing within the buffer zone that was being blocked by protesters
The SADR claims the Moroccan-built road is illegal, as it was built after the 1991 United Nations-brokered truce. Morocco, however, claims that it will still abide by the ceasefire and alleges that the army was simply trying to re-open the road to traffic.
Algeria sees itself as an "important actor" in the conflict,[29] and officially supports the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination.
Morocco's position is that Algeria is part of the conflict and uses the Sahara issue for geopolitical interests that date from the Cold War, claiming that this country in its official communication to the United Nations "presents itself sometimes as 'a concerned party,' other times as an 'important actor,' or as a 'party' in the settlement of the dispute".[30] The United Nations has only ever officially considered Morocco and the Polisario Front parties to the conflict, however acknowledges that other interests may also be involved.
The refugee camps are located in Algeria and the country has armed, trained, and financed the Polisario for more than thirty years
The statement by Jiménez came two days after two Spanish aid workers and one Italian were kidnapped by suspected al-Qaeda members in Tindouf, which is under the control of Polisario Front, which seeks the independence of Western Sahara from Morocco.
The Moroccans have been more successful regarding the Western Sahara.
Unlike the Organization of African Unity which has strongly backed Western Sahara's right to self-determination, the Arab League has shown little interest in the area.[44]
Morocco has argued that the Polisario Front receives support from Hezbollah, Iran, and al-Qaida.[45][46] There is no third-party substantiation of these claims.[47][48][49][50]
Although the Polisario Front was not involved in the negotiations, the SFPA explicitly allows for European Vessels to fish in the disputed coast of the Western Sahara territory.
NGO Human Rights Watch penned a letter to European Members of Parliament seeking a vote against the proposition, arguing that Morocco has no legal basis to make agreements regarding a disputed territory and is thus illegal under international law.
the Polisario Front announced it will challenge the vote in the European Court of Justice stating it was in clear violation of international law.[56]
The Obama administration disassociated itself from the Moroccan autonomy plan in 2009, however, reversing the Bush-backed support of the Moroccan plan, and returning to a pre-Bush position, wherein the option of an independent Western Sahara is on the table again.[58]
United States Ambassador to Morocco Samuel L. Kaplan declared during a conference in Casablanca that the Moroccan autonomy plan "can't be the only basis in these negotiations", referring to the UN sponsored talks between the Polisario Front and Morocco.[60]
On 10 December 2020, President Donald Trump announced that the United States would officially recognize Morocco's claims over Western Sahara, in exchange for Morocco agreeing to normalize relations with Israel.[61][62]
Several international human rights organizations have accused the Moroccan government of imposing a media blackout in the region by targeting protestors and journalists
argued that the blocking of foreign media access to the region has made it difficult to receive accurate and consistent reporting from inside the disputed territory.
The Polisario Front has also been accused of suppressing media freedoms within its territories. In July 2019 the Polisario Front arrested three Saharawi activists within the refugee camps for criticizing the Polisario Front's governance in Facebook Posts.
 

Battleground Morocco | theTrumpet.com
berm reaches 9 feet high, clearly visible over the harsh landscape
all is here to guard against the forces of radical Islam
The east is occupied by the Sahrawi Liberation Army, also known as the Polisario Front, which is reportedly sponsored by Iran.
The Polisario Front has been seeking the creation of an independent state, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (sadr) for years.
84 UN member states have recognized sadr
Morocco has much more support, including the backing of the United States.
. With very little to support an economy, there is a high risk that sadr could collapse into a failed state. With little military power, it could also become a home for radicals. Or worse, it could become a proxy of a foreign power like Iran.
Moroccan Foreign Affairs Minister Nasser Bourita made some bold claims: He announced that the government had evidence of Iran supporting the Polisario Front and that Iran was providing military training and weapons to Polisario soldiers through Hezbollah.
Iran has rejected the claim
Iran is accused of funneling missiles to the Polisario Front via its embassy in Algeria. Such direct Iranian involvement is unprecedented in Morocco.
There is nothing new about Iran’s efforts to sponsor radical Islam in Africa.
an ideal launching ground for illegal migrants trying to reach Europe. What happened to Libya after Muammar Qadhafi was overthrown is a good example of what could happen to Morocc
o.
These efforts show radical Islam and Iran are trying to seize control of vital sea-lanes.The world economy relies on free passage through these critical thoroughfares. Controlling them would give Iran incredible power and leverage.
Morocco is doing all it can to keep Iran out. And vast walls and minefields are not enough. That is why the Iranian Embassy was closed. It is also why the Moroccan government reintroduced the military draft.
The Economic and Social Council in Morocco study also noted that there is a strong tendency among contemporary youth toward greater religiosity. In the past, Morocco has been known for its rather secular and pro-Western society, even going so far as to ban the manufacture and sale of burqas in early 2017. But anti-West sentiment and religious zeal are both on the rise, which is raising concerns in Rabat and elsewhere about the potential for religious extremism to take hold.
 

Western Sahara: Freedom in the World 2021 Country Report | Freedom House
Morocco has claimed authority over Western Sahara since 1975, but the United Nations (UN) does not recognize Moroccan control, calling Western Sahara a “non-self-governing territory.” Morocco controls the most populous area along the Atlantic coastline, more than three-quarters of the territory. While the UN brokered a cease-fire in 1991, a long-promised referendum on the territory’s status has yet to be held. The Moroccan-controlled area, which Rabat calls its “Southern Provinces,” is represented in the Moroccan parliament. However, civil liberties are severely restricted, particularly as they relate to independence activism.
The proindependence Polisario Front declared an end to its cease-fire with Morocco in November, after Moroccan forces cleared a road that was reportedly blocked by Polisario supporters. The Polisario subsequently engaged in fighting with Moroccan forces. In December, the United States recognized Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. According to Reuters, 766 COVID-19 cases were detected in Western Sahara throughout the year, while 2 people died of the illness.
 

Moroccan Western Sahara Wall – Mauritania - Atlas Obscura
This fortified sand barrier dividing a contested territory is the longest minefield in the world.
16 times longer than the Berlin wall was,
The portion of land to the west of the wall, along the Atlantic Ocean, is controlled by Morocco. The eastern side is governed by the Polisario Front, a Sahrawi liberation movement. The fight for Sahrawi independence is what drove Spain, which had ruled Western Sahara for more than 90 years, out of the region in 1976. When Spain withdrew, Morocco took over the Atlantic coast and Mauritania the eastern portion, which was eventually overtaken by Sahrawi fighters
Morocco began building a wall through the territory in 1981 to keep out guerilla fighters and refugees from the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. The barrier was completed in 1987, and though hostilities officially ended in 1991, the wall is still heavily guarded with radar and other surveillance equipment. Still, the Polisario Front has occasionally been able to successfully burrow under the structure.
The landmines along the berm have caused many deaths and casualties among Sahrawi civilians, most of whom live in refugee camps on both sides of the wall. Since 2008, thousands of Sahrawi refugees and international human rights activists have gathered at an annual demonstration called The Thousand Column and created a human chain to protest the wall and demand its demolition.
 

Build a wall across the Sahara? That's crazy – but someone still did it | Western Sahara | The Guardian
Since Morocco invaded Western Sahara it has built a 1,700-mile desert barrier keeping Sahrawis out of the resource-rich west
At 1,700 miles (2,700km) the Morocco Western Sahara wall, known as the Berm, is about 250 miles shorter than the US-Mexican border.
It is made of sand, patrolled by more than 100,000 Moroccan soldiers, and was designed to keep independence-seeking Sahrawis in the eastern part of the desert – and and away from the region’s natural resources.
Morocco has occupied its southern neighbour Western Sahara since 1975, when Spain, the colonial power, withdrew, and the north African country fought a 15-year war with the Polisario Front, the independence movement.
the minefield running alongside the Berm includes some of the densest landmine contamination in the world.
“Morocco decided to invade the rest of Western Sahara because of its natural resources, phosphates and fishing. Western Sahara has the most important fishing resources in all of Africa,” said Devers.
 
 

For more then 40 years now, a boarder 16 times as long as the Berlin wall was, is being partolled by 100.000 Moroccan soldiers, and was designed to keep indepedence - seeking sahrawis in the eastern part of
 
 
If you look up a card of Marocco on goolge maps, you will see a dashed line right in the middle of. It is dashed, because Marrocco clamies to have Seovergnty over Western Sahara.
The line is dashed because the people in the western sahara dont reosgnate with the Maroccan Goverment, and dont respect the power claim by the moroccan governemnt over the west shara area as they believe the mporrocan government to be lacking input legitimacy over the terretory they are independently running.
Because the area of the SOuthern sahara is rich in phospate, the maroccan government dont want the self declared sahrwi people to claim the whole of west sahara, as they have personal interests in controlling the exporting of its resources to the west.
So in 1975, after the spanish left the are area of Western Shaara because of the growing of independent Sahrawis, leaving a power vacume, the marrocan quilicky took their chance to intervene by displacing morrocan citizens into the area, claiming sovergnty of the Western Sahara, which led to decade long fighting between thw two parties. Marocco didnt want the small area occupied by saharwis to grow, which has many more reasons, I will get into later. What followed was the building of a wall, keeping the swaharis where they are. The so called Berm wall is 3000 kilometer long, 16 times longer then the Berlin Wall was, build of dirt and sand, hosts more then 100.000 marrocan forces and features the desed mine fields int he world.
This wall keeps the local peole, who want western sahrara to be an independent country, from free and independent sovereignty, and on the other side, allows marocco to occupy some 80%of western sahara, also being the resource rich par tof the cointy.
 
This is a clear case of using hard power conflict, as two nations firhgt for greater security adn resources.
They have therefore build a
But while this line demonstrate the dispute about wether Western Sahara is in fact part of Marocco, this is not the noarder I want to talk abot
 
To waht extend does soft power “self determination” reaffirmations by IGOs such as the Un play a part in ahrd power territorial boarder conflicts?
To what extend do Soft power institutions such as the UN play a key role in territorial disputed
Is Hard power the main
 

Introduction

 
Goolge Maps dotted line
1.
dotted line because multiple actors claim sovergnty
2.
After spain left, becuase of the Saharis, Marroco intervined
3.
Intense FIghting between Marocco and Sahraelis, about Western Sahrara
4.
Marocco Building wall (size, weaponary, guards)
5.
UN, declared right to self determination, nothing changes
6.
→ What role do IGOs then play in territorial disputed

How this Conflict evolved

1.
In 1884, Spain claimed a protectorate over the coast from Cape Bojador to Cap Blanc.
2.
In 1958, Spain merged the previously separate districts of Saguia el-Hamra (in the north) and Río de Oro (in the south) to form the province of Spanish Sahara.
3.
In 1971, a group of young Sahrawi students in the universities of Morocco began organizing what came to be known as The Embryonic Movement for the Liberation of Saguia el-Hamra and Rio de Oro.
4.
The Polisario Front was formally constituted on 10 May 1973 in the Mauritanian city of Zouirate to call for independence
5.
Spain left unilaterally 1975 because of shwaraheli claim for independence → Leaving power vacume
6.
Morocco has claimed (occupied) authority over Western Sahara folowing in 1975
7.
Mauritanian has claimed (occupied) autority over soem of whestern sahara followign 1975
8.
the subsequent Western Sahara War against Morocco and Mauritanian between 1975 and 1991
9.
Displacement of many, 80.000 people
10.
In 1977, France intervened (why)
11.
In 1979, Mauritania withdrew
12.
1989 and 1991, a cease-fire agreement was reached
13.
1st wall (Aug 1980 – Jun 1982) built with the help of French renegade mercenaries (c. 500 km (310 mi)).

Geopolitical Interrest

why Sharawis are interested in the area

want territorial integrety,
waht external rgcognition and secured self determination
place to grow, space

Why Marocco is interested in the area

resources
claim that sharaewis are backed by Iraq, dont want them close
trade routs control

International Interests

USA, accepting Moroccan claim for them being frends with Israel, lol

As of September 2021, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is recognized by 41, Austraialia

 
UN supporting, but USA doesnt?
Conflict of poling religions
Trading und so

The Impact

1.
Power Vacume
2.
IGOs, Treaties etc (failiures/successes)
3.
Intereses Involved (Marocco, phospate, keeping islam out/US, phospate, handel route/swahari, freedome, right to self determintation)
4.
western hypocracity
 
 
to waht extend is hard power a crutial factor for territorial conflicts
 

Introduction

1.
Goolge Maps dotted line
2.
dotted line because multiple actors claim sovergnty
3.
After spain left, becuase of the Saharis, Marroco intervined
4.
Intense FIghting between Marocco and Sahraelis, about Western Sahrara
5.
Marocco Building wall (size, weaponary, guards)
6.
UN, declared right to self determination, nothing changes
7.
 
Today I am going to talk to you about the Moroccan Berm Wall. Moroco is a country in North Africa, that claimed all of the Western Sahara terretorry to bei their land. But by taking a view at Google Maps, one can see a dashed line, kindly indicating a territorial dispute- a situation of two countries claiming sovergnty over the same territory. Marrocco doesn't want Western Sahara, and with it the Sahrawi people to be a spvergn sate- they want western Sahara to be theirs, for reasons I am yet to explain. By contrasting sovereignty claims by both countries, I will try to answer the question as to what extend hard power is a crucial factor in deciding territorial conflicts, and if therefore, rightful legitimacy even plays a role.
Western Sahara is listed by the United Nations (UN) as a non-decolonized territory and is thus included in the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Under international law, Western Sahara is not a legal part of Morocco and it remains under the international laws of military occupation.[1]

Power Vacume

Since the 1870s, Western Sahraa has been under Spanish occupation and colonization. So in 1975, after the Spanish left the area of Western Shaara over the continuing demand of Sahrawis to territorial integrity, there has been a mayor power vacuum, with no controlling and governing administration. Marroco tool this short span as their chance to expand their boarders of influence. The Following  Annexation of Western Sahara by Morocco took place in two stages, in 1976 and 1979, and is considered illegal under international law. Morocco's transfer of its own civilians into the then occupied territory is as well in direct violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention
The leaving of spain of the western sahara territorial area caused a Power Vacome. A power vacume disrives the state of no gorvernment of an area, baiscally being fialed.
 

Swahalis claim for socergty

The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) was proclaimed by the Polisario Front on 27 February 1976, in Bir Lehlu, Western Sahara. SADR claims sovereignty over the entire territory of Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony; however, at present the SADR government controls only about 20–25% of the territory it claims.[1] It calls the territories under its control the "Liberated Territories".
As of September 2021, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is recognized by 41 out of a total of 193 United Nations member states. At different times, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic has been recognized by 84 UN member states, but, of these, 43 have since "frozen" or "withdrawn" recognition. SADR has, at some point in time, been recognised by 38 out of the other 54  African Union member states, 18 out of 57 Organisation of Islamic Cooperation  member states, and 5 out of 22 Arab League (AL) member states. Several states that do not recognize the Sahrawi Republic nonetheless recognize the Polisario Front as the legitimate representative of the population of the Western Sahara, but not as the government-in-exile of a sovereign state.
THE SADR claims to be a working state, with a functioning government, a permanent population and territory and claimed to be capable of conducting international relations. It shows input and throughput legitimacy, by electing representatives and by following human rights law, etc. Those, by definition, are all points required to be considered a “sovereign state” by the 1933 Montevideo state convention- yet, RHe Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic lacks its external recognition and external institutions such as the UN don't grand externa legitimacy and therefore don't grand a vote. What does this show about the importance of legitimacy over sovergtny?
 

Marrocian claim for sovereignty

Since the territory was ceded by Spain, Morocco has claimed Western Sahara as an integral part of its kingdom. Yet virtually no other country, except now the United States, recognises Moroccan sovereignty over it. Marroco claims their presence to “guard against the forces of radical Islam”. marroco states that With very little to support an economy, there is a high risk that SADR could collapse into a failed state. With little military power, it could also become a home for radicals. Or worse, it could become a proxy of a foreign power like Iran- something that marroco doesnt want to have next door. Marocco also states that These efforts show that radical Islam and Iran are trying to seize control of vital sea-lanes. The world economy relies on free passage through these critical thoroughfares. Controlling them would give Iran incredible power and leverage. Morocco states to be doing doing all it can to keep Iran out. The Economic and Social Council in Morocco study also noted that there is a strong tendency among contemporary youth toward greater religiosity. Marroco claims to be providing output legitimacy, as they have a fuctioning and recognized state that can use resources in the sahara to be exported, bringing in money for their economy, fuiling economic growth and with it their peoples wealth.
 

Interdependent and realistic

Nevertheless those factors, The UN addressed the conflict via a resolution reaffirming the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people. No otther country as the US, which I will get into, accepts Marrocos power claim over the nnon-governing territory of Western Sahara. Even though Marroco is clearly lacking the external recognition by other states, leading countries seem to be hesitant intervining or actilvy speeing agians marrocian fighting the SADR from persuing their right for “”self determination”, as stated yb the UN. The United States for example, under president Donald Trump, accpted Marrocian Sovergtny claims over the promis to agree over israeli stuff. Furthermore, the US has an interest in further working together with marrocco, as they sell phospate of the resource rich areas directly to them. The US activly goines agians values it seems to follow over national interests. We can therefore see, that in a world of limited resources, countries put their self interest first. Thid can be linked to realism, where the persuit of moral matters doesnt matter, only a coutnries self interest.
 
We can therefore say, that an actual right to claim, actual legitimacy over an area spesifically in theis case study doesnt seem to be of amtter. The SADR follow moral grounds, provide all factors for being a state and have theirfore all soft power citierias fullfilled. Marroco in the other side, has realistic force, and uses it and its interdependent countries to persu its own agenda. Yes, hard power seems to be the driving factor decisding territorial disputes, as everythign else gois against marooco and they still have more then 80% of the land occupied until today,.

conclution

After the spanish left
Power Vacume (Spanish left)
Course Links: Issues about resources, countries want to develope and soverty
Human rihgts, ethnic clensing
Global political dimention: Trump playing as part of the israel issue
 
Soverty Power IR dimantion
Terroty , sovergtny and Power, and how that plays out regionally / globally
under the idea of power (for instance: looking at the impact of a symmetry of power between the two parties on the establishment of boarders
 
saharra got the rights, got the moral, UN backing, Soft Power
Marroco got the hard power, economic power, alliances with turmp, got soemthing they want
output legitimacy
 
marrocco winning, siciding, shows the relative impoertance of the different types of power and wether legitimacy matter (short run no, lung ron yes
To what extend is hard power the crutial determinant of territorial boarder conflics
 
Power to do stuff, dont need elgitimacy.
 

To what extend is hard power a crucial factor determining territorial disputes compared to legitimised sovereignty
Sun May 29, 2022 – Initial Draft – Oral Presentation No. 2 Case introduction Today I am going to talk to you about the Moroccan Sahrawi West Sahara conflict. Morocco is a country state in North Africa, that claims sovereignty over all of the Western Sahara territory. But by taking a view at Google Maps, one can see a dashed line, kindly indicating a territorial border dispute- a situation of two parties claiming sovereignty over the same territory. Morocco doesn't want Western Sahara, and with it the Sahrawi people to become a sovereign state- they want western Sahara to be theirs, for reasons I am yet to explain. By contrasting sovereignty claims by both (state-)parties, I will try to answer the question as to what extend hard power is a crucial factor in deciding territorial conflicts, and if therefore, rightful legitimacy (I might rephrase this, what is it you mean... legitimacy granted by international legal recognition?) even plays a role. At the moment, Western Sahara is listed by the United Nations as a non-decolonized territory and is thus included in the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Under international law, Western Sahara is not a legal part of Morocco and it remains under the international laws of military occupation (I might rephrase this, I assume it means that it is illegally occupied, whereas you almost make it sound legal by talking about the international laws of military occupation). Background setting Since the 1870s, Western Sahara was under Spanish occupation and colonisation. So in 1975, after the Spanish left the area of Western Sahara over the continuing demand of the Sahrawi’s for their territorial integrity, there has been a mayor power vacuum, with no controlling and governing administration (a lack of internal sovereignty). Morocco took this short span as their chance to expand their boarders of influence. The Following Annexation of Western Sahara by Morocco took place in two stages, in 1976 and 1979 (how? Through the use of hard power?), and is considered illegal under international law (Is there a particular decision on this that you can refer to). Morocco's transfer of its own civilians into the then occupied territory is as well in direct violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention (which says what?). The leaving of Spain of the Western Sahara‘s territorial area caused a Power Vacuum. A power vacuum describes the state of no-government of an area, with anarchy allowing for change in government. (an absence of internal sovereignty allowing for external intervention) Sahrawi’s claim for territorial integrity and sovereignty The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) was proclaimed by the Polisario Front on 27 February 1976, in Bir Lehlu, Western Sahara. SADR claims sovereignty over the entire territory of Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony; however, at present the SADR government exercises sovereignty over only about 20–25% of the territory it claims. It calls the territories under its control the "Liberated Territories". Do you want to establish and link the idea of a ‘de facto’ state here (or in the next paragraph as you discuss the lack of full recognition?) As of September 2021, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is recognised by 41 out of a total of 193 United Nations member states. At different times, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic has been recognised by 84 UN member states, but, of these, 43 have since "frozen" or "withdrawn" recognition. SADR has, at some point in time, been recognised by 38 out of the other 54 African Union member states, 18 out of 57 Organisation of Islamic Cooperation member states, and 5 out of 22 Arab League member states. Several states that do not recognise the Sahrawi Republic nonetheless recognise the Polisario Front as the legitimate representative of the population of the Western Sahara, but not as the government-in-exile of a sovereign state. Is there any pattern to which states do/don’t recognise them? What are the reasons why states do or don’t recognise – is it economic, geopolitical, cultural, religious? THE SADR claims to be a working (de facto) state, with a functioning government, a permanent population and territory and claims to be capable of conducting international relations. It shows input and throughput legitimacy, by electing representatives (more details on this – is it democratic? Has it signed up to human rights treaties? It is a bit fast and vague like this) and by following human rights law, etc. Those, by definition, are all points required to be considered a “sovereign state” by the 1933 Montevideo state convention Not quite – the Montevideo Convention does also require external recognition to class them as a state- yet, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic lacks its external recognition as international institutions such as the UN don't grand external legitimacy and therefore don't grand a vote have they applied to join? What was the response?. What does this show about the importance of legitimacy over sovereignty? (Include how African Union wasn’t even bothered looking I to the case, as they were directly accepting Moroccan claim for sovereignty) It feels like you might want to look more into the UN’s role and the African Union (what is their perspective, what are their motivations for not recognising)?
Also is it really a case of legitimacy vs. Sovereignty (if they lack recognition)… is it not more about the difficulty of a de facto state receiving recognition when the state they are in conflict with has more power (of all types)? Moroccan claim for sovereignty over western Sahara Since the territory was ceded by Spain, Morocco has claimed Western Sahara as an integral part of its kingdom. Yet virtually no other country, except now the United States, recognises Moroccan sovereignty over it. Morocco claims their presence to “guard against the forces of radical Islam” this sounds like a claim to output legitimacy (tackling the ‘war on terror’). Morocco states that with very little to support an economy, there is a high risk that the SADR could collapse into a failed state leading to what.... With little military power, it could also become a home for radicals. Or worse, it could become a proxy of a foreign power like Iran- something that Morocco doesn’t want to have next door You could link then that they claim they need to do this for their own security (which could link to a structural realists desire to prioritise security/survival of the state at all costs). Morocco also states that These efforts show that radical Islam and Iran are trying to seize control of vital sea-lanes. The world economy relies on free passage through these critical thoroughfares. Controlling them would give Iran incredible power and leverage. Morocco states to be doing doing all it can to keep Iran out You haven’t really explained this Iranian link properly and so it is a bit difficult to follow/understand. The Economic and Social Council in Morocco study also noted that there is a strong tendency among contemporary youth toward greater religiosity. Morocco claims to be providing output legitimacy, as they have a functioning and recognised state that can use resources in the Sahara to be exported, bringing in money for their economy, fuelling economic growth and with it their peoples wealth. International opinion and action Nevertheless those factors, The UN addressed the conflict via a resolution reaffirming the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people. No other country as the US, accepts Moroccan power claim over the non-governing territory of Western Sahara. Still, the international community seems to be hesitant intervening or actively speaking out against Moroccan forces fighting the democratic SADR from pursuing their right for “”self determination”, as stated by the UN, as Morocco clearly lacks legitimacy for its sovereignty claim.. Why? If they don’t have legitimacy, why are they not speaking out... what are the motivations of others to not speak out? On 10 December 2020, for example, President Donald Trump announced that the United States would officially recognise Morocco's claims over Western Sahara, in exchange for Morocco agreeing to normalise relations with Israel. Furthermore, the US and other countries stating their diplomatic support of the annexation have an interest in further working together with Morocco, as Morocco has stated interest in exporting the highly demanded “phosphate from the very rich parts of western Sahara. What does this say about the importance of legitimacy? This links to the concept of realism, basically showing that countries disregard humanitarian reasons for reasons of their own interest and positioning in global politics. The US actively goes against values it seems to follow over national interests. The SADR depends on its own hard military power, as soft power declarations set by institutions such as the UN crediting the Sahrawi sovereignty, get disregarded by the very countries financing them. Does it have any hard power, you haven’t really talked about this?
Conclusion Now what does this tell us about hard power being crucial to decide territorial disputes. In short, a lot I’m not sure this is the key thing (after all, you haven’t really mentioned Morocco’s hard power at all). It seems like what is important is already having the status of a state and being able to use that to convince other states to support you. I think it points out the difficulty of getting the other members of the club of states to let you in (as a de facto state). The Case-study of West Sahara shows us how a Country has all the legitimacy to fulfil and persuade their political and territorial integrity, however, gets pushed back by illegitimate territorial challengers such as Morocco. The Sahrawi where granted territorial integrity and the right to self determination, prove almost all points set my the Montevideo convention– yet, those declarations don’t actually matter unless they are bing enforced. Morocco has the power of force and with it pretty much disregards the very resolution ,and still, is feeling no economical sanctions, or punishments of any kind. Rather thy feel the opposite, with countries such as the US financing the intervention by buying their resources of those very annexed regions. Yes, hard power seems to be the crucial factor deciding territorial disputes, as all factors that should define legitimised sovereignty are given to the people of Sahrawi that only get to occupy about 20 percent of their land. As I said above, I would get rid of the hard power point (which you don’t actually talk about) and focus on the ‘border’ between recognised and de facto states and how difficult it is to cross that border – why don’t states want others joining? What is their incentive? Then you can say that what ultimately matters is not legitimacy or international law, but support amongst other states/IGOs and this depends on what you have to offer others (and Morocco seems to have more to offer).
I also think it would be a good idea to explore the position of the UN/AU and why they are incapable of bringing about a resolution in more detail (I notice that the UN has issued plenty of resolutions condemning the occupation and Western Sahara is a full member of the AU).