By Mohammad el-Ashab
This commentary was published in al-Hayat on 23/01/2011
The negotiations over the Sahara conflict have been preceded, in their majority, by events that have no connection to this issue. This time, the Maghrebis have been concerned with the Tunisian Intifada, and this did not influence negotiations by granting them a wider scope of attention. However, giving them less attention does not mean that they are moving in the right direction. Perhaps only the United Nations envoy, Christopher Ross, is aware of which course future developments might take, as we wait for realistic conditions for negotiations to mature, which would lead to some hope that progress might be made.
Leaving behind the details of the negotiations, which are treading water, the fifth round of unofficial negotiations could help bring about the practice of getting used to negotiations, which in itself is an encouraging element, at the least in excluding a resort to other options, which might ignite the region and subject it to the dangers of escalation. However, getting used to the talks is one thing, and achieving the huge goals assigned to them is quite another.
Perhaps the time is not ripe to see a bigger Maghrebi role in solving the problems. This is especially in light of the former wager, which was formulated in the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions, when it asked for neighboring states to cooperate with each other and the UN in encouraging the negotiations track. However, satisfying Maghrebi vanity, which was one of the reasons for the lack of movement, might now require rallying around the Saharan issue, by looking at it from a new perspective.
Beyond the recent events in Tunisia, and their relations with the domestic situation in the country of the Intifada, The Maghreb region has not been liberated from the obstacles caused by deterioration and political disputes. The more it avoided grabbing at the lifeline symbolized by the suspended Maghreb Union project, the bigger was the burden it carried, in the absence of a regional outlet that could achieve economic integration and political partnership. The crisis witnessed by the Maghreb Union serves as another proof that officials have failed to take advantage of the opportunities that guarantee more balance, which would benefit the five North African states in overcoming domestic dilemmas, which would stop making the Sahara issue another expression of continuous lost opportunities.
The issue has to do with divergent opinions that has deepened over time, over the way to settle the dispute. When North African leaders agreed, more than two decades ago, to create the Maghreb Union out of these five countries, the Sahara problem existed, casting a shadow on the tense relations between Morocco and Algeria. It is likely that this agreement was purported to exclude the Sahara issue from having any negative impact on the details and requirements of a Maghreb Union. Although the Sahara conflict was not officially placed on the agenda of the Maghreb summits, which gave people hope, it was left behind with the hope to be solved as part of the large-scale project intended for this regional structure.
Yet, nothing of the sort has taken place. There is a sad fact that confirms the wagers of the Maghrebis have reached a dead-end, in terms of bilateral relations and the resolution of disputes, or in the midst of grand strategic objectives. Even the benefits that were available have dropped off considerably, in view of the ongoing closure of land borders between Algeria and Morocco, and the lack of any progress of steps leading to a détente. The conclusion reached is that no one opposes creating a Maghrebi structure, while no sides wants to, or is able to, translate its commitments into tangible acts.
What is certain is that the shock caused by the failure of several projects to achieve stability, development and democracy, is among the reasons for the Intifada in Tunisia. However, the solution for each North African state, separately, can be found in getting involved in building an Arab Maghreb that is in solidarity, is prosperous, and lacks the reasons for tension, clashes and uprisings. This is because the only recipe that has not been tried enough is that of inter-Maghreb cooperation, which might turn out to be bitter if seen according to narrow, local calculations, although much sweeter and easier to digest compared to other solutions.
Between one notion and another, the days and years pass. What is certain is that the region’s true problems are related to the demands of new generations, who want to find their place in the sun. However, the Maghreb region, amid the continuing Sahara conflict and its repercussions, might not be the same when a final settlement begins. And if no new horizons show up, in case of reaching a bold, viable and legitimate political settlement, then we will see a confrontation of real dilemmas, through solidarity and integration. The only thing that will not yield positive results is the continued existence of a problem that is exhausting for not only those directly or indirectly concerned by it, but also the entire region.
The negotiations over the Sahara conflict have been preceded, in their majority, by events that have no connection to this issue. This time, the Maghrebis have been concerned with the Tunisian Intifada, and this did not influence negotiations by granting them a wider scope of attention. However, giving them less attention does not mean that they are moving in the right direction. Perhaps only the United Nations envoy, Christopher Ross, is aware of which course future developments might take, as we wait for realistic conditions for negotiations to mature, which would lead to some hope that progress might be made.
Leaving behind the details of the negotiations, which are treading water, the fifth round of unofficial negotiations could help bring about the practice of getting used to negotiations, which in itself is an encouraging element, at the least in excluding a resort to other options, which might ignite the region and subject it to the dangers of escalation. However, getting used to the talks is one thing, and achieving the huge goals assigned to them is quite another.
Perhaps the time is not ripe to see a bigger Maghrebi role in solving the problems. This is especially in light of the former wager, which was formulated in the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions, when it asked for neighboring states to cooperate with each other and the UN in encouraging the negotiations track. However, satisfying Maghrebi vanity, which was one of the reasons for the lack of movement, might now require rallying around the Saharan issue, by looking at it from a new perspective.
Beyond the recent events in Tunisia, and their relations with the domestic situation in the country of the Intifada, The Maghreb region has not been liberated from the obstacles caused by deterioration and political disputes. The more it avoided grabbing at the lifeline symbolized by the suspended Maghreb Union project, the bigger was the burden it carried, in the absence of a regional outlet that could achieve economic integration and political partnership. The crisis witnessed by the Maghreb Union serves as another proof that officials have failed to take advantage of the opportunities that guarantee more balance, which would benefit the five North African states in overcoming domestic dilemmas, which would stop making the Sahara issue another expression of continuous lost opportunities.
The issue has to do with divergent opinions that has deepened over time, over the way to settle the dispute. When North African leaders agreed, more than two decades ago, to create the Maghreb Union out of these five countries, the Sahara problem existed, casting a shadow on the tense relations between Morocco and Algeria. It is likely that this agreement was purported to exclude the Sahara issue from having any negative impact on the details and requirements of a Maghreb Union. Although the Sahara conflict was not officially placed on the agenda of the Maghreb summits, which gave people hope, it was left behind with the hope to be solved as part of the large-scale project intended for this regional structure.
Yet, nothing of the sort has taken place. There is a sad fact that confirms the wagers of the Maghrebis have reached a dead-end, in terms of bilateral relations and the resolution of disputes, or in the midst of grand strategic objectives. Even the benefits that were available have dropped off considerably, in view of the ongoing closure of land borders between Algeria and Morocco, and the lack of any progress of steps leading to a détente. The conclusion reached is that no one opposes creating a Maghrebi structure, while no sides wants to, or is able to, translate its commitments into tangible acts.
What is certain is that the shock caused by the failure of several projects to achieve stability, development and democracy, is among the reasons for the Intifada in Tunisia. However, the solution for each North African state, separately, can be found in getting involved in building an Arab Maghreb that is in solidarity, is prosperous, and lacks the reasons for tension, clashes and uprisings. This is because the only recipe that has not been tried enough is that of inter-Maghreb cooperation, which might turn out to be bitter if seen according to narrow, local calculations, although much sweeter and easier to digest compared to other solutions.
Between one notion and another, the days and years pass. What is certain is that the region’s true problems are related to the demands of new generations, who want to find their place in the sun. However, the Maghreb region, amid the continuing Sahara conflict and its repercussions, might not be the same when a final settlement begins. And if no new horizons show up, in case of reaching a bold, viable and legitimate political settlement, then we will see a confrontation of real dilemmas, through solidarity and integration. The only thing that will not yield positive results is the continued existence of a problem that is exhausting for not only those directly or indirectly concerned by it, but also the entire region.
No comments:
Post a Comment