After suspending ties with the Polisario, Morocco's FM attends inauguration of Ecuador's president
Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita arrived in Quito Friday to represent King Mohammed VI at the inauguration of Ecuador's re-elected president, Daniel Noboa Azin, Moroccan diplomacy announced last night. The swearing-in ceremony took place this Saturday, May 24, at 5 PM (GMT+1).
Rabat and Quito have decided to open a new chapter in their relations after President Noboa, during his first term, suspended in October 2024 his country's recognition of the «Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR)». This decision was anticipated, especially after the defeat of the leftist candidate, Luisa Gonzalez, in the early presidential elections on October 15, 2023, against the current president Daniel Noboa, a 35-year-old businessman from a prosperous banana-growing family.
Two months after this suspension of relations with the Polisario, Nasser Bourita held a videoconference meeting on December 2 with his Ecuadorian counterpart, Gabriela Sommerfeld. She reaffirmed her country's support for a peaceful and lasting solution to the Sahara issue, within the framework of the political process led exclusively under the auspices of the UN.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Morocco World
21 minutes ago
- Morocco World
Rwanda's Sahara Position: Algeria Caught Again Fabricating Misleading Facts
Rabat – Algeria's regime has again been caught red-handed disseminating false information regarding Rwanda's alleged support for the Polisario Front's separatist agenda in Western Sahara. The regime's mouthpiece media echoed disinformation in which the separatist group claimed that President Paul Kagame had reaffirmed Kigali's support for its self-determination and referendum claims in recent comments. Pro-Polisario websites, including Algeria's regime press agency, claimed that the comments came while President Kagame and his Algerian counterpart, Abdelmadjid Tebboune, exchanged views on tensions and conflicts in Africa. During that exchange, they claimed, both leaders stressed their allegedly shared'support for the Sahrawi people and their right to self-determination through a free, fair, and transparent referendum.' Yet these claims were clearly and directly refuted by Kigali merely hours after the Polisario press and Algeria's news agency had run their reports, once again dealing another setback to Algeria's besieged and increasingly exposed narrative on the Sahara dispute. In stark contrast to the statement reported by the Algerian state media, Kagama's official website published a communique detailing his remarks with no explicit or implicit mention of Rwanda's support for the Polisario. To Algeria's dismay, this reflects a direct contradiction to the Algerian regime's disinformation campaign seeking to challenge Morocco's territorial integrity and sovereignty over its southern provinces. The embarrassing move further exposes Algeria's growing desperation to derail Morocco's deepening momentum on the Sahara dispute. The Moroccan Autonomy Plan has gained massive international backing over the past few years and months, with a growing cohort of countries applauding the Moroccan proposal as the most serious and credible political roadmap to end the dispute over Western Sahara. The latest such backing came from one of the UN Security Council's Permanent members, the UK, which on Sunday expressed its support for Morocco's autonomy plan as the most viable path to a lasting and politically realistic resolution of the lingering territorial dispute. While Rwanda is one of the few countries that still recognizes the self-styled SADR, the country does not embrace Algeria's consistently combatively anti-Moroccan narrative and attitude. In fact , following King Mohammed VI's historic visit to Rwanda in 2016, Rabat and Kigali have constantly pledged to strengthen relations at many levels. In particular, discussions have explored the need to expand bilateral ties on agriculture, trade, and high-level political cooperation on a wide range of strategic challenges facing the continent. T he two countries signed several agreements during the royal visit, including a Memoranda of Understanding on a political consultation mechanism, an air service agreement, an agreement on the exemption of visas, and a deal on security cooperation and tourism. In recent years, the two countries have constantly stressed the importance of maintaining or improving their bilateral cooperation at all levels. This new spirit of mutual support was particularly on display when Rwanda supported Morocco's return to the African Union in 2017. This latest fabricated news from the Algerian and Polisario media shows their desperation to undermine Morocco's growing momentum in the Sahara dossier. However, as more and more countries embrace the Moroccan autonomy proposal as the best chance for peace and prosperity in the region, or simply recognise Morocco's historical legitimacy, many observers believe that Algeria's constant attempts to challenge Morocco's growing momentum will not restore the prestige and legitimacy the exposed Algerian narrative once enjoyed. Tags: Algeria and the Western Saharaautonomy plan
Morocco World
3 hours ago
- Morocco World
US Vetoes Ceasefire, Again
The United States has once again exercised its veto power at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), blocking a resolution that called for an 'immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire' in Gaza. The resolution, which was co-sponsored by all ten elected non-permanent members—Algeria, Denmark, Greece, Guyana, Pakistan, Panama, the Republic of Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, and Somalia— received overwhelming support. All 14 other members of the Security Council, including permanent members Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom, voted in favor. In addition to demanding an immediate ceasefire, the resolution called for the 'immediate and unconditional lifting of all restrictions on the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza and its safe and unhindered distribution at scale, including by the UN and humanitarian partners.' Despite routinely citing Israeli captives in Gaza as justification for its unwavering support of Israel, the US chose once again to forgo a genuine opportunity to 'bring them home' as the resolution explicitly supported the release of all Israeli captives. Following the vote, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio released a statement doubling down on America's support for Israel, describing the resolution as 'counterproductive' and cynically reframing the situation as 'Gaza targeting Israel'— a grotesque distortion more than 20 months into a livestreamed genocide. 'Today, the United States sent a strong message by vetoing a counterproductive UN Security Council resolution on Gaza targeting Israel,' Rubio stated, in a transparent attempt to rationalize the war crime of collective punishment Israel has imposed on over two million Palestinians in Gaza. He went went to offer further rhetorical cover for Israel's ethnic cleansing campaign, stressing: 'We will not support any measure that fails to condemn Hamas, does not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza, draws a false equivalence between Israel and Hamas, or disregards Israel's right to defend itself.' Keen on carrying out its ethnic cleansing campaign, Israel swiftly applauded the US veto. 'We thank President Donald Trump and the U.S. administration for standing shoulder to shoulder with Israel and vetoing this one-sided resolution in the UN Security Council,' said Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar. Veto hall of shame On this occasion, it was US Ambassador to the UN Dorothy Shea who delivered the latest death sentence for thousands of Palestinians. She now joins Linda Thomas-Greenfield and Robert A. Wood on the growing list of US officials who, on five occasions since October 2023, have blocked Gaza's right to exist. Calling the draft resolution 'unacceptable,' Shea argued that 'US opposition to this resolution should come as no surprise—it is unacceptable for what it does say, it is unacceptable for what it does not say, and it is unacceptable for the manner in which it has been advanced.' Shea falsely accused Hamas of rejecting recent ceasefire deals, including one discussed over the weekend. It has been widely reported that Hamas did agree to a 60-day truce, which would include the release of up to ten living captives and 18 bodies. In exchange, the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) would have to withdraw to positions held prior to the March ceasefire collapse. But Israel rejected the deal because such an outcome would undermine its ongoing colonization of Gaza. 'We are not leaving areas we've conquered,' said Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich about this ceasefire proposal. Genocide renewed Earlier in January, Israel and Hamas had agreed to a ceasefire aimed at halting the genocide in Gaza, which at that point had already raged for more than 15 months. The agreement outlined a three-phase roadmap. In the first phase, a six-week cessation of military operations would see the IOF withdraw from densely populated areas and redeploy to border positions. As part of the same deal, Hamas agreed to release 33 Israeli captives—including women, children, and elderly men—in exchange for the release of roughly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails. The agreement also required the daily entry of 600 truckloads of humanitarian aid, including 50 fuel trucks, half of which were designated for northern Gaza. The subsequent phases called for the release of all remaining captives, a full IOF withdrawal from Gaza, and the launch of a multi-year reconstruction effort. Despite the initial implementation of the ceasefire, Israel refused to fully withdraw from Gaza as stipulated in the agreement. After committing nearly 1,000 documented ceasefire violations, Israel resumed its large-scale assault on Gaza on March 18—reigniting its campaign of mass slaughter and destruction. The US-induced collapse of this latest UN resolution comes as Gaza endures nearly 100 days under an almost total blockade on humanitarian aid, all while relentless Israeli bombings — using US-made and sponsored weapons — continue on a besieged population deliberately starved into the brink of extinction. Few images capture the scale of global depravity more clearly than that of a starving child in Gaza. Meanwhile, Western powers, from a safe distance, continue to presume the authority to decide who is worthy of life and who may be bombed into oblivion.
Morocco World
5 hours ago
- Morocco World
At the Edge of the Fabric of Moroccan Identity: The Limits and Promise of Tamaghrabit
In the global tapestry of nations, the Kingdom of Morocco occupies a remarkable position—not as the result of historical disjunction, but as a global culture formed by deep and layered encounters. Positioned on the Atlantic, linked to the interior of Africa, and historically enmeshed with the Mediterranean and Islamic worlds, Morocco has long crafted its identity from a mosaic of plural traditions. At the heart of this national distinctiveness lies a concept both vernacular and cultural: Tamaghrabit (or Tamghribīt ), a term that conveys the affective texture and ethical grammar of 'Moroccanness.' In recent years, Tamaghrabit has gained renewed prominence in Moroccan public discourse. From state institutions to civil society, and from intellectuals to policymakers, the term is increasingly embraced as a homegrown civic ethos—a way of being Moroccan that affirms pluralism, historical continuity, and strategic autonomy in a region often marked by fragmentation and ideological disarray (Bennis 2012; Boussouf 2023; Hashas 2024). Rooted in Morocco's deep historical entanglements—Arab, Amazigh, Andalusian, African, Islamic, Jewish, and Mediterranean— Tamaghrabit is invoked both as a cultural inheritance and as a forward-looking identity project. But is it? Beneath this confident narrative lies a set of unresolved questions. Is Tamaghrabit a genuine civic ethos grounded in lived diversity, or a normative framework that seeks to defuse dissent without addressing deeper structural inequalities and historical omissions? Can a discourse founded on pluralism and exceptionalism avoid the pitfalls of ideological reification? To what extent does invoking Tamaghrabit as a 'civilization' risk lapsing into essentialism? And might Tamaghrabit instead evolve as a generative, critical, and open-ended space of identity-making, rather than a finalized narrative of cultural uniqueness? More than a casual signifier of national identity, Tamaghrabit is framed as a 'civilizational' ethos—a cultivated mode of cultural and political being. It represents an orientation to the world shaped by centuries of entanglement among Amazigh, Arab, African, Andalusian, Islamic, Jewish, and Mediterranean influences. This complex identity found legal and symbolic expression in Morocco's 2011 Constitution, which articulates the nation as forged through the convergence of Arab-Islamic, Amazigh, and Saharan-Hassania roots, nourished by African, Andalusian, Hebraic, and Mediterranean tributaries. At the center of this national tapestry is Islam, whose Moroccan iteration emphasizes openness, moderation, and dialogue—a spiritual and ethical compass that informs both private piety and public life. Yet Tamaghrabit is more than constitutional text; it is a lived practice and cultural grammar, expressed through architecture, cuisine, music, ritual, and the multilingualism of Moroccan society. Arabic and Tamazight share official status, while French, Hebrew, Spanish, Hassania, and Moroccan Arabic ( dārija ) course through everyday life, governance, and intellectual production. This polyphony is not a problem to be solved but a defining feature of Morocco's civilizational grammar—a historical strategy of managing cultural difference not through homogenization, but through what Moroccan thinkers term 'unity in diversity.' This ethos is deeply rooted in Morocco's long-standing state tradition. Since the establishment of the Idrissid dynasty in the late 8th century, Morocco has maintained political autonomy from the great caliphal centers of the Islamic world—the Umayyads in Damascus, the Abbasids in Baghdad, and later the Ottomans. This autonomy gave rise to a distinct model of statecraft, centered on the figure of the Amīr al-Muʾminīn (Commander of the Faithful), which tied political authority to sacred lineage and communal legitimacy. Across successive dynasties—from the Almoravids and Marinids to the Saadians and ʿAlawites—this sovereignty became a cornerstone of Moroccan identity. The process of civilizational fusion matured significantly during the Marinid period (13th–15th centuries), when Moroccan territorial, linguistic, and legal boundaries began to crystallize. Scholars such as Mohammed al-Manouni have shown how institutions of language, law, creed, and scholarship were consolidated during this era, laying the groundwork for what would become the Moroccan personality. Crucially, this identity never rested on exclusionary ethnic foundations. As contemporary scholars affirm, the Arab and Amazigh elements of Moroccan identity are not oppositional but mutually constitutive. Arabness is primarily understood as cultural and linguistic, not ethnic, while Amazighness refers to the indigenous historical and cultural stratum of North Africa, which continues to flourish through cultural revitalization and official recognition (Hashas 2024). The modern articulation of Amazigh identity—evident in the 2011 constitutional recognition of Tamazight and the adoption of the neo-Tifinagh script in 2003—has not undermined national cohesion but rather enriched Morocco's pluralistic ethos. Scholars such as Mohamed Chafik and Hassan Aourid argue that Arabs and Amazighs are not discrete or antagonistic communities, but co-founders of the Moroccan nation and its Islamic civilizational path. This marks a significant epistemic shift from colonial binaries that sought to fragment Moroccan society, toward a postcolonial paradigm that affirms pluralism as foundational. Still, while Tamaghrabit is often celebrated as a framework of cultural pluralism and historical depth, it risks being reified as a coherent and finalized construct. This conceptual closure—reinforced by state narratives and nationalist historiography—can obscure the tensions, hierarchies, and contestations that animate Moroccan plurality. Rather than treating Moroccanness as a stable essence, it is more productive to view it as a site of ongoing negotiation—a dynamic space where cultural, linguistic, political, and epistemic forces interact and reshape one another. This perspective aligns with Lawrence Rosen's Two Arabs, a Berber, and a Jew (2015), which argues that identity in the Moroccan context is not inherited but negotiated—shaped by social adjudication, situational belonging, and interpretive practice. Rosen reveals that Moroccan life is marked by enduring tensions—between Arab and Amazigh identities, Islamic and Jewish legacies, modern and traditional authorities. These are not peripheral but foundational. Despite Morocco's proud motto of 'unity in diversity,' linguistic and religious hierarchies persist. Tamazight still struggles for full institutional parity; Jewish heritage is symbolically acknowledged but politically marginal; and Christian and non-Sunni communities remain largely invisible. Moroccanness , then, is not seamless—it is marked by dissonance between symbolic pluralism and structural inequalities. The late Moroccan sociologist Paul Pascon's concept of the 'composite society' ( société composite ) offers a powerful analytic for these contradictions. Pascon rejected binary models—tribe versus state, tradition versus modernity—that flatten Morocco's complexity. He saw Moroccan society as an overlapping set of social orders—tribal, colonial, capitalist, Islamic—each shaped by historical forces and coexisting in tension. These entanglements produce not harmony but uneven development and contested spaces. Pascon's insights complement Rosen's: identity in Morocco is not fixed but enacted through a continual process of negotiation. It draws on multiple, often conflicting sources—Islamic law, tribal custom, colonial bureaucracy, revolutionary ideologies. The result is not a finished pluralism but a dynamic and fragmented field of becoming, where Moroccanness is continually reshaped and reimagined. These frameworks resonate with Hashas's (2024) tripartite typology of contemporary Moroccan thought— the near , the far , and the other —tracing how Moroccan thinkers engage local traditions, regional connections, and universal values. Rosen's interlocutors live this complexity daily. Their identities draw from Islamic jurisprudence, tribal affiliations, and postcolonial modernity, always negotiated and never settled. In this context, Pascon's société composite provides the structural lens through which these lived negotiations unfold. This ethos of critical dynamism underpins the intellectual tradition of the so-called Rabat School of Thought—a constellation of thinkers who emerged during the French Protectorate and rose to prominence in post-independence Morocco. They articulated a pluralist, reformist, and autonomous epistemology. Positioned at the intellectual 'edge' of Arab, African, Islamic, and Mediterranean civilizations, these thinkers reject both cultural mimicry and ideological rigidity. Their edge is not marginality but vantage—a site of synthesis, critique, and possibility. From this perspective, Moroccan intellectuals confront colonial legacies, critique Arab nationalism, and craft alternatives rooted in the country's cultural ecology. Allal al-Fassi, for example, envisioned Morocco's Atlantic character as both a geopolitical fact and a moral orientation. The Atlantic was not merely geography—it was a horizon of freedom, dialogue, and ethical reform. Morocco, in this view, becomes a nation of the middle way : Sufism animates spiritual life, legal reform coexists with tradition, and intellectual independence is a lived ideal (Hashas 2024). Tamaghrabit , then, might best be understood as 'Moroccan humanism'—an ethos of coexistence, reflection, and civilizational confidence. It is not utopian or parochial, but emergent: forged at the intersection of geography and memory, spirit and aspiration. Yet to realize its potential, we must resist the urge to canonize it. Moroccanness is not a finished identity—it is a palimpsest, a site of becoming, where plural pasts meet uncertain futures. Edward Said's warning against essentialist thinking is instructive here. In 'The Clash of Ignorance' (2001), Said critiques Huntington's thesis of 'civilizational clashes,' rejecting the idea of cultures as fixed, self-contained entities. Civilizations, he argues, are dynamic, porous, and internally contested. Applied to Tamaghrabit , Said's insight reminds us that cultural identity must remain open to negotiation. When framed as essence, Tamaghrabit risks becoming an ideological tool—masking dissent and presenting pluralism as a fait accompli. Morocco's history offers rich resources for reimagining identity today: the migrations of Andalusian refugees and expellees; deep Jewish-Muslim ties; trans-Saharan caravans; Sufi cosmopolitanism; centuries of encounter with Ottoman, European, and American actors. These crossings shaped a Moroccan identity forged in connection, not isolation. If Tamaghrabit is to retain meaning, it must embrace these complexities. Tamaghrabit should not be reduced to a national brand. It should be seen as an ethical compass—a way of being that values pluralism, embraces contradiction, and cultivates reflection. Its power lies not in resolving complexity, but in naming it. To acknowledge the cracks in our society is not to weaken Tamaghrabit —it is to humanize and strengthen it. To speak of Tamaghrabit in the spirit of Edward Said is to reject cultural essentialism. Identity is not timeless essence; it is struggle, memory, and practice. Moroccan pluralism is not a completed project—it is an ongoing labor. Sustaining it requires dialogue, critique, and imagination. The stories of Estevanico of Azemmour—the African explorer who crossed continents and cultures—and Ibn Battuta of Tangier—the indefatigable traveler—remind us that identity is not a destination but a journey. To honor them is not to claim national heroes, but to embrace the labor of border-crossing, tension-holding, and narrative-making. In this light, Tamaghrabit is best seen as a living formation—an evolving bundle of meanings and practices shaped by history, memory, and everyday negotiation. It is not a static identity, but a dynamic process: open-ended, contested, and generative. Its strength lies in its capacity for openness—to hold contradiction, resist closure, and invite continual reinterpretation. As such, Tamaghrabit offers Moroccans a framework for navigating pluralism, questioning orthodoxies, and imagining more inclusive futures. Tags: Arabic and FrenchTamazight
