MAK urges Marco Rubio to pressure Algeria over Kabylie
Feeling the winds blowing in its favor from the United States, the Movement for Self-Determination in Kabylia (MAK) is seeking to make the Trump administration aware of its demands. MAK advisor Elizabeth Myers, an American who heads the Marrakech-based firm Strategix Legal, sent a letter to Marco Rubio to this effect.
She reminded the United States secretary of state of the letter he himself had sent in September 2022, when he was a senator, to his predecessor, Antony Blinken, regarding the $7 billion Algeria had earmarked for the purchase of Russian weapons. «Since then, the situation has only worsened. Algeria's defense budget is currently the largest in Africa, with $25 billion allocated for 2025—more than three times the $7 billion you were concerned about on September 14, 2022», she pointed out.
Myers asserts that the MAK and the Kabyle government-in-exile (known as Anavad) are the principal opponents of Algeria's authoritarian regime and enjoy growing support among the 12 million Kabyles living at home and abroad.
«The MAK continues to peacefully and relentlessly defend its oppressed people and march toward the establishment of a pluralist and democratic state, unlike Algeria's anti-democratic and demagogic military-religious oligarchy, which in no way represents the voice of the people».
Elizabeth Myers : MAK draws inspiration from the U.S. Declaration of Independence
To back up her indictment of the Algerian government, the Strategix Legal director referenced the latest report, published on January 30, 2025, by UN Special Rapporteur Mary Lawlor on the human rights situation in Algeria.
«She expressed dismay that more than a year after her visit to Algeria, human rights defenders, including lawyers, are 'still arbitrarily arrested, judicially harassed, intimidated, and criminalized for their peaceful activities' under Article 87 bis of the Algerian Penal Code, 'a vaguely worded anti-terrorism provision that is often misused to repress freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly'», wrote the MAK adviser.
On the other hand, she notes that her client «is committed to democratic values such as free elections, freedom of expression, and freedom of religion, and to respecting a constitution that is largely based on the U.S. Constitution. The Kabyle constitution cites as its authority the U.S. Declaration of Independence» of July 4, 1776.
Myers concluded her letter by requesting, on behalf of MAK President Ferhat Mehenni, a meeting with Marco Rubio or one of his representatives to «discuss how Kabylia can work with the United States to stabilize Africa and promote democratic principles and prosperity».
In her letter, Elizabeth Myers also pointed to Algeria's support for the Polisario and its relations with Cuba and Venezuela. In its latest report on terrorism, published in December 2024, the Biden administration rejected Algeria's designation of the MAK as a terrorist organization.
As a reminder, on April 20, 2024, from New York, the MAK declared the creation of the Kabyle state.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
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
a day ago
- Morocco World
Diplomacy: A New Bargaining Power Style
Rabat – It happens that viewers are mesmerized watching an epic scene that makes them whisper, smile, or feel outraged. A heated exchange between American President Donald Trump and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa on May 22, 2025, on the occasion of the latter's visit to Washington, can be included in this perspective. The visit of the South African head of state is highly anticipated as Pretoria is caught in the crossfire of the White House. Out of the blue, the American president gives the order to turn off the lights to broadcast images showing alleged persecutions of white farmers in South Africa. The American narrative about what is happening in South Africa is perceived in different ways by observers and experts in African affairs. Explanations are flying around. I'm going to mention a few of them for the purpose of getting the record straight. Some experts believe that the American president's behavior is an explicit response from the United States to the land expropriation law that the South African government adopted on January 23, 2025. This law directly targets white South African farmers who own 80% of the fertile lands. Elon Musk, of South African origin, would have pushed the new American administration to be merciless towards Pretoria. Other experts interpret the American president's behavior as a stigmatization of Pretoria's position towards Israel. Peoria initiated proceedings before the International Court of Justice, accusing Tel Aviv of genocide in the Gaza Strip in 2023. Moreover, a small handful of observers perceive the American president's attitude as a barely concealed grievance regarding South Africa's double-standard position within the BRICS and other international forums. Open-Air Diplomatic Bargaining Paradigm However, this paper aims at a different objective. It will assess what might be called the entrenchment of a new diplomatic style that President Donald Trump has been performing so far. This started during his first term in 2017-2021. A style that comes with a new diplomatic bargaining power that disregards the old diplomatic niceties. This style aims (and succeeds) to achieve the prospective results by playing on the nerves of the guest to the White House. Several heads of state and government have experienced the magnitude and electric atmosphere in the Oval Office. In the realm of smart diplomacy, the appropriate key is to achieve the desired objectives and to do so in a commendable manner. It is in this perspective that one should observe another style, more sober, more straightforward, and without any doublespeak. It is not given enough spotlight, but it achieves the targeted objectives: The style of King Mohammed VI of Morocco . This assumption is not about comparing between the two leaders in the academic sense of the term, but about reflecting on diplomatic styles that evolve according to the changes in the international system. In this case, these styles embody both adaptation and firmness, flexibility and determination. 'The style is the man,' This statement is particularly relevant in this case. Let's recall the main arguments to help understand the matter dealt with. It is worth reminding that, as mentioned earlier, what the South African President has endured is not the first in its kind. Observers recall the scene in whereby President Donald Trump presents to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, on March 20, 2018, in front of cameras, large posters of the weapons sold to Saudi Arabia in 2017. He tries to persuade him to acquire more weapons. Far from the subtleties of a business deal for which the American President is known, the message is rather diplomatic and strategic. President Trump puts the conditions of the American security umbrella in favor of Saudi Arabia back on the table. This mechanism has been operational since the secret agreement in February 1945 between American President Franklin D. Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz bin Abdul Rahman Al Saud aboard the USS Quincy cruiser in the Suez Canal. According to unconfirmed reports, the United States would guarantee the military security of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in exchange for the latter's commitment to ensure the energy security of the United States and its Western allies. The impeccably staged performance by President Donald Trump in 2018 relied on two vectors of state interdependence paradigm: vulnerability and sensitivity. At the time, the internal situation in Saudi Arabia is hectic, and the reforms introduced by the Saudi Crown Prince are shaking up the regional political, security, and diplomatic landscape. It goes without saying that the purpose of Donald Trump's diplomatic exercise is to place his interlocutors in an uncomfortable position, pushing them either to rise to the challenge or to let the storm pass. The psychological dimension is crucial, as the American President enjoys making unpredictability his Trojan horse. The same scenario is implemented during the visit of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February 2025 to Washington. President Trump draws his guest's attention that he no longer has any cards to play for the sake of negotiating a better solution in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia ( H. Hami, L'Europe daltonienne et la phobie d'un Yalta 2, MEDIAS24, March 14, 2025) . The Ukrainian President tries to argue by challenging the American Vice President James Davis Vance who intervenes to support his President's argument during the meeting. In vain. What interpretation can we make of this new style of open-air negotiation? One: Setting the rules of the game and initiating a new timetable for the conduct of future negotiations. This is a technique aimed at turning the page on candid previous relationships to shake up the status quo and express the need to find different alternatives. Two: Prioritizing issues in asymmetrical relationships where the minor actor is summoned to reconsider his priorities and adapt them to those of the major actor. Otherwise, he is urged to look elsewhere while bearing the consequences of his choice. Three: Clarifying positions by bringing in the media, the involved parties, and the public as witnesses. The exercise is an eloquent demonstration of manipulation in broad daylight. It is indirectly accompanied by the demystification of the alleged charismatic image of certain leaders in the eyes of their own people. Four: Challenging media outlets known for their sensational scoops. They are caught off guard and, through unyielding reporters, seek to avoid being sidelined. The scene of the reporter asking President Trump a tricky question about the story of the Boeing 747-8i (an impressive version of the jumbo-jet) offered by Qatar, to defuse the chaotic situation in which the South African President finds himself, tells more about biased (and dichotomous) relationships between media and politicians. Sword of Damocles Hoovering President Trump doesn't back down and calls the reporter incompetent for trying to divert the audience's and the public's attention from the ordeal he is subjecting his South African guest to. He confirms that he has no problem accepting such an offer. For the record, two Boeing 747-200Bs have been in service for the American presidency since 1990. President Trump intends to replace them. Five: Delineating the scope of visits by foreign heads of state and government to the White House. Unless they prepare well and come with a clear agenda negotiated in advance and in the finest details, they are advised to stay at home. For those who want to see the American President pay visit to them in order to polish their image, they are requested to prepare their checks and pay up. No free rides and no closed eyes without consequences either. Six: Repeating protocol premediated mistakes. Here's a weapon that never misses its target. It destabilizes the guests and puts them at odds with their narratives about the excellence of bilateral relations and their promising prospects. The mistake is being corrected, but the sword of Damocles remains in the backdrop. One of the premeditated mistakes is the one involving flags or pennants. Displaying an old flag or mistaking it for that of another country with which the visiting head of state has a conflict is one of the diplomatic tricks that hits the mark. Besides the required destabilization of guests, it somehow poisons the atmosphere of official meetings and downsizes expected results. Similarly, the error on the geographical and political map is a strong signal regarding the host country's position in relation to a regional conflict in which the country of the head of state visiting is involved. Seven: Justifying a political and diplomatic decision that does not seem to have been well understood. This stance is aimed at the so-called traditional allied countries that are reluctant to admit that their privileged status is being challenged. A new breeze is in the air, favoring realism and pragmatism, and they have to get it or leave the stage. Most of the criteria mentioned above can be witnessed, to some extent, in the style of Mohammed VI, King of Morocco. One: The use of the media to convey messages is done through appropriate media. King Mohammed VI very seldom speaks directly to the media. He seems to prefer not to engage in the question-and-answer game, which can lead to misunderstandings and unnecessary subtleties. Two: Clarity in ideas and mastery in responding to urgent questions. The King uses a top-notch instrument, rational, clear, and straightforward: speeches. They are concise and get straight to the point. In terms of foreign policy, the speeches are clear, and the targeted actors are identified. Three: The deep care given to timing and context. The King makes it a cornerstone of the message he intends to deliver. This is a coherent approach in line with the outlined priorities. Four: The delineation of the scope of future negotiations with partners and other countries interested in serious relationships with Morocco. National interest comes first. No concessions regarding sovereignty in its political, diplomatic, economic, and security dimensions are accepted or imposed. Five: The accuracy and relevance of the political and strategic vision. In this respect, two speeches and messages are worth mentioning. Diplomacy: Transparency Means Business First, the speech delivered on April 20, 2016, on the occasion of the Morocco-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Summit. King Mohammed VI draws attention to the dangers facing the Arab world, particularly the attempts to change regimes and fragment Arab states. He warns against the new alliances aimed at creating conditions of disorder that threaten stability in the region and the viability of sovereign states. A year later, a coalition of five countries (Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Yemen, and Egypt) rises against Qatar. Once again, King Mohammed VI stands out with his mastery and vision, breaking the economic blockade imposed on this country by sending emergency food and medical aid in June 2017, as a sign of solidarity with the Qatari people. Morocco nonetheless maintains friendly relations with the members of the coalition, despite a brief cooling period that was quickly overtaken. Morocco hardly pays attention to the statements from certain circles in Doha who claim, ignoring the symbolism of the King's gesture, that their country receives no aid from anyone and that it would have paid for what it has received accordingly. Secondly, the speech in which King Mohammed VI draws the red lines beyond which Morocco cannot accept to promote its relations with both partners and adversaries. The royal speech of August 20, 2022, on the prism through which Morocco views its international environment, is a striking illustration of the King's diplomatic perception. This prism is assessed based on the position of friendly countries and other countries regarding the issue of the Moroccan Sahara. Six: The promotion of the peaceful approach to resolving bilateral inter-state conflicts. King Mohammed VI emphasizes at least five dialogue techniques along with the rejection of belligerent means that Morocco's adversaries are fond of. One: The outstretched hand aimed at identifying the actors who have a grudge against Morocco. These are sovereign state actors, members of the United Nations Organization, eager for double talk and fervent adepts of bureaucratic jargon. Two: The invitation addressed to the international community to appreciate Morocco's goodwill in contrast to the bad faith of its adversaries, state actors in the Euro-Mediterranean and Arab-African spaces. Three: The distinction and complementarity between domestic and foreign policy choices. The link between the two (Linkage politics) is fluid. It is expressed in accordance with the current political and diplomatic swings without deviating from the fundamental principles governing the two arenas. Four: Pragmatism and adaptation. Both are part of the framework designed to neutralize opponents and maintain a line of contact through international bodies. Two striking examples. On one hand, the proposal of the Autonomy Plan in 2007 to resolve the issue of the regional conflict over the Moroccan Sahara. On the other hand, the return of Morocco to the African Union in 2017. Five: The junction between national and international priorities in the same speech subtly conveys the same message. It is up to the intranational and international actors to grasp it at its true value and interpret it appropriately. President Donald Trump's style, through the slogan 'America First,' which grates on the United States' rival nerves, allows him to break the iceberg of doubt among his allies and adversaries. During his recent tour of the Gulf region, he returned to Washington with promises of investments amounting to trillions of dollars. Enough to leave political and economic planners and military strategists disoriented, most of whom are still navigating the uncertainties of the Cold War or Third World literature. The style of King Mohammed VI is equally productive of positive results. Since the speech on August 20, 2022, the list of countries that publicly recognize Moroccan sovereignty over its southern provinces or endorse the autonomy plan proposed since 2007 has expanded. The latest endorsement to date is from the United Kingdom, on June 1, 2025. One could quibble over the terminology used or the choice of syntax, however, one thing is certain: now, three permanent member countries of the United Nations Security Council support Morocco. They are on the list of 117 countries around the world that adopt the same position: the resolution of the regional conflict over the Sahara cannot but within (and only in) the framework of Moroccan sovereignty. The various scenes reviewed above normally take place behind closed doors. They lead to legendary quarrels, some of which are recounted in the memoirs of heads of state or foreign ministers. They describe threats, intimidation, and diplomatic harsh cacophonic language. In short, diplomacy evolves at the pace of the changes in the structure of the international system and the processes that unfold within it. It goes without saying that all means intended for the implementation of foreign policy choices are equal as long as they are creative, preemptive, and reactive in serenity and calm. By the same token, it is worth noting that post-COVID diplomacy will be more surrealistic for some and more realistic for others. Nevertheless, as long as diplomacy works to clarify perceptions instead of stifling them, it will have achieved its objective. Negotiation between sovereign states is now in the spotlight, with styles that sometimes confuse observers. However, these styles do not resemble the classical model of l'État spectacle . Similarly, diplomacy no longer fits into the all-encompassing manipulation scheme. Although diplomacy still keeps the classic channels open for less urgent matters, it is more direct. It is now dealt with in the open, performing some sort of new bargaining power style . Tags: Africa diplomacyDonald Trump
Ya Biladi
2 days ago
- Ya Biladi
Abuja seeks investors for $25 billion Nigeria-Morocco gas pipeline project
On Monday, Nigeria's federal government announced it is actively seeking international investors for the $25 billion Nigeria-Morocco gas pipeline project, designed to supply gas to Europe via Morocco. Speaking at a meeting with Swiss-based Dutch multinational energy and commodity trading company Vitol Group, Nigeria's Vice President Kashim Shettima urged global investors to «mobilize resources and join us in this transparent project». «We hold the world's eighth-largest gas reserves and aim to fully harness their potential due to the stability and transparency of the gas sector. This is why we are seriously exploring the export of gas to Europe via this undersea pipeline—a costly $25 billion project that requires technical expertise more than money», Shettima said. «Nigeria has been a crucial country for Vitol. We have been involved in financing, trading, and supporting government initiatives. Vitol is committed and ready to deploy capital when needed», Jeffrey Dellapina, Vitol's CFO and delegation leader, promised. The Nigeria-Morocco gas pipeline remains a top priority for the Nigerian government. In May, President Bola Tinubu reaffirmed the project's significance, calling it a «top priority». It is worth noting that the project is gaining momentum with recent substantial funding support from the United Arab Emirates. Other major financiers include the European Investment Bank, the Islamic Development Bank, and the OPEC Fund. Chinese company Jingye Steel has secured the contract to supply materials for the pipeline. The United States has also expressed interest in investing. Morocco has completed feasibility and engineering studies for the 5,660 km pipeline, which will pass through 13 African countries. First gas deliveries are expected by 2029. A joint venture between Rabat and Abuja has been established to oversee the project's implementation.
