The MKP's two-faced foreign relations on Western Sahara
Image: Leon Lestrade / Independent Newspapers.
THE Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is a complete African Union (AU) member state and is recognised by more than 40 United Nations (UN) member states. Despite decades of occupation by Morocco and the ongoing struggle for self-determination, its existence is a testament to the resilience of its people and the enduring principles of international law regarding decolonisation.
The UN classified this contested territory as a non-self-governing territory in 1963, following Spain's submission of information under Article 73(e) of the UN Charter. However, the territory has remained in a state of legal limbo despite multiple resolutions, diplomatic interventions and a protracted conflict involving Morocco, the Polisario Front and Algeria.
This status affirms that the Sahrawi people have yet to exercise their right to self-determination under international law. The recent political stunt by Jacob Zuma's Umkhonto weSizwe Party (MK Party), which dismissed this right as 'Balkanisation', reflects a troubling ahistorisation of a people's identity and a flagrant disregard for international legal norms.
South Africa's genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) relied on its reputation for principled support of the occupied peoples. The MK Party's stance on Western Sahara would cripple this moral standing, inviting accusations of hypocrisy. Worse, Zuma's use of the national flag during party-to-government talks with Morocco was improper, as he acted solely in his MK Party capacity, not in any official national role.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Ad loading
In an op-ed, MK Party parliamentarian Mzanyele Manyi attempts to reframe the party's position as a rejection of 'Eurocentric binaries' and a commitment to precolonial African structures. A closer examination reveals a deeply contradictory and, frankly, two-faced approach that undermines the very principles the MK Party claims to uphold.
Manyi's argument hinges on a romanticised and selective interpretation of history, conveniently overlooking the realities of international law and the fundamental right to self-determination that the AU has consistently championed. To suggest that Western Sahara was merely 'integrated with Morocco' through 'trade, kinship and religious institutions' before colonialism, and that this somehow equates to legitimate sovereignty, is to deliberately blur the lines between historical influence and political dominion.
While precolonial connections existed, they do not negate the distinct identity of the Saharawi people or their internationally recognised right to choose their destiny. The assertion that Moroccan Sultans exercised 'spiritual and political suzerainty' akin to the British monarch's role over the Commonwealth is a disingenuous comparison.
Based on colonial logics, the Commonwealth is a voluntary association of so-called independent states. Thus, it does not provide a historical justification for territorial claims over a people who have consistently sought their statehood.
Furthermore, equating Morocco's actions in Western Sahara to an 'African character' while simultaneously dismissing the Saharawi's struggle for independence as 'intellectually lazy and historically dishonest' reveals a profound bias. Who, then, defines 'African character' in this narrative? Is it only those who align with pre-colonial monarchies, regardless of the aspirations of indigenous populations?
Nevertheless, the 1975 International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion found no ties of territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and Morocco. Manyi's dismissal of this advisory opinion as 'just that… an opinion, not a binding judgment' is a classic legal evasion, as it ignores its foundational role in the UN and AU's stance on decolonisation.
While advisory opinions are not directly binding in the same way as contentious judgments, they carry significant legal weight and are highly influential in international law.
The ICJ explicitly stated that it 'did not find any ties of territorial sovereignty between the territory of Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco or the Mauritanian entity'. This critical finding, conveniently downplayed by Manyi, directly challenges the MK Party's narrative of historical Moroccan suzerainty. To suggest that those who rely on this opinion are 'disingenuously using it as a hammer' is to accuse the international legal framework itself of being disingenuous when it doesn't align with the MK Party's preferred outcome.
Furthermore, it is crucial to recall that Spain's 1975 tripartite agreement with Morocco and Mauritania, which ceded administrative control of Western Sahara without a referendum, was a direct violation of UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) on the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, which affirms the right to self-determination for all colonial territories.
The MK Party's purported 'rejection of the Balkanisation of Africa' is perhaps the most glaring hypocrisy. For a party to claim it stands 'firmly against the further splintering of our continent into externally sponsored micro-states' while simultaneously advocating for the annexation of Western Sahara by Morocco is a monumental contradiction.
The Saharawi Republic is a member of the AU, recognised by a significant number of African states, including South Africa. Its struggle is one of decolonisation and self-determination, not 'external sponsorship' designed to create a 'micro-state' for foreign interests. This is a classic case of projection, where the MK Party attributes to the Saharawi what many accuse Morocco of pursuing: territorial expansion under the guise of historical claims.
The appeal to 'African sovereignty' and the 'legitimacy of political structures that preceded colonial conquest,' specifically the Moroccan monarchy, is a dangerous precedent. While respecting indigenous institutions is crucial, it cannot come at the expense of human rights or the universally accepted principle of self-determination.
If the MK Party genuinely champions African Renaissance, it should uphold the rights of all African peoples, not just those aligned with powerful historical monarchies. To suggest that the AU's decision to readmit Morocco was purely an act of 'African agency' without considering geopolitical manoeuvring or economic influence is naive at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.
Morocco had voluntarily left the continental body in 1984 because it disagreed with the decision of the AU's predecessor, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), to admit the Sahrawi Republic as a full member — effectively refusing to share a room with the very people it claims to share heritage and historical ties with.
What Manyi omits to mention is that Western Sahara suffered a similar fate to that of black South Africans during the 1960s, when Britain conferred political independence on Afrikaners. Spain ceded the territory to Rabat instead of the Sahrawi people, leading to a political standoff with Mauritania, which had also made a concurrent claim.
Following the colonial terra nullius myth, Afrikaners also make false claims that the land was empty or unused prior to their arrival and that Black South Africans were latecomers, erasing centuries of indigenous presence, land use, and political organisation by African communities. Moroccans follow almost an identical logic in Western Sahara, portraying the territory as historically ungoverned or inherently part of Morocco, thus denying the Sahrawi people's longstanding political identity and their right to self-determination.
Like Zambia and others, MK Party appears to have also fallen under the spell of the despotic foreign policy of a pariah state that seeks validation from former colonial powers. In effect, Morocco exercises what Moses Ochonu calls 'colonialism by proxy', a form of indirect rule on behalf of European interests eager to exploit Western Sahara's rich mineral wealth, particularly phosphates and iron ore, without Sahrawi consent. Phosphates are crucial for fertiliser production and global agriculture.
Morocco's extractivist agenda violates international law and entrenches neocolonial control over resources that rightfully belong to the Sahrawi people. The export of phosphates from Boucraa has been the subject of international legal challenges, including rulings by the European Court of Justice that trade agreements with Morocco cannot legally include resources from Western Sahara without the consent of the Sahrawi people.
Beyond phosphates, Morocco has developed significant wind and solar farms in the occupied territory, such as Nareva's 50MW Foum el Oued farm, specifically powering the Bou Craa phosphate mines.
Furthermore, European Union (EU) and Russian fishing fleets continue to plunder Western Sahara's rich Atlantic waters under trade agreements that, per ECJ rulings, cannot lawfully apply to Sahrawi territory. Similarly, Morocco has permitted large-scale agribusiness exports, including citrus and tomatoes, using water-intensive farming on occupied Sahrawi land, exacerbating local water scarcity and environmental degradation.
Under international law, primarily UN General Assembly Resolution 1803 (1962) on permanent sovereignty over natural resources, the Sahrawi people are the rightful owners of these resources. However, as the territory remains non-self-governing and partially occupied by Morocco, any extraction or export without their free, prior and informed consent is considered illegal by many legal scholars, the AU and the UN.
Despite international efforts to find a resolution, including the Baker Plans (Baker I and Baker II), which proposed varying degrees of autonomy for Western Sahara followed by a referendum on self-determination, viable alternatives remain underdeveloped. These UN-backed proposals, though at times accepted by one party and rejected by the other, represent pathways that prioritise the Sahrawi people's right to choose, offering a stark contrast to Morocco's unilateral autonomy initiative.
Beyond the MK Party's internal contradictions, Rabat's international manoeuvring also merits scrutiny. France's 2024 endorsement of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, following the US recognition, indicates a concerning shift by major powers, prioritising geopolitical interests over international law and Western Sahara's self-determination.
This trend is further amplified by Morocco's strategic utilisation of Israel normalisation, particularly through the Abraham Accords. This exploits a complex regional dynamic to garner global support for its occupation, at the expense of established principles of decolonisation and human rights.
The MK Party's position on Western Sahara, as articulated by Manyi, is not a nuanced 'African-centred reading of history'. It is a thinly veiled justification for an international relations position that prioritises a selective historical narrative and the interests of a specific state over the fundamental right of a people to determine their future. MK Party's stance effectively legitimises resource theft disguised as anti-Western posturing.
Therefore, the MK Party's foreign relations strategy is not only inconsistent but also fundamentally two-faced: it champions African unity and decolonisation in rhetoric, while actively undermining it in practice, particularly concerning the Saharawi people. The 'ghosts of colonial borders' that Manyi wishes to reject seem to linger quite strongly in the MK Party's approach, but only when it suits their political agenda.
There is a need to address the MKP's rhetoric-reality gap, evident in their endorsement of Morocco's 'autonomy plan' as 'decolonisation' while simultaneously silencing Sahrawi self-determination. This constitutes a colonial proxy masked in anti-Western slogans.
Siyayibanga le economy!
* Siyabonga Hadebe is an independent commentator based in Geneva on socio-economic, political and global matters.
** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, Independent Media, or IOL. Get the real story on the go: Follow the Sunday Independent on WhatsApp.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
an hour ago
- Mail & Guardian
Countries are legally liable for climate inaction, International Court of Justice rules
In its unanimous advisory opinion the ICJ, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, ruled that countries have an obligation to protect the environment from greenhouse gas emissions and to act with due diligence and co-operation to fulfill this obligation. (Wikimedia Commons) In its unanimous advisory opinion the ICJ, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, ruled that countries have an obligation to protect the environment from greenhouse gas emissions and to act with due diligence and co-operation to fulfill this obligation. This includes the obligation under the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The court ruled that if states breach these obligations, they incur legal responsibility and may be required to cease the wrongful conduct, offer guarantees of non-repetition and make full reparation, depending on the circumstances. To justify this decision, it used the commitments of member states to environmental and human rights treaties including the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement, the ozone layer treaties and the Biodiversity Convention. The court, which was of the view that 'a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is a precondition for the enjoyment of many human rights', said the full enjoyment of human rights 'cannot be ensured without the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment'. To guarantee the effective enjoyment of human rights, countries must take measures to protect the climate system and other parts of the environment. 'These measures may include, inter alia, taking mitigation and adaptation measures, with due account given to the protection of human rights, the adoption of standards and legislation, and the regulation of the activities of private actors.' International human rights law, climate change treaties and other relevant environmental treaties, as well as the relevant obligations under customary international law, inform each other. 'States must therefore take their obligations under international human rights law into account when implementing their obligations under the climate change treaties and other relevant environmental treaties and under customary international law, just as they must take their obligations under the climate change treaties and other relevant environmental treaties and under customary international law into account when implementing their human rights obligations,' the ICJ said. It found that the failure of a state to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from greenhouse gas emissions — including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licences or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies — 'may constitute an internationally wrongful act, which is attributable to that state'. The case was the largest ever seen by the ICJ, with the proceedings unprecedented in scale. There were 91 written statements filed by states and a further 62 comments submitted by states, international organisations and civil society groups. A record 97 states participated in the oral proceedings, which were held in the Hague in December. The consequences of climate change are 'severe and far-reaching', affecting both natural ecosystems and human populations, the court said. Rising temperatures are causing the melting of ice sheets and glaciers, leading to sea level rise and threatening coastal communities with unprecedented flooding. 'Extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, droughts and heatwaves, are becoming more frequent and intense, devastating agriculture, displacing populations and exacerbating water shortages,' it said. 'Furthermore, the disruption of natural habitats is pushing certain species toward extinction and leading to irreversible loss of biodiversity. Human life and health are also at risk, with an increased incidence of heat-related illnesses and the spread of climate-related diseases. These consequences underscore the urgent and existential threat posed by climate change.' In September 2021, the Pacific Island state of Vanuatu announced that it would seek an advisory opinion from the ICJ on climate change. This move was inspired by youth group After Vanuatu lobbied other UN member states to support this initiative in the General Assembly, on 29 March 2023, it adopted a resolution requesting an advisory opinion from the court. Two fundamental questions were posed before the court. What are states' obligations under international law to address climate change for present and future generations? What are the legal consequences under these obligations for states failing to do so? Noting that these advisory proceedings were 'unlike any that have previously come before the court', the ICJ said the questions posed by the General Assembly represented more than a legal problem. 'They concern an existential problem of planetary proportions that imperils all forms of life and the very health of our planet,' the court said. 'International law, whose authority has been invoked by the General Assembly, has an important but ultimately limited role in resolving this problem.' A complete solution to 'this daunting, and self-inflicted, problem' requires the contribution of all fields of human knowledge, whether law, science, economics or any other. The ICJ emphasised that solving the climate crisis extends beyond law — collective human will and wisdom are vital 'at the individual, social and political levels'. This involves 'changing our habits, comforts and current way of life in order to secure a future for ourselves and those who are yet to come'. While the court's advisory opinions are non-binding, they carry significant legal and moral authority, and help clarify and develop international law by defining the legal obligations of states. The ICJ's opinion provides new avenues for litigation, advocacy, and international pressure, especially for vulnerable countries and communities harmed by major emitting states, said Nomasango Masiye-Moyo, the co-ordinator of Natural Justice's environmental lawyers collective. For Africa, the statements by the ICJ on reparations mean that vulnerable citizens can seek remedy for 'ecological destruction, illegal eviction, While reparations have long been considered customary international law, the court's statements 'sketch a judicially acknowledged pathway for compensation, rehabilitation and restitution'. 'We hope that the court's findings will embolden many African communities and lawyers around the continent, to fiercely seek accountability and justice for harms done in their communities, historically and in the future.'
IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
How Russia's historical ties are fading in southern Africa
The Valdai Discussion Club in partnership with the South African Institute of International Affairs hosts the 3rd Russian-African Conference in Pretoria titled: 'Realpolitik in a Divided World: Rethinking Russia-South Africa Ties in a Global and African Context'. Image: Oupa Mokoena / Independent Newspapers Russia's influence in southern Africa is facing a significant challenge as the region's historical memory of the Soviet Union's role in liberation movements begins to fade. Lwazi Somya, manager of research and development at the Southern African Liaison Office, made this observation during the Russia-Africa conference co-hosted by the Valdai Discussion Club and the South African Institute of International Affairs in Pretoria. He warned that the decline in electoral support for former liberation movements in southern Africa could signal a loss of historical memory in Russia's relations with African countries, potentially eroding the soft power gained during the Soviet Union era. "Russia has to engage with the decline of support to former liberation movements within southern Africa in terms of electoral support," he said. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Somya cited the recent meeting of southern African liberation movements, where Russia was mentioned only once in the declaration, as evidence of the diminishing influence. He also pointed out that Russia's trade relations with South Africa are relatively low, ranking 46th as an export partner and 39th as a source of imports. "The ideological dilution of governance within southern Africa" and the emergence of a new generation without attachment to the liberation history are further challenges for Russia, Somya said. "Young people are forgetting the historical role Russia played, and therefore those historic memory connections Russia has predicated on and relied on in terms of soft power are declining," he added. Godwin Gonde, a lecturer at the Dr Salim Ahmed Salim Centre for Foreign Regions in Tanzania, noted that Russian-African relations have evolved, spanning pre-colonial, liberation Struggle, Cold War, and post-Cold War eras. However, he emphasised that the current generation often lacks knowledge of this history, and that Russia's re-engagement with Africa is taking place in a vastly different context. "The future generation will no longer have the same historical context and good notion of relations," Gonde said, highlighting the importance of learning from past experiences to move forward as global partners. He added that Russia's renewed engagement with Africa comes at a time when the continent is struggling to find its footing in a rapidly changing world. Munyaradzi Nyakudya, chairperson of the Department of Peace, Security and Society at the University of Zimbabwe, praised the Russians for their trade cooperation investments made in his country. "I think they are doing a lot in terms of trying to get into mining and energy. We have seen some cultural exchanges. We have seen quite a number in terms of the scholarships and education exchanges," he said. However, Nyakudya noted that despite significant developments on the ground, the visibility of Russia's presence in Zimbabwe is lacking, and the relationship between the two countries has faced criticism for being elitist. He bemoaned the fact that the benefits of the partnership are not trickling down to the grassroots level, where the country's resources are being exported as raw materials.
IOL News
4 hours ago
- IOL News
How BRICS is fostering dialogue and addressing global challenges
The Valdai Discussion Club, in partnership with the South African Institute of International Affairs, hosted the 3rd Russian-African Conference titled 'Realpolitik in a Divided World: Rethinking Russia-South Africa Ties in a Global and African Context' in Pretoria. Image: Oupa Mokoena / Independent Newspapers The role of BRICS in the world has been hailed as a positive force driving dialogue and creating strategic conditions for development, rather than opposing any particular nation, including the United States (US). This message was delivered at the Russia-Africa conference, co-hosted by the Valdai Discussion Club and the South African Institute of International Affairs in Pretoria. The conference, titled 'Realpolitik Responses in a Fractured World: Rethinking Russia-South Africa Ties in Global and African Context', brought together top government officials and academics to share their perspectives on 'G20 and BRICS: Assessing Strategic Roles in an Evolving Global Order'. Dmitry Birichevsky, director of the Department of Economic Cooperation at the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, noted that the BRICS leadership cycle in the G20 has coincided with a strengthening of its economic positions. 'The mounting influence of BRICS has asserted itself as a centre for growth, innovation and one of the main pillars of a new and more just world order,' he said. He added that BRICS' principles of consensus, equality, and mutual consideration of each other's interests resonate with the growing number of countries in the Global South. Key issues on the BRICS agenda include making economic governance more democratic and bridging the digital and ecological divide between the Global North and the Global South. Birichevsky reiterated Russia's support for the South African presidency, saying it has predictably placed G20 emphasis on the African agenda amid the alarming development in the global economy. Philani Mthembu, executive director of the Institute for Global Dialogue, noted that the recent presidencies of BRICS and G20 have coincided with a rapidly shifting geopolitical landscape, which has heightened the focus on these forums. He stressed that the low level of participation or absence of the United States should not be the only thing on their radar. 'The participation of the US will not make or break South Africa's G20 presidency. The US must be seen in a broader context where the US is pursuing what it views as America first,' he said. Mthembu added that BRICS should aim to reform international institutions from within while also applying external pressure. Elena Maslova, associate professor at MGIMO University's Department of Integration Studies, recommended that BRICS delve into issues such as climate change. Image: Oupa Mokoena / Independent Newspapers Elena Maslova, associate professor at MGIMO University's Department of Integration Studies, suggested that BRICS should explore topics such as climate change, highlighting the declaration on climate finance as a significant step forward. 'BRICS is gradually becoming a key platform for climate dialogue as well. BRICS should strive to create its single space for climate finance implementation to make it possible to reduce emissions,' she said. Maslova emphasised that BRICS is not a confrontational tool, but rather a valuable platform for tackling global challenges. Nourhan ElSheikh, professor of International Relations at Cairo University, stated that the Global South's influence has surged over the past decade, largely due to BRICS and G20, which are driving forces behind the emerging new world order. 'The Global South matters a lot not only for competition among colonial powers but also as a global player in international politics,' she said. ElSheikh remarked that the Global South has matured to the point where it can identify its own interests, rather than automatically aligning with the US, which is still trying to maintain its global dominance. 'Now we have the Global South saying 'no' and that this is not in our favour or interest and we have the right to choose our way,' she said. [email protected]
