Tag: Independence

What’s Next For Western Sahara?

My regulars know that I have a soft spot in my heart for Western Sahara…..years ago when I was working in North Africa and the Middle East I had the opportunity to visit and work in Western Sahara…I was doing research and analysis for a Spanish newspaper……..I fell in love with the region and the people……

Since those days I have been watching and writing about the area’s struggle for independence from Morocco…..it is not as complicated as the news media and the Moroccan government would have one believe…..

The death of the leader of the Polisario, a group fighting for the independence of Western Sahara, has the whole movement in a quandary…..

Late Polisario Front leader Mohamed Abdelaziz kept the dispute over Western Sahara peaceful, but a fruitless, 25-year-long cease-fire with Morocco has young Sahrawis impatient.

Source: What’s next in Western Sahara dispute after death of Polisario leader?

A leader of the independence movement in Western Sahara died Tuesday. Mohamed Abdelaziz was the leader and co-founder of the Sahrawi people’s Polisario Front movement, which has demanded independence ever since Morocco took over most of Western Sahara in 1975. He was 68. A 16-year-long insurgency led by the indigenous Polisario Front ended with a U.N.-brokered truce in 1991. The resolution promised a referendum on independence, which has yet to take place. Morocco is only willing to grant limited autonomy to the disputed region. Eighty-four countries as well as the African Union recognize Western Sahara as an independent nation. In March, Morocco expelled U.N. staffers from Western Sahara after Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon referred to Morocco’s rule over the region as “occupation” during a visit to refugee camps in the Algerian town of Tindouf, located in southwestern Algeria. The expulsion of the 84 U.N. staffers has put at risk the ceasefire between Morocco and the Polisario Front.

It is only a matter of time before this situation explodes again…….the US will naturally come down on the side of Morocco because of some misguided loyalty from the past.

The UN will do whatever the US tells them to do……especially if it falls into the Security Council where the US can use all its power to keep a people oppressed.

What can we expect from the beacon of freedom and liberty?

TAKE ACTION: Protect rights and resources in Western Sahara | Western Sahara Action Forum

As my regular readers know I am a supporter of independence of Western Sahara from Morocco……I visited there in the 80’s when I worked in the region and fell in love with the people and land……

I promised my friends there in Western Sahara that I would do what I could to help the movement…..

Please check this out and if you feel that you can support their goals…..please lend a hand……

 

TAKE ACTION: Protect rights and resources in Western Sahara | Western Sahara Action Forum.

Where Is Western Sahara?

I know that this post will mean very little to anyone at all…..but for me it is a personal thing for I have been into the area now in dispute…..a personal journey, if you will……so I apologize for the personal break and that I have gone off on a tangent here…..

First of all…please STOP using the term “the Sahara Desert”!  The word Sahara means desert….so you are saying the desert desert……

When I was working in the Middle East I was in Morocco and had a chance to visit Western Sahara….that was shortly after the Spanish pulled out……

Western Sahara is just south of Morocco on the coast with the Atlantic….there is little to NO rainfall….temps got from 115 in day to 30’s at night…..few people and few resources…….Northern Africa, bordering the North Atlantic Ocean, between Mauritania and Morocco

Morocco annexed the northern two-thirds of Western Sahara (formerly Spanish Sahara) in 1976 and claimed the rest of the territory in 1979, following Mauritania’s withdrawal. A guerrilla war with the Polisario Front contesting Morocco’s sovereignty ended in a 1991 UN-brokered cease-fire; a UN-organized referendum on the territory’s final status has been repeatedly postponed. The UN since 2007 has sponsored intermittent talks between representatives of the Government of Morocco and the Polisario Front to negotiate the status of Western Sahara. Morocco has put forward an autonomy proposal for the territory, which would allow for some local administration while maintaining Moroccan sovereignty. The Polisario, with Algeria’s support, demands a popular referendum that includes the option of independence.

A little background to help understand the post a bit better…..

Since 1976 there is been a series of conflicts and situations in Western Sahara but none have been good for the Sahawaris (indigenous people)…..and now the Obama admin has jumped on the Moroccan band wagon…..

“We have stated our belief that Morocco’s autonomy plan is serious, realistic and credible, a potential approach to satisfy the aspirations of the people in the Western Sahara to run their own affairs in peace and dignity,” Clinton told reporters.

The Polisario Front group demands a self-determination referendum in Western Sahara, a phosphate-rich territory that was annexed by Morocco after Spain withdrew in 1975. Morocco has only offered greater autonomy.

This is CRAP!  It is what Morocco wants NOT what the Sahawris want……

In 1991, the United Nations negotiated a ceasefire between the Polisario forces and Morocco. The basis for this was that a UN-supervised referendum would determine the country’s future. However, despite numerous promises and resolutions from the UN, the referendum has not taken place. This is largely due to support for Morocco from the Western powers, particularly France and the US.

Repression in the Moroccan occupied territories continues. On November 8, 2010, Moroccan forces violently attacked non-violent protesters camped at Gdeim Izik, outside the capital El Aaiun. In the aftermath, Moroccan soldiers and settlers attacked Saharawi homes and shops in El Aaiun. An estimated 36 Saharawi were killed and 723 wounded, and 163 were arrested and are currently facing Moroccan military courts.  Does this sound like they will give these people autonomy?  If it does then we are not reading the same books……

My time among the people was great and they were a courteous and friendly people that only wanted one thing……freedom for them and the land….so far all they have gotten is crappy promises from the US, Morocco, France and many other countries….when I was leaving I was asked, “why does anyone but a Sahawris want this land?”  An excellent question…it has NO gas or oil….it has NO arable land….it has NO natural resources other than some phosphates…….this land has nothing but the Sahara and if you ever go there you will NOT want it either……so why is it such an international thing?

I suggest that the US butt out of this situation and let the Sahawris have their own land…nothing about this smacks of the freedom loving American stereotype…it smacks of colonization of one country by another……IT IS NOT RIGHT!  What happen to the belief in self-determination?

Like I have said….most Americans could care less about this piece of sand….but for me it is just something I had to post on…….have a day!

The American Revolution–Early Days

A Professor’s Classroom

Subject:  Am. History/Economics

I realize that is post will not sit well with those so called “patriots” that believe that the American Revolution was this spontaneous eruption of the desire for independence.  Sorry, that just is not so.  Reality bites!  If anyone wants a true picture of the early days of the revolution then the study of economics would be the place to start.  The decisions in the early days were more those of economics than some radical political philosophy.

Today, 9/11, is Patriot’s Day.  I want to talk a bit about the original patriots.  Actually, I feel that Remembrance Day would be a better title for the day….but what do I know?

The history of America  is been taught and taught, but unless you are a student of economic history, the story of the beginning is a bit obscure.  We are taught that taxation without representative was one of the major reason that the Colonials wanted out from under the thumb of King George.  That is part of the reason but not the major one.  It was n0t that Joe farmer sat in a pub and longed for freedom from England…far from the real occurrence.

You recall the Sons of Liberty, that covert group that held tea parties and other protests.  In reality only some were concerned with independence, most were wealthy merchants that saw that they could make more profit without dealing with England and its tariffs and such.  These people saw a God-given right to make more profit.

The “Founding Fathers” were rich merchants, lawyers, speculators, etc…the common man was not concerned with freedom at this point.  They were more concerned with their existence and that of their families.  Fighting the British army was far from their minds and independence may have been discussed but few thought it possible.

Yes, I am saying that the original intent of the independence movement was economics not political.  Decisions were being made by the greed of the wealthy, not by the common man working the fields.  That will come later and with the help of an Englishman.

After the French and Indian War, the population of the colonies was booming and spreading and about this time the wealthy colonials began to consider a way to get out of England’s shadow.

With an expanding population, from an economic point of view, meant landowners could increase the value of their holdings.  Speculation was on the rise with the opening of the lands to the West of the Colonies.  Merchants saw the growing population as more and larger markets.  To traders it meant an expansion of imports and exports.  Ship owners saw the growth as an increase in the volume of goods being shipped.  Finally, manufacturers saw the growth in population as larger markets, a larger supply of labor and a decrease in the amount of wages to be paid.

All in all, a larger population would mean that all colonial economic endeavors would be profitable, but first they would have to find away to break with England.  You see the wealthy of the 1770’s were no different than today….they want money money and more power.  But to do what they wanted they needed to get out from under the thumb of British merchantilism.

Mercantilism?  Yep, where the central figure was the authoritarian king.  The mercantilist state aimed for the enlargement of the national power or the monarch in this case, not the gratification of individual aspirations of material advancement.  Only the king truly embodied the realm’s best interests.  Only he could lead and manipulate the realm’s economic interests.

The “founding fathers” interests were in the maximizing their profits, not the liberation of a country and its people from the iron grip of a monarch.  The “founding fathers” were true capitalists.