How Was Western Sahara Denied Independence? | When Decolonisation Didn’t Mean Self-Determination 

Your fatal error is that your story begin in 1884 ... there was no population before ? Let’s be serious. These population in the Sahara were under control of the Kings of Morocco. You have a colonial biais from the beginning....

​@@freewal If he has a "colonial bias", then the International Court of Justice itself has a colonial bias. He has not given his opinion, but the advisory opinion of the Court, so mind your words. Besides, you are the one holding the error, given that allegiance of some tribes in Western Sahara does not mean sovereignty over them and that's precisely what the Court understood. Sahrawis do indeed have the right of peoples to self-determination, unlike other cases in the process of decolonization, like Gibraltar and the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands, and Morocco was and still is in grave violation of one of the most important principles of international law.

@@Rio-kd6xy Morocco has nothing against self determination. Morocco even proposed a referendum during the 80’s but we saw that it was impossible to organise because of the fake voters added by the Polisario. So now self determination can occur with negotiations.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Rflu6ziON3o.html

@@carlosmadrid4661 yep. This video is clear. But you will see. No answer from the author. Je didn’t mention the role played by Algeria which is key in this conflit. He is not a serious analyst. A propagandist, he is.

I agree. The problem is that then they dispute who should be entitled to vote.

​@JamesKerLindsay the native residents of the area clearly, or refugees in europe and other places

@@WinchesterBoyy That's easier to say than to prove. If a Sahrawi moved to Casablanca, Morocco, and married a local, are his/her children eligible to vote? If a Moroccan originally from Marrakech moved to Laayoune since 1980 and lived there and married and had children, is (s)he eligible to vote? If a Sahrawi family moved to Tangier or Madrid 70 years ago, are they and their children eligible to vote? Is a Sahrawi refugee in Algeria eligible to vote? Depending who you ask, many of these would be eligible or not eligible.

@@WinchesterBoyy The UN tried this for 10 years and concluded that it is technically impossible to implement. Such approach is dead and buried for more than 23 years now and you cannot wake up the dead.

There is no such thing as western Sahara. It used to be moroccan. Western Sahara is an invention.

YES!!! 👍

@@markmh835 Sahara is moroccan and it will stay moroccan

Shut up Europeans ,keep away from this conflict or you will offend 40 million of Moroccans

In international law consulates are not considered recognition of sovereignty, they are just a recognition of a de facto situation. A disputed territory or a secessionist state may have consulates of all nations within its borders and at the same time none of them recognizing the entity as a state or whatever that entity is pretending to be.

what do think of the historic evidence of moroccan sovreithy on western sahara before spanish colonization in the Late 19 th century

@@angryyoungman66 There is no historical evidence that proves Moroccan sovereignty over the territory of Western Sahara before its process of colonization. The International Court of Justice has already addressed this issue and has concluded that, even though both Morocco and Mauritania held relations with the tribes of Western Sahara, those relations did not mean Moroccan or Mauritanian sovereignty over the territory, thus, in modern international law, Western Sahara is a self-determination unit entitled to decide the fate of the territory without external interference, including both independence or integration with an existing state, whether it is Morocco or otherwise in accordance to their will.

​@SASA SASA My only interest in this is the truth, the rest is not my problem. Whether or not the United States of America backs Moroccan territorial claims over Western Sahara, even though those claims are juridically unfounded, then I am indifferent. In my opinion, Morocco shouldn't have invaded the territory after knowing the position of the International Court of Justice, instead it should've negotiated with the representatives of Western Sahara in order to gain the support of the Sahrawi people to join Morocco. Only negotiations will tell if the people of Western Sahara are willing to consider the integration of their territory to Morocco, in law they have the final say.

@@Eddy-id3zd Yes, I know that that's the current position of the United States of America, someone has already pointed that out to me. However, that does not make the Moroccan claim more legitimate, it just means that another state recognizes the Moroccan claim. As the International Court of Justice has pointed out, Morocco has no juridical sovereignty over Western Sahara and the Sahrawi people is entitled to the right of peoples to self-determination in order to determine the fate of the territory.

Thanks so much. Very good point. Yes, that was an aspect of the story that fascinated me. But I wasn’t altogether surprised that Spain simply gave up. Sometimes, colonial powers just became exhausted or just lost the will to continue resisting. (One could argue this happened with Britain and Cyprus.)

@@JamesKerLindsay I agree with you! Now you mention Cyprus, it could be a good idea talking about that case and the negotiations about reunifications, the fact that the green line and the british military bases are almost a 10% of the island's land. would it happen like with german reunification that the turkish part would need to be "paid" by the greek one? which influence would have on cyprus eu position?

ツツVIC I will certainly do more on Cyprus. It is probably the international issue I know best. Rather worryingly, I’ve been working on it for 30 years now! 😱😳😀 As it happens: global.oup.com/academic/product/the-cyprus-problem-9780199757152?cc=ro&lang=en&

Harold Thanks. So glad it helped!

I would also be interested in your thoughts on the recent developments, given that the video is now somewhat outdated. The United States has recognized Morocco's full control of the area (Israel defacto too). Additionally, the majority of the world, including most European countries, has expressed support for Morocco's autonomy plan for the region.

Thank you for the comment. I accept that many people in Western Sahara may feel a link to Morocco. But that’s not the point. The UN said that the people should have a free and fair choice on their future. This democratic choice was denied to them by Spain, Mauritania and Morocco, which decided to act contrary to UN resolutions. That’s the problem.

@@JamesKerLindsay thanks you for the answer. But actually there is a negociation between Morocco and polisario under UN. UN said that both have to negociate and find a solution mutually acceptable for both. This is what UN say now. You look like you want to divide Sahara from Morocco, you speak about decolonisation, colonisation was Spain, we saharawis fight against Spain with Morocco, it was a war in Sahara in 1957-58, from sahrawis under moroccan movment. Please, be neutral, I'm not appreciate someone speak for all the sahrawis, now you speak with independantist vision. But we are not all independantist. The conflict in sahara is more difficult that you can imagine. There is a tribal problem, a geopolitical problem between Morocco and Algeria. In the same way, no sahrawi voted for polisario to speak for us. Why tindouf have not a self determination in 1962 ? The people of tindouf refused to be algerian, and ask to France to be moroccan (declassified french documents), why they couldn't have self determination ? You know James, even us sahrawis, sometimes we don't understand this conflict... and the real origin of the conflict was from Spain and French when they divided our sahara as a cake and create this conflict for us, sahara never know borders some part was moroccan some part was something else (east sahara touareg people)... and sahrawis was nomadic tribe, we have cousins in north of Morocco they live ther from 350 years, they keep the same name of our tribe but they speak like north moroccans.

@@TouratSbouya I'm also a sahrawi and you look like you talk in the name of all sahrawis too

@@mysticc5665 you are not sahraoui. Speak hassania

If the 'MOROCCON Western Sahara is not careful, the evil WEST is even capable of turning you into another ISRAEL too ! After that, they will BULLDOZED all your homes !

Thanks, Carolyn. 😀 Much appreciated! I hope you’re doing well.

Yea. It's very simplistic my 6 years old kid likes it. You barely use 20% of your brain power watching this. Great for amateurs. Not too much information to digest or remember. The cliff notes version. 👍👍👍

@@JamesKerLindsay You are not accurate on this sir and you have to re-consider what you said if you really want to be fair. By this video you have deeply wronged the Moroccan people. Even the UN has not qualified the presence of Morocco in Western Sahara as "colonization". Are you placing yourself above the UN?

@@rmadiyoussef5132 that's false, you are the only one thinking that the morrocan are wronged is you, he's just telling history, western sahara got its independence from spain not morrocan and so? they were colonized by the morrocan goverment just like any colonial empire do without asking permission of the people living there.

@@carlosmadrid4661 if it's simplistic doesn made it false, and so? why are you using the AD HOMINEM you don't have any arguments?

Sahara was annexed by Spain from Morocco, so the principe of UPJ already apply by Morocco.

Sahara is moroccan and will stay Moroccan

@@morrocanincanadavibes2928 not really

@@morrocanincanadavibes2928 keep dreaming sir and u will find sahara

@@cutelilamber I'm not dreaming our flag is waving in our moroccan sahara I spended my summer holidays there it was Amazing

@@morrocanincanadavibes2928 say that to the united nation 😂

Thank you for watching! :-)

Thank you very much.

It’s illegal. It has no legitimacy. International law doesn’t grant peoples a general right to self-determination leading to independence. This only applies in cases of colonialism. Instead, self-determination is understood as a right to autonomy of some sort within an existing state. In other words the integrity of states is understood to be superior. This applies here. And the clearest proof is that Russia won’t allow its own peoples a vote on their self-determination. Just watch what would happen if they tried holding votes in the bane of self-determination. So let’s stop giving credibility to Moscow’s sham talking points.

@@JamesKerLindsay Thanks for this clarification. I am actually glad that you have come to the same conclusion that the sovereignty of states have to be respected. This applies too to the case of Western Sahara and Morocco : Unless you regard this as a case of colonialism and consider Morocco as a superpower that held colonies around the world which is obviously not the case, Western Sahara has to be regarded as a breach against the sovereignty of Morocco. Colonisation existed in WS and that was that of Spain and Morocco had to fight hard both politically and on the ground to oust the Spaniards. Polisario front and its related militias that were created ex-Nihilo in 1973-4, are funded armed and trainded by the gas rich Algeria and are no different from the so called pro Russia militias Moscow is backing in Dombass and other Ukrainian regions to pretend it has a sovereignity over the territory : they are nothing else than angry foolish mercenaries. And indeed Self-determination is not a right you grant to anyone on a first come first serve basis.

@@mindme7628 yes I know now its part of Morocco, but before that it never used to be.

Oh really? So all this kingdoms who ruled Moroccan territory (including western Moroccan Sahara) from many hundred years until now aren't Moroccan? Are you blind? You know: almohads almoravids /Saudis/marinids/alaouits...right? All these kingdoms used to have really big territory including Moroccan Sahara "western sahara" and their capitals were in : fez or marrakech...even Spain (in alandalus era ) at the time was controlled from the capital marrakech and you know that... And today you came to say simply that western Sahara wasn't a part from Morocco !!!! Dude wake up and don't be brainwashed

@@timoid2704 Morocco also used to be part of the Roman Empire. Time to join Italy again! I expect Fez and Marrakech to be in Italian hands in 24 hours.

@@houseplant1016 fez and marrakech did not exist when rome was an empire, neither does rome today, the modern state entity of morocco has possesed a jurisdiction over the sahara for the last 400 years, mr.voltaire himself mentioned that cherrifian kingdom's stretch went until the senegal river

True!

if the people of western sahara want to be part of moroco then ask them, wait the morrocan goverment didn't do a referendum asking them and so they just did want any other european colonial empire, take the land of the people without asking permission, and so invading and colonizing

Thanks so much! You are very right. There are a number of fascinating elements to the story that I couldn’t really take up in such a short time. I think that’s exactly what Morocco decided. They obviously calculated no one would do anything if it stepped in. (I was also fascinated in the relationship between Morocco and Mauritania. There seemed to be no antagonism between them over the issue. It seemed they just accepted each other’s claims.) And very good point about decolonisation as an end state (or not).

As a morrocan i must say one thing the polisario was born by algerian propaganda and funding since algeria had loses due to the morrocan algerian sand war they actually are morrocans that want out even though morroco used to own before colonization western sahara and many other areas in algeria and mauritania now all we want is western sahara but the world is against us

@@iliasszennati173 Thanks for explaining. I did not know about the Algerian connection. I hope you can find a way for any Moroccans who want out to get out without too much suffering and loss.

Uh im morrocan the sahara has always been morrocan the polisario are just rebels they almost disbanded back in the last century but their leader a guy from marrakesh hes not even sahrawi started emprisonning anyone who wanted to go back to morroco and this is sad add to it the fact tye rest of them have been brainwashed into believing propanganda and think western sahara is yours also note that tensions are getting higher since earlier this month the polisario front launched a missile that destroyed a village

@@iliasszennati173 Thanks for the additional information. I'm sorry to hear about the missile, and i hope the villagers have a place to stay. Are any Americans or Europeans involved?

Thanks so much for watching. I hope you found it interesting.

Thanks. What a brilliant suggestion! I love Bir Tawil. I’ve always wanted to know why neither Egypt nor Sudan seem to want to claim it! After all, who doesn’t want more land!?

@@JamesKerLindsay In historic times San Marino was offered an opportunity to expand it's territory but they decline so it does happen from time to time.

If we were to use one old map to draw new borders, we would be in constant wars.

@@beautifulbaby4585 not so old just before the spanish occupation

@@yassinebenryan2814 Who is deciding how old? There are many maps showing Morocco with a tiny territory in the North. Why don't we use those ones? That's why United Nation has a principle that is to recognize the border post decolonization. Otherwise it's mayhem

@@beautifulbaby4585 a principal serving the colonial powers of divide and rule. Why we should apply to it

@@yassinebenryan2814 Cause you need one single and accepted principle otherwise it's chaos. The principle that has been defined by United Nations is clear. If we open the door for other principles, you have 1000 years of war in Africa and elsewhere

Thanks. Phosphates are indeed one reason. The other is fishing. The coastal waters are very rich fishing grounds. Apart from that, there doesn’t seem to be a lot. It certainly doesn’t have much agricultural or industrial activity. However, I also think that there’s probably the element of good old territorial aggrandisement!

@@JamesKerLindsay the main raison is history. European colonisation divided Morocco like a cake. Isn't normal for Morocco to want to recover his land from occupation ? This is the map of Morocco 30 years before the start of occupation of North Africa cartotheque.sciences-po.fr/media/Lexpansion_europeenne_1798/133/;jsessionid=6F3C171E9C1C578C33B9DDE29F5B0E5B This is the map of Morocco in 1956 after the end of french occupation journals.openedition.org/espacepolitique/docannexe/image/2644/img-2-small580.png There is a problem. Can Morocco ask UN or someone to recover all the land annexed by occupation ? Because actually Morocco 2020 is maybe 25% of Morocco before european occupation. Phosphat, fish, oil all countries need this, but in fact the ressources is not important, the most important thing is to be one country like we was before the occupation.

@@JamesKerLindsay Western Sahara phosphate only represents 2% of Morocco's reserves and all profits from Western Sahara operations is reinvested in the region. And I don't think Morocco would involve itself in 45 year conflict over fish.

@@MassNssen Are you saying there's something else other than fish and phosphate? If yes, what is it?

the reason of this conflict that algeria wants a strategic gate to the atlantic ocean meanwhile they created the front of Polisario to acheive this strategic goal

Thanks, but it doesn't work like that. Registering a claim at the UN means nothing. Would you argue that Spain's claim to Ceuta and Melilla is stronger because it claimed earlier sovereignty? The ICJ ruled that Morocco has no historical claim to the territory and that the people of Western Sahara had a right to self-determination. Morocco thwarted This. They deserve to have a free and fair say on their future.

​@@JamesKerLindsay Not true, The ICJ issued an advisory opinion at the request of the UN and not a judgment, the content of the opinion is the opposite of what you said above, please check the right document on which Madrid agreement in 1975 between Spain Mauritania and Morocco was made and check why spain did not mention any other party, please check the recognized Moroccan map at 1880th and see what spanish and french occupation did to Moroccan territories. Polisario was initially a students group who intented to fight spanish occupation while political process was already engaged, the king and different politic parties refused that parallel behavior, but Algerian president Boumedien involved Kaddafi to supply weapons to such movemment who started hostility to Morocco. Look at the video where the founder and leader of polisario named "El Bachir Mostapha Said" says that he is moroccan.

@@atlaslion1746 Sorry, but your comment is completely incorrect. For a start, an Advisory Opinion is still a ruling. And I know that in Morocco you are taught that it ruled in Morocco’s favour. But it didn’t. The ruling is clear. Morocco doesn’t have a historical claim. Please read it for yourself. In any case, I have discussed this too much with people who simply refuse to accept reality. I have to say that in all my work on international relations, this has got to be one of the clearest cases of national brainwashing I have ever come across.

@@JamesKerLindsay Sorry but you cannot beat me on this field. Who refuses to accept proofs ? tons of documents exist, check the closest one to you, check UK foreign affairs ministry archives you'll find there an agreement between kingdom of Morocco and UK on a scope located on the Sahara before Spain colonized it. If this is a part of brainwashing too, how could such astonishing brainwashing of all history escape denunciation in the international media?

Thank you.

Thank you so much for the incredibly kind comment. I really appreciate it!

This is very inaccurate and the work of a lazy person.

You want to say the most biased one

@@JamesKerLindsay You are not accurate on this sir and you have to re-consider what you said if you really want to be fair. By this video you have deeply wronged the Moroccan people. Even the UN has not qualified the presence of Morocco in Western Sahara as "colonization". Are you placing yourself above the UN?

You're confusing accuracy and confirmation bias.

Thank you so much for the comment. I am certainly planning to do a video on Biafra. I’ll probably look at the history first, rather than the current situation - although I would like to cover this as well. It is an incredibly important case in terms of defining the modern rules of secession.

@@JamesKerLindsay I wish we can exchange WhatsApp number because all they do "government " is bribe anybody that talks about or change the narrative to favour them but please we are being killed every day

Perhaps watch the video!? The International Court of Justice did not give Morocco a claim to sovereignty over Western Sahara and confirmed the right of the region to determine its own future in line with numerous UN General Assembly resolutions. Seriously, I don’t mind debating situations, but it helps if people engage with the actual facts of the situation.

And I also clearly explain that, yes, Morocco did push for the decolonisation of Western Sahara from the 1950s - and had a particular reading of Resolution 1514 that it claimed gave it a right to incorporate the territory. However, that doesn’t change the fact that there was meant to be a free and fair referendum and that should have included the option of independence. Again, please watch the video. It is all there!

@@JamesKerLindsay The current form of sovereignty didn't exist in pre colonial time it was more about allegiance links . This allegiance links with Moroccan sultans were proved by ICJ who st also stated that Sahara wasn't a terra nullus in pre colonial era

Sorry. Read the ICJ opinion again! I cite it in the video. The Court acknowledged some links between some tribes and Morocco. However, it was also absolutely clear that this did *not* give Morocco a claim to sovereignty. As a result, the Court argued that the people of Western Sahara had a right to decide their future free and fairly in accordance with UNGA Resolution 1514 and subsequent General Assembly resolutions calling for a referendum. I am not sure why this is so hard to understand!?

@@JamesKerLindsay Yeah but it was advisory opinion . Can we speak about history ? We know that before french and spanish occupation. Morocco was bigger than today. You can see this map of this french school "science po": cartotheque.sciences-po.fr/media/Lexpansion_europeenne_1798/133/;jsessionid=6F3C171E9C1C578C33B9DDE29F5B0E5B So why Morocco have no right for justice ? You can read this article of London Time in 1900 scontent.fcdg1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/96161029_3568283986531777_8378853107068567552_o.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_sid=1480c5&_nc_oc=AQl-nVo6x0nEXa51xvYb23_3KScN1xn5ACDtIRucY9EoISP2gpDfL-naSh3IEQ9yNf4&_nc_ht=scontent.fcdg1-1.fna&_nc_tp=6&oh=528ead8bb43cb62cb433fad06c337145&oe=5EDE9940 Can you defend the same position for Morocco to recoview this land ? Can we speak about Morocco-England accord in 1895 a bout western sahara between Cap Juby to Cap Bojador ? Morocco loose a lot and they was no justice for him. Today I'm sahrawi, and I feel moroccan, but like others sahrawis feels moroccan, you never speak for us, it's like we don't exist and only sahrawi independantist have the right to be defended...

Thank you so much for the incredibly interesting comment. As it happens, I am planning to return to this issue soon (ideally this week). The news that the ceasefire has come to an end is very worrying. I thought to take more of a look at it. As you probably saw, I essentially stopped the story at the point of the declaration of independence and Morocco’s invasion.

@@JamesKerLindsay Your position sir is very weird. You support the Algerian thesis which want to have access to the Atlantic ocean by any means. Morocco did not invade western Sahara. Hassan II retrieved it from Spain because it's an integral part of the whole territory. Read the Berlin Treaty of Berlin to see how Morocco was divided between two colonial forces namely France and Spain.Now, as Spain has recognised the Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara historical documents that confirm this sovereignty will be released

@@rmadiyoussef5132 that doesn't care if the people of western sahara want to be independent, they got independen from spain not morroco, so? ilegal occupation just like any other colonial empire

Thanks. Great question. It happened during a very different era, when the EU was far smaller (just 9 members) and was more focused on economic issues than having a single common foreign and security policy. That process started about 15 years later.

@@JamesKerLindsay EU have no right of taking any decision against Morroco, the conflict is under United nations asking for mutual acceptable solution. EU already declared that they dont want to be part of the problem but part of the solution and this is why EU is still considering the negociation with Morocco including his Sahara.

Because Morroco has good historical Arguments about their right in the sovereignty on this land because before Spain colonization era Morocco had half of Algeria all of Mauritania and half o Senegal and Mali

@@puremotorsportma3965 and even part of spain😂

@@salam11153 yeah way before good point 😂

If the Spanish give them a referwndum like they almost did with the saharawis, it would prove they would rather stay in Spain, so why bother, the only thing that will come of it is further Moroccan attempts to cope

6 century it is no longer a matter of colonization

@@RepubliqueDuMaroc i couldn't share the link bro coz it's not allowed in RU-vid but this is the authentic info

correction: morocco used to be part of Mauritania for centuries, Mauritania is the land of the moors, so is the name morocco. :)

@@abdella012 إنها المخدرات 😂😂😂

its true , the west still referred to yo as the moors as late as the 19th century, the moors surely come from mauritania, see link 1 This is a letter from HM the queen of england from the 17 century to your embassador, they refer to you as the moor, see link 2 I think your king filled your heads with dellusion, please bring in any references you have, were all here to learn :) dont truust the media - Also your monarchy clearly state their link to The Saharaoui republic, Dont be ashamed of your origins :) - Also there was no morocco during the phoenesian rule, roman rule, most of islamic rule, in north africa :) but sure there was mauritania. 1 -www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=kMjGX4fODJKjgwewkLS4Dw&q=mauritania+name+meaning&oq=mauritania+name+mean&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAxgAMgUIABDJAzoRCC4QsQMQgwEQxwEQowIQkwI6DgguELEDEIMBEMcBEKMCOggIABCxAxCDAToLCC4QsQMQxwEQowI6FAguELEDEIMBEMcBEKMCEMkDEJMCOggILhCxAxCDAToLCC4QsQMQyQMQkwI6BQguELEDOgIIADoLCC4QsQMQxwEQrwE6CAguEMcBEK8BOgUIABCxAzoECAAQAzoCCC46CAguEMkDEJMCOgYIABAWEB5KBQgHEgExSgUICRIBMUoHCAoSAzE1N1C3C1jIM2D7QWgAcAB4AIABogSIAaQakgEMMTEuNC4xLjIuMS4xmAEAoAEBqgEHZ3dzLXdpeg&sclient=psy-ab 2 - www.bl.uk/collection-items/portrait-of-the-moorish-ambassador-to-queen-elizabeth-i Respect

@@elmetkelem7524 By that they mean Historic Mauretania in Northern Morocco you dimwit. Today's Mauritania has never been a state and is today almost a failed state. enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/886559

@@carlosmadrid4661 No no no Sir, I am not talking about a Roman province... Even Cartage became a roman province after the fall of phonesians no? and carteage did include Morocco for a long time thats sure :) see the maps. During the punic wars the entire mediteranean was disputed between rome and phonesia , whats makes you think the tiny kingdom of the moors could have had anything to say there? realy? hahaha The real moors were a kingdom situated where Mauritania is today , used the surrounding desert for protection from rome, and the atlantic for food, they were fishermans as we know. Nobody wanted to pay rome taxes.... except rome allies who helped rome against the phonesians, in exchange of a province, hahaha :) they got punished for this later.... This also explains why moors woman have so much power in their group. I will not explain this, but see the relationship between how much power women have in the group, and the amount of security the group enjoys. Best regards.

Look when it was made? When did those recognition take place? There’s your answer. Seriously, this is basic stuff.

i am a sahrawi here and i will answer and debunk your questions/claims 1. The sahrawi land before spanish colonialism is sovereign and independent from neighbouring states and its not hard to see it, the sahrawi tribes either fought against spain or traded with them but calling it a “state” is a incorrect term, the accurate term is “independent entity” which proofs that the sahrawi’s still have a right to independence and saying that the definition of a “state” applies doesn’t do anything because thats a modern and a western definition and obviously the west is completely different then that of the rest of the world 1.2 there is no real established name for the sovereign entity but neighbouring states did call them the land of dissidence, there is also a another name for the territory called “trab al bidhan” but thats a more broader term thats spans to everywhere that has bidhani origins like Mauritania, however one thing is clear is that the neighbouring states which includes moroccan sultanate recognised that there was a independent sahrawi entity 1.3 the name of the sahrawi people before colonialism is almost the same story of above but there has been numerous tribes with different names like reguibat, oulad delim etc however they all considered themselves to be loosely unified in a way despite some having rivalries, also by your logic that sahrawi’s cannot name themselves sahrawis then Americans shouldn’t call themselves Americans because the word americans mean the people of america 1.4 there was no one ruler but there was a clear sovereign authority called the djema which is a system that is comprised with every sahrawi tribal leaders 1.5 flags and capital never was a sign of sovereignty and to think that is just naive, in some chinese empires they never had a flag, does that mean that they were not a sovereign empire? Does nauru and the vatican city not count as sovereign states because they don’t have a capital? and currency is very very unclear in the case of the western sahara atleast to my knowledge but you if we don’t have currency, does bartering even count as a sign of sovereignty? Flags, capital and currency never determines if a nation or entity is sovereign but rather authority and people does 1.6 its still considered a liberation group because morocco still occupies majority of the western sahara, it doesn’t matter if we declared independence soon or earlier, aslong as there is a occupation then there is a liberation movement Both sahrawi’s and moroccans are entirely different, we sahrawis have different traditions, dialect, culture, way of life and ethnicity so what are you even talking about? If you take a look at sahrawi culture and moroccan culture you would see alots of differences The sahrawi territory is entire based on the existence and long history of the sahrawi’s, there is a reason why the UN court in hague said that we are independent, they didn’t just blindly get bribed by a side, they researched long and hard and find that the territory does have connections but is independent and there is a clear authority by the sahrawis, you clearly did not look nor research in depth about any of this and blindly followed a view that was made by the makhzen also the Polisario front is not a puppet of anyone, the Polisario is independent from algeria entirely “Far from being an Algerian puppet, the Polisario has always maintained a distinct identity in terms of its desire for its own distinct from and its own autonomous political organisation and decision-making” -stephen zune Since I answered and debunked your claims i will now ask you this, why is morocco denying the UN sponsored independence referendum? That’s because morocco knows that majority of sahrawi’s wanted independence and when the UN went on a mission in the spanish sahara they found a overwhelming majority of sahrawis wanting independence instead of integration of neighbouring states Basically we sahrawi’s were majority of history independent from neighbouring states, had clear authority over the region, are united and clearly existed and recognised by moroccan sultanate

@@Gawarasmi No matter how long or how strong you will shout, there has never been an independent entity in what has been now tagged as "Western Sahara". That's not an opinion, that's a fact. When the Spanish entered the territory at the end of the 19th century, they found no one to treat with since the very few people they found there were camel shepherds living a nomad life. There has never been an authority over the region outside the nominal (but yet documented) authority of the Cherifian Sultanate of Morocco. And you were right to call it "Land of dissidence" since the area was from time to time entering in dissidence precisely from the only authority that was recognized out there : that of the Moroccan Sultanate. As for the "Jamaa" that you named, a jamaa exists in every single village in Morocco and use to be the assembly of the elders who decided for the community or the tribe. It never was an expression of sovereignty whatsoever. How can you seriously ask for the independence of a country you are not even able to name it ??! Even the Polisario was named as the "liberation front of Sakia al Hamra and Rio de Oro" and NOT of the "Western Sahara", since this is a term that was created ex-Nihilo in 1976 to serve the interests of those who wanted to see a puppet state created in that area. The Saharan culture is an integral part of Morocco (both country and culture). Many Moroccans are of Saharan origin, speak hassania languages and adopt Saharan way of life in the Moroccan Saharan regions whether those that are contested or not : In Guelmim, in Mhamid, in Erfoud, in Figuig .... Just saw some of them not earlier than this morning in my neighbour market (I live in Casablanca... ) You talked about the Rguibat and Oulad Dlim? Rguibat is a famous Saharan tribe that fought the Spanish and whose chieftain Maa Al Aynaine was not only armed, supplied and financed but also loyal to the Sultane of Morocco. He is now burried in Tiznit. The former president of the so called Rasd Mohamed Abdelaziz himself is also a Rguibi and was the son of Khalil Rguibi, one of Moroccan army officers who remained loyal to his motherland. Most of the Rguibi tribe members are now in Rabat and Casablanca, one of them is actually a very welknown doctor. As for the Dlimi, many members of this clan occupy high positions in the Moroccan Royal armed Forces fighting their own cousins who chose the opposite direction. Morocco and Moroccans have stronger ties with the Sahara than the Algerians. Algerians from Algiers have nothing to do with Algerians from Tamanrasset or the Hogar whether it be culturally or in their way of life. Yet, nothing prevented Algeria from absorbing the Sahara in 1962 even if it was administered independently from France as part of what was then known as the Organisation Commune des Regions Sahariennes (OCRS) also known as the "French Sahara". No matter how hard the opposition may be, Morocco cannot and will never accept to have a state created on its southern territories because such an enterprise will simply mean the end of the country as it is known today and as it has always been known : on the first day of having an independent Sahara, Souss, the Rif, Sijilmasa will ask the same. And the future of the region is towards global union not the other way round. You will soon be a bad nightmame for Morocco and for the whole region.

@@Salim-mikram You simply ignored the very strong evidence that there was a authority made by sahrawi leaders, here is a wiki article for you to actually see that there is authority and some degree of law in the area tagged western sahara thats not opinion, thats a fact en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Djema%27a “The assembly (djemaa) established its own body of law, the A’arf, to complement the basic Islamic judicial code, sharia. Under harsh conditions and dispersal no single group has been able to draw on sufficient power or resources to establish even a semblance of supra-tribal government.” -minorityrights The funny part when you mentioned that there was “none” in the late 19th century, spain only occupied the coastal parts of the territory and had traded with the nomads and even that the coastal tribes had agreements with spain “The Spanish concluded several fishing agreements with coastal tribes who granted free fishing or had not attacked the fish-drying plants established on the shores.” And “The fact that the Sultan of Morocco had no influence over the Sahrawi tribes caused several problems not only to the Spanish but to the French diplomacy too” -Janos besenyo This coupled with the facts that there was a sahrawi resistance against the spanish screams out that there was authority independent from morocco There even is no influence by the moroccan sultanate before colonialism, so what do you even mean by “well documented” moroccan authority? Also what i meant by “the land of the dissidence” is this wiki text part “In pre-colonial times, the tribal areas of the Sahara desert was generally considered bled es-Siba or "the land of dissidence" by the authorities of the established Islamic states of North Africa, such as the Sultan of Morocco and the Deys of Algeria. The Islamic governments of the pre-colonial sub-Saharan empires of Mali and Songhai appear to have had a similar relationship with these territories, which were at once the home of undisciplined raiding tribes and the main trade route for the Saharan caravan trade.” which the sahrawi tribes are a part of, basically the sahrawi tribes were recognised by the moroccan sultanate and others as against their rules and sovereignty by your logic algeria and morocco has authority of all of the Sahara [the desert] “How can you seriously ask for independence of a country your not even capable of naming?” It doesn’t matter what the sahrawi territory was called, as long as there is authority and was independent and also the people wanted to continue independence which was proved in this case, you have the right to declare independence, name does not indicate sovereignty at all The Polisario Front is a political and liberation organisation so the name of the polisario has nothing to do with the name of territory also the neighbouring countries and spain never wanted a “puppet state” in the area but wanted the area to be part of it self “The Saharan culture is a integral part of morocco” no it isn’t, only 90,000 sahrawi in the tarfaya strip while there is 36.91 million moroccans, sahrawi culture is never integral to morocco, morocco is completely different then that of western sahara “many moroccans adopt hassaniya and the way of life” never and its clear from the percentage above that there is a HUGE gap I never talked about reguibat and oulad delim i simply used them as a example for names, while morocco did give supplies and aid to ma al ayneen, they stopped giving it because ma al ayneen fought under anyone who fought against colonialism, he was betrayed by the sultan by letting colonial powers some concessions, the issue between muhammed abdel aziz and his father are completely personal and should not be political and its disrespectful to debate about personal affairs since both died, i as a reguibi myself can say with confidence that most of my fellow reguibi tribe members are not heavily concentrated in morocco like you claimed, most either live in western sahara, moroccan occupied, diaspora or the tindouf camps Both oulad delim and reguibat had historically fought against the moroccan sultanate or are atleast neutral Morocco has no strong ties to the region at all infact mauritania has more ties then that of morocco, there was virtually almost no moroccan presence in the region nor influence and claiming such is naive at best Also morocco and algeria has virtually the same culture lol, sahrawis and algerians from tammanraset are similar, its like saying hindi and urdu is entirely different languages You knocked yourself of that statement and finally no it won’t be a dominos effect for morocco if the SADR gets independence because the polisario front has proven historical, international legitimacy, diplomacy, backing from another powerful state, have a powerful military, etc while all the other groups in morocco doesn’t have most of these I am not going to reply again because my lazy ass never want to type paragraphs again lol

@@Gawarasmi Indeed this type of debate can go on for ages... You seem to ignore completely Morocco and Algeria. Morocco always had an extension towards the South and the desert that Algeria missed out completely. Moroccan desert on top of comprising the South also includes regions like Oued Noun, oued draa, tafilalt and the figuig region where the way of life is very similar to the ones you can find in Sakia hamra or dakhla. Algeria has been founded as a pirates city turned towards the sea with no or few relation to the desert. You seem to ignore that the Hogar and Tamanrasset are the land of the Tuaregs and that these do have their own language (Tamachek), their own particular way of life, their own identity. More than that they had a well identified country before colonialism which was called the Sultanate of Agadaz which included the North of Niger, the South of Algeria and the azawad. And guess what ? when the Tuaregs started an insurrection in 2013 to declare independence of Azawad as a nation in North Mali, Algeria pressured the negociations to screw this initiative up as they feared the insurrection might extend to the South of Algeria : they said that Azawad does not have the right to self determination. When Algeria gained independence in 1962 do you know who visited first the land of Tamanrasset and the Hogar from the Algerian Government ? Mr. Bouteflika, the then Algerian minister of foreign Affairs. 😂 Algeria is the Main support of the borders as the colonialism left them because it has interest in doing so. And the Western Sahara is no different story. It does not exist as a nation : It is a creation of Spanish colonialism that Algeria tries to maintain for strategic reasons to legitimate its own control on desert areas that never were part of it and of course on its ressources. And the Rguibis and the Ait Dlim are present in Morocco. Ahmed Dlimi himself was a well-known general in the Royal armed forces who was the very same man who was behind the construction of the sand wall in the Sahara.

@@Salim-mikram -- I will not write so much. I will simply ask a question: exactly what are your professional credentials which allow you to declare that the decision of the International Court of Justice is wrong? Are you a lawyer? A judge? A diplomat? Why should ANYTHING you say be considered more authoritative than the opinion of the International justices? If you have a problem with the Court's decision, take it up with the Court to get its ruling changed. Otherwise, that opinion still has the effect of International Law along with the UN Resolutions. That makes Morocco an occupying power.

It is already a deadlock. Unless Morocco could implement the UN peace plan and resolve the issue concerning Western Sahara in a fair way which does not violate international law and is deemed acceptable by the international community, this issue will remain unresolved and Western Saraha will continue to be the largest piece of land (other than Antarctica) which is shown as a grey area on our maps (when I was a kid, I always wondered why this piece of land was grey while all other countries were represented by different colours).

His analysis is completely wrong and unacceptable.

​@@terminator1716 wrong in what? unacceptable maybe just to you, that's history not what you want to hear

Not even sure where to begin with that comnent. Seriously, you’ve just spouted a collection of words at me! I’m not sure you even know the details of the situation. Watch the video and then come back to me on specific points.

@@JamesKerLindsay You failed to mention that Morocco was a country before the occupation and if you read historical facts you will know that the moroccan navy was the dominant in that region with a big trade network to west africa. therefore the occupation divided the land.... My other point is what gives the legitimaty to a bunch of European judges ruling that the sahara is not legally moroccan ? they don't understand the political system that can't be separated from religion and the recognition of the Moroccan sultan as the believers commander in the sahara before spanish control. That recognition is a form of legal rights in political islam since the caliphate. + you failed to mention that the sahrawi people are divided between supporters of morocco and others supporting the polizario. even so they fight in the moroccan army ...etc I can go all day showing you how your video is so biased. presenting only the information that serves your purpose

@@yassinebenryan2814 The International Court of Justice, the highest court in the world and an organ of the United Nations, looked into Morocco’s case and found that it didn’t have a historical claim on the region. That pretty much says all anyone needs to know.

@@JamesKerLindsay not true they said that the leaders of the lands had Bayaa relationships with the Sultan of Morocco their for it was a Moroccan land

Ikr, the ‘western sahara’ had been moroccan soil since the almoravid empire.

Thank you so much. Really appreciate it. Do pass it on to anyone else who might be interested. Regards from London.

Of course you loved it, it repeats the propaganda of your criminal regime. This James Ker Lindsay should read one or two books about the Algerian Black Decade... and how does it work in Algeria. And what about Kabylie... no video at all on Kabylie right ?

Of course, you do. It's the same stupid propaganda your regime is paying for. James' reply to your comments only confirms one thing: he's a part of the propaganda machine.

For the first question i dont have an answer but i think perhpas because the Cold War,for the second question as a sahrawi guy living there and who his both parents were registered in the last Spanish statistics there in western sahara,i consider Morocco as colonize power ,but thats just my opinion,but i highly suggest to look for the gdeim izik protests in 2010 and noam chomsky explanation as the first sparkle of what known as The arabic spring.

Because it is a part of our holy land of morocco mauritania was called Chinguit and was part of morocco before the french and spanish invasions so you have to study the history before talking shiii about a country

@@hamzasehouli Your country name is FES

I be been to their 95% of people say that they are Moroccan and 3% don’t know and 2% says they want freedom Morocco want the referendum but they want Sahara people to vote not people from tindouf(Algeria) that’s why they didn’t agreed on the referendum

@@bai267 Poor you; You have been brainwashed...That the history that your military junta has taught you. Morocco had been an empire before it was colonized.

Failed Moroccan education at its finest. Your terrible English and your "Algeria is the devil"-obsession isn't very promising for Morocco's future.

hhhhhhhh

You are Algerian so why you care about a thing thats not yours ?😂😂😂😂😂😂 Sahara was Moroccan and now its Moroccan in reality,Keep crying you stupid Algerinos

That's exactly what happened from 1975 till the ceasefire in 1991.

You do realise that changing the demographics of territory that is occupied is in fact considered to be a war crime?

And if everything you wrote is true, then there is NO REASON why Morocco should fear a free and fair election in Spanish Sahara. The fact that Morocco DOES fear such an election makes them an occupying power.

Thank you.

Ofc it is

Where are you from my friend?You are Sahrawi ?If no ,keep away from this conflict or you will offend 38 million of Moroccans ,I WARNED YOU

@@wad5672They should be offended because what their government is doing is wrong, and anyone who agrees with that government is equally evil

TheConqueringRam Thanks. How interesting! It is fascinating to see how it is handled on maps. Almost all acknowledge that it is disputed territory and not a part of Morocco (although Moroccan control is often noted.) And they always refer to the area as Western Sahara, rather than as SADR. By the way, it’s interesting that you mention Morocco and the US. I teach a lot of American students and I always ask which were the first two countries to recognise the US after its independence was confirmed by Britain - the answers of course being Morocco and Sweden. Few realise how old Morocco actually is as a country, although it was of course under French colonial rule for a period.

This vid ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-B0cOTXLJCvU.html features, and has a link to, a world map showing the proper current Sahrawi borders

We have an enemy called Algeria they the reason of this problem , there is no saharawi , the polisario are Algerian generals puppetes to fight Morocco , do you want us to handover our land to our enemies Algerians ,and also we prevent a refferundem because the Algerian enemies bring Mauritanies, Malians , Niger to tindouf camps as saharawis , you never asked why they dont let UN do a census ?? Algerians Generals are the only obstacle of this problem we have one common enemy is Algeria , these Polisario are just some mercaniers used by Algeria to fight Morocco

it's not about a people deciding their fate, it's about Algeria trying to create a puppet state with access to the Atlantic. The Irony today, is that the people in Moroccan Sahara do have self determination, since they are administred by elected officials, in elections deemed fair by international observers. While the Sahrawis in the polisario side are living under a repressive regime, appointed by the Algerian military regime.

Mate Morocco want the referendum but Polisario want people living in Tindouf ( Algeria) to vote in it so Morocco refused in 1991 and it lasted until now

Western sahara has never been a part of morocco, and never it's gonna be. Sahrawis people don't consider themselves as moroccans and, people there are calling for self- determination.

@@BoukhariLaabaidi Well, it is a part of Morocco Now. what Sahrawis do you mean ? the ones in Algeria ?

@@youssefouhdou5462 Lol it's a part of morocco because it's occupied. Do you rememeber what happened back then in gduim ouzik 2010? Thousands of sahrawis people from laayoune to ad dakhla went out protesting for self-determination. Poor moroccans are considering themselves sahraouis. Pathetic!

@@BoukhariLaabaidi LMAO, this is the funniest shit, I love how Algeria is playing with you'll like dummies. the camp was to protest against "ongoing discrimination, poverty and human rights abuses against local citizens",[9] but later some protesters also demanded independence for Western Sahara". If the majority of The Sahrawi people believe in self-determination why don't they do an uprising against Morocco ?? Some of the Sahrawis think that they're occupied, I understand that, that's a result of Years of Propaganda by Algeria, the Sahara problem started right after the Sand War between Algeria and Morocco, The Polisario founded in 1973, where were they when Morocco succeeded in getting Spanish Sahara to be listed on the list of territories to be decolonized ??

@@youssefouhdou5462 Lol what you mean by the sahara problem started after sand war ? Lmfao you're literally brainwashed mate. Sahraouis people aren't the same as moroccans. And, we do not share the same culture. Besides, polisario movement existed back then to end the occupation of spain colony. Furthermore, every nation has right on self-determanation. We don't wanna be a part of morocco mate.

The International Court of Justice explicitly stated that Morocco did not have a historical claim to Western Sahara and said the people of the territory have a right to self-determination. If Morocco has done as much as you say to lift living standards, then why doesn’t it just permit a free and fair vote on the issue and let the inhabitants voice their wishes? This would settle the issue once and for all.

@@JamesKerLindsay The maroccan kingdoms claim over the sahara lies in recorded history ,it has been maroccan for hundreds of years . The in (recently) 1945 founded court of justice is not needed to tell a people there history and there rights . But are they able to claim , take and defend and keep there rights like many others thats whats important. As we see all over the world rights over land are rearly given . 1975 peacefully the maroccans marched back to the sahara after the occupation of spain ended . Visit the city of Laayoune and then visit the camps in algeria you will see the difference in living standarts.

Sorry, but the Court is the highest legal authority in the World. I’ll take its considered view over the partisan position of a directly involved country. You might not like its ruling, but you might want to stop for a moment and question if Morocco is actually be in the wrong over this. I always tell students not to always take their country’s position on an issue as being the correct one. It’s all about critical thinking.

@@JamesKerLindsay Lets agree to disagree. My arguments are clear . The signs of a persons biased arguments is claming an opinion as fact for all soverein peoples of the world ( the court )and assuming that someone is not thinking critical without knowing . And using postion (my students) to strenghten the argument(emty) is a sign of not thinking critical so i hope you take your one advice at hart .

@@JamesKerLindsay it’s because Polisario take people from Mali and Senegal and Algeria and say that they are Sahrawi too then the vote won’t be fair

It is a decent start for a permanent peace agreement. SADR should have some coastline for fishing and trade.

My solution is that the sahara stays moroccan as it always has and that algiers personal militia of child soldiers and sahel mercenaries can fuck off

@@jblico Won't be accepted by the international community and other parties though.

@@zealandia5668 We don’t care if they cry about it, Morocco doesn’t want terrorists on its property , most of Europe, the americas and Africa doesn’t see an issue with it either , how would you feel to give your land to a terrorist militant group used in proxy conflicts by your political enemies

@@zealandia5668 It’s also about time Europeans stop putting their nose into moorish affairs , you’re talking about dividing up Morocco like if it’s a peace of pie

Western sahars was always a seperate county

i agree

OK. So why is there a UN mission to oversee a referendum on the future of Western Sahara? minurso.unmissions.org Seriously, instead of just repeating the official Moroccan policy, it might be worth looking into the issue a little more deeply! There are numerous UN resolutions calling for the territory to have self-determination. And the ICJ, the highest court of international law, clearly states that Morocco does not have a historical claim to Western Sahara.

@@JamesKerLindsay you really not telling the real story .as I answer the first question it’s all about other nations interests and it has been an agenda to play that card in order to suppress Morocco . Would you tell me why united nation is quiet about the two cities up north Morocco and the Canary Islands?!!! I see this case is like the key west in USA when it’s residents tried to claim their own independent country . Lol I think you should look at the biggest important case : The Middle East issue

@@JamesKerLindsay we don't listen to Un or USA we are Moroccan have own speech if you want to make independence do it about ( mlilia and sabta ) that Spanish took them from Morocco and talk about how many money franch stole from north Africa bullshit

Here’s the thing, in most conflicts I have ever worked on, I will be subjected to all sorts of long lectures about why this or that aspect of history matters. In almost all cases, it doesn’t. These issues are governed by international law. There are rules that exist to determine these issues. The ICJ explored Morocco’s historical claim to sovereignty and decided that there was a case. The people of Western Sahara had a right to decide their own future. So, you can present as many historical ‘facts’ as you like, but these have already been considered by the highest court in the world and rejected.

​@@JamesKerLindsay I totally disagree with you , the highest court in the Hague "Lahaye" gave only a recommendation about this conflict, it did not render any Legal decision about this matter. But this land is Moroccan for hundreds of years and the huge majority of Moroccan Sahraouis want to stay with Morocco.So if you believe in democracy and majority rule, you can not in the sake of justice and equality support a small number of people over the vast majority and give them a territory bigger than England. I believe this fabricated conflict can only be solved if you understand the Gio- socio-political hidden agendas of Algeria and work out the problems of the Oriental Moroccan Sahara ( Moroccan Eastern Sahara) . One last thing for you, Morocco's strategic interest is US's strategic interest and there no way that Algeria (Russia) will have a foot on the Atlantic Ocean.

​@@salzizito4572not true

Thanks so much for the lovely comment. So glad to hear the videos are helpful. In fact, the US recognised Morocco’s sovereignty over the Western Sahara. This is what made it so groundbreaking. Trump decided that giving away the right of self-determination of people in a UN recognised non-self-governing territory could be justified to achieve Morocco’s recognition of Israel. This is a shocking decision. It will be interesting to see how Biden responds to this.

@@JamesKerLindsay So the US is playing chess with other countries?Supporting Morocco get them to recognize Israel.Before I come to Israel let me address Morocco.I don't support Morocco's claim.They told us the rest of Sub Saharan Africans that they don't want to be a part of the AU.Infact most of the Northern Saharan countries don't respect the black South Sub Saharan Africans and skin colour has something to do with it too.Morocco wanted to join the EU but they got reject then came down to earth.Now they asked the rest of the African countries to support their claim so they can use their money to strengthen the AU to become powerful.What hypocrisy.One thing about Moroccan is that they are never grateful for the help you offer them afterward.Once you help them and they are done with you they will drop you fast.The UN had no right whatsoever to force Spain to give up Western Sahara whiles the US,UK,France and other western powers held and still holds on to oversees territories and constituent countries till today.I am christian but still trying to wrap my head around Israel and Palestine.What I can say is that from the bible Abraham's son is Isaac and his descendants are the Israelites(Jewish and Christians)and his first son with his maid Ishmael.Ishmael descendants are the Palestinians(Muslims).So basically two descendants from two brothers are fighting.The reason why countries side with Israel is because of the heavenly blessing and protection it receives by virtue of it being stated in the bible that their are God's children and no nation can rise against it.So siding with Israel means benefiting from such relationship.They often forget that Palestinians are also God's children infact Abraham was God's son and chosen one which means Ishmael although not Sara's son and his descendants are also God's children.The bible talks about how that issue will be resolved in line with the second coming of Christ so I will allow events to take place.So I think some countries should stop sidelining Palestine.Israel is antagonizing tem.Superpowers should stop using other countries as chess pieces.Morocco is hypocritical and as a fellow African I will never support them.A referendum should be held and let the people decide.The UN has also caused problems for my tribe people by adding us to a country who looks down upon us through a sham of a referendum which was rigged by the British empire before the WWII.We would have been better of with the Germans or deciding our own faith.The Spanish should have not been pressured to leave Western Sahara.

And that makes it right?

@@JamesKerLindsay what right?? Morocco taking its historical lands and legally administrating it till a further refuredum which has being denied many times by the terror polisario group lead by an war criminal? What you don't seem to know is that most saharawis in fact live in Morocco and are Moroccan wanne know what happens in Tindouf and the border camp and actually see what is right and how Algeria is treating these people?

@@morocco_020fc7 Morocco has no interest in a referendum

We are in 2023 and guess what ?NO INDEPENDENCE AND STILL SAHARA IS MOROCCAN🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦

they aren’t recognised but many countries support it

Thank you very much for the comment. It is a really interesting case. By the way, do keep an eye out for my next video. I look at another country that managed to gain its independence despite facing similar circumstances to Western Sahara.

what?

i don't think so

Then Morocco should not fear the results of any election there, should it? To not allow an election makes Morocco a hypocrite. 😜

Palestine is Israel, deal with it

​@@cutelilamber It doesnt matter what you think

Not very helpful. So, why am I wrong?

Thanks. But I don’t need to change anything. The world’s highest court looked into it and decided Morocco has no historical claim.

@@JamesKerLindsay www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/almoravids-al-murabitun-1040ce-1147ce/

@@JamesKerLindsay hahaha no history claim? hhhh you must be on crack or something

​@@JamesKerLindsay i agree with u

Morocco is evil. The King is the son of a dog.

Yes. It really needs to get given a chance to decide its future. I hope to return to the issue in a future video.

@@JamesKerLindsay 🤲🤲✌️✌️

​@@JamesKerLindsay i love western sahara

What about them?

@@JamesKerLindsay they should have been gone under decolonisation processe first and must be given back to spain and argentina respectively because they are located tousands of kms away from british coasts and do not share any ethnic and cultural aspects with UK contrary to morocco whose people in Tata Sidi Ifni TanTan and Guelmim for instance they share the same culture even in clothing with (sahrawi) people and Western Sahara was a part of morocco starting from Almoravid until Alawit dynasty

So, you would advocate giving them to Spain and Argentina even though the people overwhelmingly want to remain British? Is it merely about the acquisition of territory. Surely, the will of the people who actually live there matters?

that's not true

@@cutelilamber i am orijinal saharien my grand grand father from Coast of sahara move to casablanca by Coast maried moroccan jew women sahara is morocco morocco was large country but frensh colony take a part to algeria to preper to make war in future and selling armes to morocco and rusia selling armes to algeria

@@tangokosby4663 I do not think that Algeria created the Western Sahara, but rather supported the Sahrawis to become independent (this is what I studied). The revolutionaries wanted independence, and that Morocco resisted by killing, displacement and theft of the Sahrawi lands, claiming that it was their land. Even Morocco agreed to the partition between Morocco and Mauritania. The Sahara, and this does not cast doubt on Morocco’s words. I also studied about the Green March, which aimed to take the Sahrawi lands by force with the United Nations and the African Union. in the United Nations and the right to self-determination. Therefore, I say that I support the Sahara, I think. I hope that you will respect my opinion.

@@tangokosby4663 i am from germany and u?

@@cutelilamber from morocco casablanca and agadir

No. I have covered this time and time again. The International Court of Justice clearly said that Morocco did not have a historical claim to the territory.

مهما حاولت تزوير تاريخ تبقى صحراء غربية 😂

​@@JamesKerLindsay Don't believe he is lying and their history is fake

​@@JamesKerLindsay Thank you for supporting us 😊❤🇪🇭

Thanks. But that’s not the case. This is the page that media claimed had been changed. It hasn’t. Western Sahara is still shown as being separate. www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-14121438

i agree