Historical Foundations
of the Moroccanity of the Sahara
If it is topical to view the Sahara problem under the scope of self determination for the population, one must keep in mind that this territory belongs since immemorial times to Morocco and that its integration to the mother-country in 1975 was legitimate. Indeed, Morocco emphatically proposes the holding of a referendum for the self-determination of the Saharan population, but the holding of a referendum does not mean in any way that Morocco lays a claim to its historical rights and legal titles. This position must be apprehended as a Moroccan attachment which has never been denied, to the principles governing the friendly relationship between States, for upholding international peace and security and the peaceful settlement of disputes.
The present document aims to recall briefly the different titles which prove the Moroccan nature of
the Sahara. The symbiosis which characterizes the relations between the Saharan provinces and the
remainder of the country, the prodigious socio-economic achievements made since 1975 attest the
belonging of the Sahara to Morocco .
1- HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE MOROCCANITY OF THE SAHARA
These foundations rest on numerous acts on internal and international levels.
1- Internal level.
First, there is a major fact worth mentioning: Morocco exists as a State since the 9th century (1).
This genuine Statesmanship is unique in the Maghreb. It had been preserved even during the
Protectorate (1912-1956).
Within the mechanism of functioning of the secular Moroccan State, the Sahara has always held a
privileged and often decisive position. Thus, the founders of the different dynasties in Morocco
were often members of one of the tribes of the Western Sahara. This was the case for the
Almoravides, whose founder Youssef Ben Tachfine (9th century), was later to create the "Greater
Morocco" which extended to the frontiers of the Senegal. Those close ties with the Sahara had not
been interrupted with the advent of the Alaouite dynasty (17th century), that came from the Tafilalet
(Sahara) and which never stopped consolidating the national unity and strengthening the immemorial
ties between all the parts of Morocco (2).
The exercise of Sovereignty by the Moroccan State during its history which is characterized by a
number of peculiarities due to the particular structure of the State. This peculiarity has been
recognized by the International Court of Justice (Advisory Opinion; 16/10/75). The central power
is exerted by the Sultan, "Commander of the Believers". In this position, he is the religious leader of
the community of believers whom he also governs temporally. The acceptation of the Sultan's
person by the believers is made through the "Beyaa", or allegiance. The obedience which,
translated into inter-temporal terms, emanates from the traditional efforts binding a State to its
nationals so long as the Sultan remains faithful to the precepts of the Coran. The Sultan,
representative of the supreme spiritual and political authority, is in charge of, among others, the
protection of the population and the relationship with foreign powers. Therefore, the allegiance act
is synonymous with sovereignty. Besides, this has been confirmed by Judge Ammoun in his opinion
relating to the judgment of the ICJ on the Sahara.
Therefore, allegiance to the Sultan or Sovereign was tantamount to allegiance to the State. It is to
recognize consequently, that the legal ties between Morocco and the Western Sahara, which are
recognized by the Court, translate into political ties, and even ties of Sovereignty (3).
As for the Sahara, the exercise of this sovereignty appears at several levels, such as the
appointment of local officials (governors, judges and military officers), and the definition of the
missions which were assigned to them.
While the International Court of Justice was looking into the file of the Western tern Sahara, Morocco produced several dozens of texts and documents of internal character that certify an effective, permanent, continuous and peaceful exercise of sovereignty by the Sultan over the Saharan territories (4).
If one examines the period preceding colonial occupation, one can cite several instances dealing
with the appointment of local officials by the central authority (Cf. Annex n° I) (5). Furthermore,
these officials were instructed to preserve the territorial integrity of Morocco (Cf. Annex n° 2) (6).
In this respect, one must recall the privileged place held by Cheikh Ma el Ainain (c. the end of the
19th century) in the resistance against foreign encroachments in the Western Sahara. He was the
Sultan's special representative, whose policy he conducted on the local level (Cf. Annex n° 3) (7).
The central power, anxious to consolidate its authority over the southern provinces, had to
intervene in situ in the person of the Sultan himself. Thus, mentioning only the latest, Hassan I had
carried out two expeditions in 1886 in order to put an end to foreign incursions in this territory and
to officially invest several caids and Cadis. One may also mention the levy of taxes as a further
instance of the exercise of sovereignty (8).
2- International level.
The Moroccan sovereignty over the Western Sahara has been consecrated by express provisions
of several treaties between the Cherifian empire and foreign States. The analyses of these
diplomatic conventions demonstrates that the foreign powers have permanently resorted to the
Sultan to protect the activities of their nationals in the Western Sahara. For this purpose, treaties
were signed respectively with Spain in 1861, the Unites States of America in 1786 and 1836 and
with Great Britain in 1856 (9).
Other instruments expressly recognize Moroccan sovereignty over the Western Sahara. This is
particularly the case of the Anglo-moroccan Treaty of March 13, 1895, the first Article of which
provided that: "...no power can lay claims to the lands that are between Wad Draa and Cape
Bojador and which are called Tarfaya above named and all the lands behind it, because all this
belongs to the territory of Morocco" (10).
Besides, Moroccan sovereignty over Rio de Oro was internationally recognised , as the French
ambassador in Tangiers demonstrates it in his letter of` November 10, 1898. According to that
letter exchange,
"The Spanish newspapers are making a lot of fuss about news that have recently originated in Rio
de Oro, purporting that a great number of Moroccans -from four to five thousand- are aggressively
approaching the mentioned factory"(Cf. Annex n° 5).
The International Court of Justice examined all these documents and did not fail to note that the
elements and information brought to the knowledge of the Court show the existence, at the time of
the Spanish colonization, of legal ties of allegiance between the Sultan of Morocco and certain
tribes living in the territory of the Western Sahara; (§162 of the 1975 Advisory opinion).
These historical foundations warrant a better understanding of the legal bases underlying the
completion of the territorial integrity achieved in 1975.
II- LEGAL BASES OF THE COMPLETION OF THE TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY
Under the joint declaration of April 7, 1956, Spain had to put an end to its presence in the northern
part of the Kingdom. This declaration, in particular its paragraph 2, provided that Spain "reaffirms
her willingness to respect the territorial unity of the Empire guaranteed by the international
treaties".In fact, the Spanish colonization was to continue in several parts of the Moroccan territory
that were later ceded through stages: Tarfaya (1958), Ifni (1969) and Western Sahara (Sebta and
Melilia) are still the object of a Moroccan-Spanish territorial dispute.
Regarding the Sahara, Morocco's claims for retrieval date back to 1956. Among other
manifestation of Morocco's determination to get back its southern provinces, the historical speech
of the Late King, His Majesty Mohammed V at El Ghizlan in 1958 is worth mentioning. Addressing
Moroccans from the Sahara, He reminded them of the everlasting allegiance their ancestors had
vowed to Moulay Hassan I and promised them a permanent and total mobilisation of Morocco,
until the recovery of the whole Sahara. (Cf. Annex n° 6).
Following the same trend, and ever since His enthronement, His Majesty King Hassan II reaffirmed
this stance, when He declared, at the first Non-aligned Summit (Belgrade, September 1961):
"...This assail on the territorial integrity of independent countries, members of the United Nations,
creates a climate of irritation and provocation and constitutes, on the part of the colonialist
countries, a permanent threat against security and peace. In Morocco, for instance, Spain still
occupies whole areas in the southern part of our territory: Saquia El Hamra, Ifni and Rio de Oro...".
When it adhered to the Chart of the OAU in 1963, Morocco reaffirmed its stance, entering
reservations as follows: "Regarding the achievement of Morocco's Sovereignty and territorial
integrity in its authentic frontiers, it is important that it be known that the signature of the Chart of
the OAU should not, in any case, be inter interpreted as an explicit or implicit recognition of the
"faits accomplis", so far rejected by Morocco as such, nor as a foregoing of the pursuance of our
rights through the legitimate means at our disposal".
In this affair, Morocco has always sought, through peaceful means, to reach a settlement by
requesting Spain to start appropriate negotiations and by referring the case to different international
organization. In its response, the United Nations General Assembly, in the resolution 2072 (XX) of
December 16, 1965, called on Spain in her capacity as administrating power to take immediate
and necessary measures for the liberation from the colonial dominion of the territories of Sidi Ifni
and Western Sahara and to start negotiations on problems relating to the Sovereignty of these two
territories". The United Nations General Assembly had thus established a link between two
questions concerning the territorial integrity of Morocco.
The dilatory maneuvers of Spain had led the UN General Assembly to ask, upon Morocco's
request, for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (resolutions 3292 (XXIX) of
December 13, 1974) relating to the legal situation of`the territory on the eve of the Spanish
colonization, and in particular its legal ties with Morocco and Mauritania.
The questions were the following:
"1- Was the Western Sahara (Rio de Oro and Saquiat El Hamra) at the time of colonization by
Spain a territory belonging to no one (Terra Nullius)?
If the answer to the first question is in the negative,
2- What were the legal ties between this territory and the Kingdom of Morocco and the
Mauritanian entity?"
Answering the first question in the negative, the ICJ recognized, as stated before, ties of allegiance
between the Sultan of Morocco and the tribes of the Western tern Sahara. This attested the
lawfulness of the Moroccan legal theses and made it mandatory to start negotiations with Spain to
put an end to the colonial situation of this territory.
It is in this spirit that the Security Council had to recall, under its resolutions 377 of October 22,
1975? that "the concerned and interested parties" were able to start negotiations to peacefully settle
the litigation on the basis of article 33 of the United Nations Charter. The concerned parties are
Spain, Mauritania and Morocco. The interested party being Algeria in her capacity as a neighboring
country. It is worth noting that the "Polisario" was mentioned neither in the UN Resolutions nor in
the official statements of the Algerian authorities. In fact, Algeria pretended having no direct claim
on the Western Sahara. Even more, president Boumedienne let it be known that he encouraged
and approved the partition of the territory bet between Morocco and Mauritania. Indeed, in
October 1974, during the summit of the League of Arab States, he told Arab Heads of State that
"the problem concerns only Mauritania and Morocco. I say that I agree and that there is no
problem...". Several meetings were held in Nouadhibou, Rabat and Agadir after the
Morocco-algerian accord.
"I have attended a meeting between His Majesty the King and the Mauritanian president during
which they agreed to find out a formula to settle this problem after the liberation, a formula which
provides for the part to be retrieved by Mauritanian and the part to be ceded to Morocco. I was
then present and I heartily agreed without reservation". (Archives of the League of the Arab States.
Cf. in this sense "LE MONDE", April 9, 1980).
Spain, though, maintained its colonial policy, causing Morocco to organize the Green March, which
paved the way for the Madrid Agreement, signed by Spain, Morocco and Mauritania and laying
down modalities of retroceding this territory (Cf. Annex n° 7: Madrid Agreement, November 14,
1975).
One must underline that this agreement is in total conformity with provisions of international law and
the United Nations Charter (Cf. Article 5 of the Agreement). The General Assembly recognized
indeed the validity of this Treaty, since it took notice of the trilateral Agreement concluded between
the Spanish, Moroccan and Mauritanian Governments, the text of which has been transmitted to
the Secretary General of the UN in November 18, 1975". (Resolution 3458 (XXX) B.
10/12/1975).
All the provisions of the Madrid Agreement have been scrupulously respected by Morocco,
particularly those relating to the expression of the will of the population . (Article 3 of the Madrid
Agreement) (11).
In fact, the Jemaa (Assembly), a body whose representativity and competence in managing the
affairs of the population, had been recognized by the United Nations Mission which visited the
territory in 1975 (UN Document, A/10023/Add. 5, pp. 41 and following) had approved the
provisions of the Agreement. This way of consulting the population is in conformity with
international law and international practice in the matter of decolonization.
Consequently, self-determination may, according to the provisions of inter national law, take on
several forms. This has been amply underlined during the pro proceedings of the International Court
of Justice while it examined the Sahara affair.
Therefore, the retrocession of the Sahara to Morocco is in conformity with the historical and legal
titles of Morocco and satisfies international legality through its respect of the UN Resolutions, the
Madrid Agreement and the population's wishes. The more so as the reintegration of the Sahara to
the mother-country started an unprecedented development of this part of the Kingdom.
(1)- Cf. Robert REZETTE: Le Sahara Occidental et les Frontières marocaines". Nel, Paris 1975 p. Il.
(2)- In this respect, the meaningful statement of Moulay Hassan I can be recalled: "I take the oath not to pay a piastre as
compensation . Spain can set my ports on fire, occupy the capital, ransack the country: I would take refuge in the Atlas rather
than compromise. My ancestor came from the Sahara. I will go back there", (Document n° 15, dated May 14th, 1876, French
Legation in Morocco) mentioning only the pre-protectorate period.
(3)- ICJ, Reports 1975, p. 83. For more details, Cf. pp. 83-102. Cf. also individual opinion of Judge M. FORSTER. Idem p. 103
and Annex n° 7.
(4)- ICJ, Western Sahara Pleadings, Arguments, Documents, Volume 111, Written Statements and Documents, pp. 205 to 497.
(5)- Nomination Dahirs, dating back to the reign of His Majesty Moulay Abdelaziz Bel Hassan, (Two Dahirs in 1886 and two in
1899), of His Majesty Abdelhafid Bel Hassan (1907 and 1909).
(6)- Dahirs of His Majesty El Hassan Ben Mohammed (1877 and 1886) of His Majesty Abdelaziz Ben El H~Hassan (1901)
(7)- Two letters by Ma El Ainain (1903 and 1908)
(8)- Cf. separate opinion of Vice-President Ammoun, ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory opinions and Orders, Western Sahara
Advisory Opinion of 16 October 1975, p. 83
(9)- The treaties are the following: - Trading Treaty between Morocco and Spain in Madrid in November 20, 1861. - Treaty
with the USA in June 23 to 28,1786. - Treaty of peace and friendship between the USA and Morocco, signed in Meknes in
September 16,1856. - Anglo-maroccan Accords, December 9,1856.
(10)- "If this government buy the buildings in the place above-named, from the named company, no one will have any claim to
the lands that are between Wad Draa and Cape Bojador, and which are called Tarfaya, above named and all the lands behind it,
because all this belongs to the territory of Morocco. (Cf. Annex 4)
(Il)- "The opinion of the Saharan population, expressed through the Jemaa will be respected".