Polisario Denounces US, Israel Support for Moroccan Sahara Claim
The Polisario Front has criticized the United States and Israel for elevating their diplomatic representation with Morocco to the ambassadorial level, viewing it as an attempt to impose a settlement outside their framework. In a September 17 statement, the group labeled the US and Israeli stance "illegitimate," asserting it contradicts the Sahrawi people's right to self-determination and independence. Polisario urged the United Nations and the African Union to intervene and assume their responsibilities.
The recent trilateral declaration from New York on September 16, 2026, where the US and Israel reaffirmed their recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, coincided with the upgrade of diplomatic ties between Rabat and Tel Aviv to full embassies. This development signifies that the Western Sahara issue is rapidly evolving beyond a regional dispute on the UN's agenda into a geopolitical arena in North Africa, where politics, security, economy, and diplomacy intersect.
Both the US and Israel not only endorsed Morocco's autonomy proposal but also described it as the "sole basis" for a just and lasting solution, warning that any other path would prolong the current situation. However, the article notes a divergence in diplomatic language and political reference points. Morocco and its allies focus on a political settlement based on autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty, while Polisario insists on self-determination as the core issue.
The UN continues to navigate this complex situation through ongoing negotiations, as more countries express support for Morocco's proposal. Washington's current stance reinforces its December 2020 recognition of Moroccan sovereignty and its support for the autonomy plan, which it has previously facilitated through talks.
Polisario's reaction aims to re-center the dispute within its legal and political framework, rejecting bilateral agreements and international recognition as substitutes for the UN process. By calling on the UN and AU, the group seeks to re-establish international legitimacy against what it perceives as a push to impose a new political solution. This latest development highlights a growing struggle over defining the future settlement: whether it will be a negotiated outcome or a result of accumulating recognitions and political realities.
