.png)
Another year like no other. Apart from for the Saharawi
Thank you for your continued support for the Saharawi people’s right to self-determination. Without people like you being prepared to stand up against colonialism and for international law the Western Sahara Campaign would not be able to continue its work.
Yet again the United Nations has failed to make progress on this issue. Morocco, confident in the tacit support of the UN Security Council for the status quo, continues to be rewarded for its violent occupation and illegal exploitation of the resources of the Western Sahara.
This reached a new low when in November the United Nations issued a press release to mark the conclusion of the ninth Global Forum for the UN Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) that took place in the Moroccan city of Fez. It includes this almost unbelievable statement by The UN High Representative, Miguel Angel Moratinos: “The Moroccan model has yielded concrete results in terms of urgent needs for mutual respect, for brotherhood, peace, for understanding.” In his opening remarks to the Forum, UN chief António Guterres said: “I would particularly like to thank His Majesty Mohammed VI for his personal and permanent commitment to the defense of interreligious and intercultural dialogue, tolerance and diversity as a richness for our societies and our world.”
Less than 1000 miles away in Western Sahara, the Saharawi people know what the concrete results of the Moroccan model of brotherhood, peace and understanding are and must laugh out loud at the praise of the King of Morocco’s tolerance and defense of intercultural dialogue.
It would almost be funny if the UN was not responsible (as a founding principle in its Charter) for the process of decolonising Western Sahara.
A search of the same UN News website where this was announced reveals that they have not issued a single press release on the situation in Western Sahara over the last year.
How can the Saharawi have any faith in such an organisation? Saharawi women and men are raped by Moroccan police if they have the temerity to suggest that the UN should honour their right to self-determination. It hardly smacks of tolerance and a model for peace and understanding.
So what can we do? We must continue the campaign.
With your support we have taken the UK Government to court. The case was heard in October and the judgement issued at the beginning of December. We were disappointed that the judgement went against us. We are now consulting our lawyers about whether we have sufficient grounds to lodge an appeal. We will keep you updated about our decision with the next Analysis. The wheels of justice turn slowly (the Saharawi know this only too well) but we are still confident that international law must be applied to UK trade agreements with Morocco.
We still work with supporters in parliament; we heard from Ben Lake, the Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Western Sahara at the Stand with Saharawis conference we organised in November. Ben is the Plaid Cymru MP for Ceredigion and does a great job of championing the Saharawi cause in parliament.
Neither of these things would have happened without the Western Sahara Campaign. So thanks for your continuing support.
And there are specific opportunities to do more – we need people to help improve our links with trades unions, to support our work in parliament, to carry out research or even just look out for Western Sahara produce in our supermarkets.
The Saharawi obviously can’t rely on the United Nations. Instead, the Saharawi must rely on friends of freedom and justice - so if you could take up one of those roles in the new year please contact us.
Thank you.
Mark Luetchford, Chair of WSC (uk)
Stand with Saharawis: The Future of UK-Western Sahara SolidarityLondon October 29th 2022 – Keynote Speech
My journey with the Saharawis began rather randomly. One day a colleague mentioned a book by a Canadian journalist, named “Walls” and which told the stories of the walls diving people in the world. The peace wall in Belfast, those in Jerusalem, Northern Cyprus or at the Mexican-US border were mentioned. And of course, a whole chapter dedicated to the wall dividing Western Sahara… In his book, the writer mentioned that he had been visiting the wall at the same time as a “Sahara marathon took place”. And I am a runner. I only saw those 2 words. Sahara and marathon. I had no knowledge about the place, the camps, the conflict, other than what was briefly explained in the book. But hey, what terrible thing could happen to me thousands of miles from home, in the middle of a protracted conflict in a harsh environment, sleeping with strangers and running in the sand by 30 or so degrees?
Well, the terrible thing that happened is that it changed my life entirely.
I will never forget the week I spent in Smara – a refugee camp near Tindouf in the south of Algeria - with my Saharawi family. Malad, his wife Khnetha and their 2 sons Hamdi and Majoub. I will never forget the 4 strangers who also shared the Jaima with the family and this life experience with me (Maya, Solveig, Jessie and Ovidio). I will never forget this race in the desert, the wind, the sand, the heat. I will never forget the conversations, the meals, the bad internet, the tea, the dances, my first m’lahfas (traditional Saharawi clothing). I came back to the UK with tired legs but a full heart.
But why was I feeling this way? Why did I not forget about them when the rest of the world did? How come these people had been living in these camps for so long? Why did I not learn about this conflict in my international law classes? Or in the news?
Because the prolongation of this conflict is the result of numerous errors and failures on the part of the international community, and nobody is ready to admit their responsibility and be held accountable for what is happening. The Saharawi people are the victims of an international system of peace and security which has failed them, and which has failed itself. They have witnessed their own destiny being side-lined. Spain as colonial power, Morocco as occupier, MINURSO as a peacekeeping mission deprived of human rights monitoring mechanism, the EU as a prime trade partner, multinationals as illegal investors and mainstream media as accomplices of an ambient silence.
Almost 50 years since the International Court of Justice denied Morocco and Mauritania any legal claim of sovereignty over Western Sahara, since Morocco annexed illegally most of the territory of Western Sahara, since Spain unburdened themselves of their responsibilities to ensure the right to self-determination, since innocent Sahrawis were forced to live in one of the most inhospitable regions of the world, since the longest decolonisation process in Africa started. Since Western Sahara was placed on the list of NSGT in 1963, Nelson Mandela has had the time to serve 27 years in prison, become the first Black president of his country, end Apartheid, reconcile its people, retire, and die as a national hero and international icon. The third generation of Sahrawis are now being born either in the camps or under military occupation. During the same period, the UK has had 13 Prime Ministers, none of whom has ever made a clear move towards international legality.
Because this is what we are dealing with: several breaches of international law, totally unaccounted for. In the conflict in Western Sahara, there is more than a Saharawi vs Moroccan paradigm. There is what the UN resolutions and court decisions have said countless times vs what politicians make of them. Words are clear, their meaning need not be distorted. And the words and statements have been abundant in favour of the Saharawis throughout the world: the UK, France, South Africa, the Court of Justice of the European Union and most recently, the African Court of People’s and Human Rights.
Because they explicitly include the territory of Western Sahara without the free and genuine consent of its people, the new EU-Morocco trade partnership agreements stand in violation of international law. By illegally investing in the Nonself-governing Territory of Western Sahara without the consent of its people as per all these court decisions and UN resolutions, States and corporations take a big financial and reputational risk. But most importantly, they are trading away peace.
And peace is not just the absence of war. It means that Human Rights are protected and upheld, justice is rendered fairly and society functions on the basis of equality. The cease-fire in place in Western Sahara for three decades never meant it has been at peace. The very fact that MINURSO, the token of the existence of an international conflict to be resolved, is the only modern peacekeeping operations to be deprived of a human rights monitoring mechanism means it is not at peace. The idea that we could offer the Saharawis an autonomy under the occupier’s sovereignty without any way out for independence means it is not at peace. The fact that the territory has not been accessible to international NGOs, journalists, or elected representatives since almost a decade means it is not at peace. The non-implementation of resolutions and decisions calling for the respect of human rights and, a fortiori, the right to selfdetermination, means it is not at peace. Status quo does not equal peace.
Sadly, in the absence of an independent human rights monitoring mechanism, our work has been made undoubtedly difficult. What is the most likely consequence when human rights organisations, journalists or even the Personal Envoy to the UN Secretary General aren't welcome in a conflicted area? When media are silent, and heads of States remain inert [uhnuht]? When political blackmail is used to make people forget who is the victim and who is the perpetrator? Impunity. And impunity means there is no peace.
It will come as no surprise to anyone that the Saharawis have lost the trust they placed in the UN and the international community. Because, in trying to resolve the conflict in Western Sahara, they have tolerated for too long Morocco’s positions, demands and illegal claims. Yet, in this conflict one party is offering to 'take before asking' and the other to 'ask before taking'. The first is called dictatorship while the second is called democracy. Favouring the option of referendum in Western Sahara doesn't mean favouring independence. It means granting its people with its inalienable right to decide. One can arguably be against independence. But one cannot be against the right to choose it as an option. And this is what the work of the campaign has been about since it was created in the early 1980’s, before I was even born.
We often hear that the conflict in Western Sahara cannot reach a solution without a radical change in one of the parties' positions. But should it be governed by respect of the rule of law and human rights for its people? Or by power politics at the Security Council and economic interests of foreign corporations? How is the UN Security Council - representing less than 10% of the UN Member States - "not supposed to deal with human rights issues" in Western Sahara and elsewhere, and yet, has the power to actively deny their monitoring and protection in the missions it deploys? If Great Powers are worried of the emergence of a "weak" or "failed" state in a strategic region with the prospect of an independent Western Sahara, why don't they work towards strengthening it, instead of investing in a territory where no Human Rights observers are allowed? And if the interests of the weaker party must be compromised in order to keep the stronger party “at the negotiation table”, how can the outcome of such a process be considered fair or just? The law will catch up with diplomacy in the months and years to come. More and more legal challenges and court decisions will be available to all and our elected representatives will have to respect the laws they have themselves agreed to implement and the court they have themselves set up.
As British citizens or people living in the UK in general, we, undeniably, have a part to play. Creating that space which will allow the Saharawis to voice their concerns and express their inalienable rights is something we can all help doing at our level. This can be done by running and supporting awareness campaigns on social media and other platforms, being visible during conferences, demonstrations, seminars, festivals, elections and other gatherings, sharing information in our private circles, fundraising, getting more students and academics involved in researching the various ways peace can be achieved in Western Sahara. The ways are endless, but the resources are few. Or not visible, not reachable.
John’s response mentioned that he had been busy with court cases. Little did I know then what it meant for the Campaign, for me, for the activists and, of course, for the Saharawis. He also mentioned that the Campaign “always needs more activists”. And so, the journey within the UK solidarity movement began for me. I did not think twice. Because ignoring the oppressed is supporting the oppressor. It is our duty to stand with Saharawis. And divided we fall, together we stand. Let’s celebrate standing together today.
Meriem Naili
Continuing Silence of the International Community
Speaking at the EUCOCO conference, the president of the Algerian National Committee for Solidarity with the Saharawi People (CNASPS), Saïd Ayachi, denounced the silence of the international community in the face of the continuation of Moroccan repression and violations of human rights in occupied Western Sahara.
"For 47 years Morocco has been repressing the Saharawis. Morocco arrests, imprisons and tortures Saharawis. Morocco plunders the Saharawi wealth. All this under the gaze and silence of the international community, without any call to order, without any condemnation, without any sanction of the Moroccan occupier."
"How long will the international community remain silent in the face of Morocco's obstacles and maneuvers to prevent the Personal Envoy of the UN Secretary-General from doing his job? And when are we going to put an end to the shameless plundering of Saharawi natural wealth by the Moroccan occupier?" he wondered.
Aggression, Ukraine and Western Sahara
Jeffrey Smith
A friend remarked recently that Western Sahara has many dimensions in international law. To open a textbook in this field at any page is to find something which applies: The right to selfdetermination, the responsibilities of an occupying state, the sovereignty of a non-self-governing people to their natural resources, territorial integrity, to name a few. I replied to my friend that a course in international law could be taught from an entirely Western Sahara perspective.
However, we haven’t solved the problems of international law when it comes to what the United Nations calls the “question” of Western Sahara. The biggest is certainly assuring the Saharawi people their right to self-determination, as a colonised (and occupied) people the choice of their political and legal status in what’s called the organised international community.
My friend asked if we have “sufficient” law for the Saharawi people. I hesitated, wanting to equivocate. International law isn’t sufficiently developed for a complete justice in every case. If it was, we – our governments – would apply it in a protective, forward-leaning sense. There would be better rules for humanitarian intervention and avoiding armed conflict. And holding state and government leaders accountable for human rights violations.
This year, one of the law’s newest features has been much discussed: The crime of aggression. Students of history will remind us that the crime has been around for a while, first developed and applied in the post-Second World War Nuremburg trials. And then shelved until creation of the International Criminal Court in 1998, with a definition of the crime only agreed in 2010. Of course, this renewed discussion of the crime has been in the context of Ukraine. And it properly should be: The scale of Russia’s assault on Ukraine with a goal of eliminating the country’s political independence is compelling in its horror.
Helpfully, what’s going on in Ukraine reminds us of the seriousness of the failure to decolonise Western Sahara and end its (unlawful) occupation. A simple approach to their similarity is to substitute “Western Sahara” for “Ukraine” when defining how the crime of aggression applies. It works this way: Aggression is the act of the highest officials of a state who decide and direct the unlawful use of armed force against another state or territory. It does not matter how brief the use of force or whether occupation (the holding of territory) results. Today, the only justifications for use of armed force are selfdefence or prior approval of the UN Security Council. (The crime is distinct from the responsibility of a state which carries out aggression, something defined by the UN General Assembly in 1974.)
The responsibility of individual state and government officials for aggression can extend to occupation and annexation. It seems the only thing to be done when swapping Western Sahara for Ukraine is to change the relevant dates and names of individuals. Even the stated justifications are more or less the same: “This territory was historically a part of our greater country and its people have no different political identity.”
At this point, students of history will recall the Saharawi people have the advantage of the International Court of Justice’s 1975 Western Sahara Advisory Opinion. There’s no such case for the people of Ukraine – not yet – which confirms the state invading it has no territorial claim.
Clever law students, meanwhile, will point out two things that make Western Sahara different from Ukraine. The first is that it is possible to bring individual perpetrators of the crime of aggression to account. This is because Spain’s courts have concluded the country’s criminal law continues to apply in Western Sahara. (Neither Ukraine nor Russia have accepted the crime.) Crucially, Spain has accepted the 2010 crime of aggression, which means its criminal law system has jurisdiction over the crime in Western Sahara. It seems to be only a matter of catching up to the perpetrators.
Second, our students would argue that, beyond unlawful use of force, occupation and annexation, a fourth unlawful act of aggression is taking place in Western Sahara: The intentional denial of the right to self-determination. This is because the bedrock of the international order is both territorial integrity and the political independence of peoples as first principles of the UN Charter. Such independence isn’t statehood or another choice resulting from self-determination, but something necessary from the start: A sufficient assured identity and security to be able to make the choice. Attempting to extinguish a colonised people’s pursuit of self-determination is itself aggression, something sufficiently defined since 2010.
The best feature of international law is that it belongs to us all. Its principles and rules are easily identified toward urging acceptable behavior of our governments and institutions, and a United Nations organisation stalled in its commitment to deliver self-determination to the Saharawi people. Of many tools available to us, the law is a reminder of shared obligations and how we pursue justice.
Climate Justice
Climate justice addresses the unequal contributions of different populations to climate change, the highly differentiated vulnerability to the impacts of climate change across different groups, and the fact that it is often the poorest, and those who have contributed least to climate change, who experience the worst impacts.
The Western Sahara conflict is not only an issue of occupation, colonialism and disregard for international law and UN conventions and resolutions; it also increases the vulnerability of the Sahrawi people to the losses and damages caused by climate change, while limiting their ability to respond and adapt. The conflict is therefore also an issue of climate justice.
Climate justice in Western Sahara is linked with risks that result from the interaction of the following elements:
1. climate hazards, which are the physical manifestations of climate variability and change such as droughts, extreme rainfall, heat extremes, storms, desertification, etc.;
2. exposure to these hazards, based largely on the physical location of people and infrastructure;
3. vulnerability, or the extent to which people and systems are likely to harmed when exposed to hazards, based on their characteristics, capacities, access to resources, and ability to act.
Climate change is worsening the climate hazards experienced by the displaced Sahrawis, while the conflict in Western Sahara is increasing their exposure and vulnerability to these hazards. Climate change and conflict in Western Sahara and the camps are therefore combining to increase climate risks resulting in avoidable losses and damages. This is happening through a number of mechanisms.
1. Displacement increases exposure & vulnerability to worsening heat extremes
The Sahrawi-controlled areas of Western Sahara (Liberated Territories) and the Sahrawi refugee camps experience higher temperatures and temperature extremes than the areas nearer to the Atlantic coast. Increases in average and extreme temperatures are projected to be greater in these inland areas than in the areas of Western Sahara occupied by Morocco. The camps and the Liberated Territories are at the edge of a zone of extreme risk from projected increases in wet-bulb temperature, a combined measure of heat and humidity. In the coming decades, wet-bulb temperatures in this zone of extreme risk are projected to approach and possibly exceed 35°C, the limit of human survivability. People living in the Liberated Territories and the camps would be exposed to these potentially fatal conditions, while people living in the Occupied Territories would not.
2. Displacement increases exposure & vulnerability to floods
The Sahrawi refugee camps are subject to severe and devastating floods. Climate change is increasing the amount of moisture in the atmosphere and resulting in more severe rainfall extremes, both globally and in the Sahel region immediately south of Western Sahara. These trends increase flood risk. Periodic flooding in the camps destroys homes, schools, food stocks, health facilities and other infrastructure, resulting in loss of life, injury, poor physical and mental health, food insecurity, and disruption to children’s education.
3. Displacement increases food insecurity, made worse by climate change
The Sahrawis’ traditional way of life as nomadic pastoralists is not possible in the camps, meaning they cannot rely on traditional sources of food security based on livestock and wild plant resources. Some food production occurs in the camps, based on small-scale gardens and hydroponics. However, this is limited by water scarcity and extreme temperatures, both of which are increasing due to climate change.
4. Forced sedentarisation erodes indigenous knowledge & adaptive capacity
Traditionally, the Sahrawis practiced mobile pastoralism based on camel and goat herding. Mobile pastoralism is based on the flexibility that is needed to exploit shifting patterns of rainfall and pasture in marginal, unpredictable and highly variable environments. While a small number of Sahrawis still practice pastoralism in the Liberated Territories, most Sahrawis live in the camps, where mobile pastoralism is not possible, or in the Occupied Territories, where it is restricted. Forced displacement and sedentarisation has resulted in a loss of traditional skills and knowledge, particularly among younger Sahrawis.
5. Conflict amplifies climate change impacts on health and wellbeing
The impacts of heat extremes, flooding an increase in water-borne diseases Dust storms, , are associated with respiratory conditions are made worse by the conflict, through the mechanism of displacement. As indicated above, this displacement has increase people’s exposure to climate hazards, because of the camps’ location in areas subject to worse heat extremes, the concentration of the displaced Sahrawis in dense urban centres, and their displacement to a more arid environment where airborne dust pollution is more prevalent. The fragile infrastructure in the camps, and the lack of financial and other resources available to the Sahrawis, constrains their ability to address public health issues and the health impacts of climate change. All these impacts are in addition to the physical and mental health consequences of living as refugees.
6. Conflict excludes the Sahrawis from global climate governance
Faced with extreme vulnerability exacerbated by the conflict, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) of Western Sahara, a founding member of the African Union enjoying diplomatic recognition by dozens of countries, has developed its own national adaptation plan and indicative Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). NDCs are national documents setting out what countries intend to do to address climate change through mitigation (reducing greenhouse gas emissions) and adaptation (reducing the risks and impacts of climate change) NDCs are prepared by signatories to the Paris Agreement and are submitted to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). However, because of the conflict and the failure of the UN-mandated self-determination process in Western Sahara, the SADR is not a UN member state. Consequently, it cannot be a party to the UNFCCC or sign the Paris Agreement. The SADR is thus excluded from UN-dominated global climate governance mechanisms, including global climate negotiations. Consequently, the Sahrawi people and nation have no voice in the critical arena of international climate action, despite having made a negligible contribution to the problem, and despite being highly vulnerable. The exclusion of the Sahrawis from global climate governance in this context represents an extreme example of climate injustice.
7. Exclusion from climate finance mechanisms constrains climate action
The exclusion of the SADR from global climate governance also extends to global climate finance mechanisms associated with global climate funds such as the Green Climate Fund, the Climate Investment Funds, the Adaptation Fund, and the Global Environment Facility. Access to grants or loans from these funds requires the existence of an Accredited Entity in the recipient country.
8. Conflict makes the international system of climate governance complicit in colonialism
While the SADR is excluded from global climate finance and governance mechanisms, Morocco enjoys good access to these mechanisms, using them to bolster its position through climate diplomacy, and presenting NDCs whose target of sourcing 52% of its energy from renewable sources is dependent on the development of renewable energy infrastructure in occupied Western Sahara (WSRW 2021). The achievement of Morocco’s climate targets, endorsed by the UNFCCC through its acceptance of Morocco’s NDCs, is thus directly dependent on its occupation of Western Sahara.
Despite the parity of the Polisario and Morocco as equal parties to the conflict under the 1991 ceasefire agreement and multiple UN resolutions (SADR, 2021), global climate governance supports and privileges Morocco’s climate actions while excluding the SADR, exacerbating the vulnerability of the latter and creating obstacles to its adaptation actions. These climate governance and finance mechanisms serve to legitimise and strengthen a military occupation while excluding those displaced by the occupation and constraining their adaptation. This, coupled with the UNFCCC’s acceptance of Moroccan NDCs that are predicated on the exploitation of the Occupied Territories, means that the UNFCCC is in effect endorsing Moroccan colonialism in the non-selfgoverning territory of Western Sahara, in contradiction of UN resolutions and international law.
9. Climate change mitigation actions entrench the occupation
Renewable energy infrastructure in the Occupied Territories directly supports Morocco’s occupation and its ruling elite. Wind and solar plants power Moroccan economic and industrial activity in the Occupied Territories. https://nickbrooks.wordpress.com/2021/11/15/challenging-climate-colonialism-in-north-africaa-new-indicative-ndc-for-western-sahara/
Saharawis' right to armed struggle for independence reiterated
Speaking at the opening of the 46th Conference of the European Coordination for Support and Solidarity with the Sahrawi People (EUCOCO) in Berlin, the Saharawi Prime Minister, Mr. Bushraya Hamoudi Beyoun, stressed that "the current situation in Western Sahara and the position of some influential countries will only lead to more tensions in the region," denouncing "the repeated maneuvers of Morocco and its allies in order to thwart any solution that would lead to the implementation of international legality. "All efforts of the international community to find a peaceful and just solution have been ignored," he said, noting that the attitude of some countries "was the cause of non-compliance with international law.
States Criticise Morocco Over Human Rights in Western Sahara
In November Morocco underwent its fourth Universal Periodic Review; a peer review by other UN Member States of the country's human rights record.
Ten intervening States took the opportunity to ask questions about or put forward recommendations on Western Sahara; a Non-Self-Governing Territory the size of the UK that has been largely occupied by Morocco since 1975. Below are extracts from their statements. Read the full statements at https://wsrw.org/en/news/states-criticizemorocco-over-human-rights-in-western-sahara N.B. The transcripts were made by Western Sahara Resource Watch; they are non-official transcriptions.
Uganda
‘Put in place an accountability mechanism to closely monitor and address the rights and freedoms of the people of Western Sahara’
Venezuela
‘We are concerned about the restrictions on the freedom of expression in Western Sahara and also the actions of security forces, and also certain evictions. We’d like to recommend the government to put an end to its denial of the right to autodetermination, in line with international law organising a referendum that will ensure the free expression of the population of that territory, and continue strengthening its framework on human rights, and strengthen the role of the national council on human rights and strengthen efforts to ensure gender equality and the protection of women against all forms of violence and discrimination.’
Algeria
‘We take note of the report, and we express our serious concern regarding reports by local and international NGOs, as well as UN human rights mechanisms, regarding serious and systematic violations of human rights in the Western Sahara under Moroccan occupation. We recommend the following:
1. Allowing all international organisations and observers to visit Western Sahara.
2. Avoid any economic activities or the exploitation of resources in Western Sahara without the formal approval of the people of the Western Sahara, in line with international law.
3. Ending the Moroccan occupation of the Western Sahara in line with UN documents.’
Ireland
‘Take all necessary measures to ensure respect for the human rights of all people in Western Sahara, including human rights defenders, through enhanced cooperation with OHCHR and via facilitating monitoring measures’
Luxembourg
‘To respect the human rights of the Saharawis, including their right to self-determination, and allow the High Commissioner access to Western Sahara’
Namibia
‘The right to self-determination is formally established in international law. Notwithstanding this fact, the kingdom of Morocco continues to illegally occupy Western Sahara. To add insult to injury, some States in breach of their erga omnes obligations continue to recognise the illegal occupation. Given this injustice, Namibia makes the following recommendations for implementation by Morocco:
1. Enable the people of Western Sahara to exercise their right to self-determination through a free, fair and transparent referendum administered by the UN.
2. Respect the right of the people of Western Sahara to enjoy and utilize fully and freely their natural resources. In conclusion, we call on all states to refrain from recognising the illegal occupation. It is a sad reality that some states have chosen economic expediency over well-established principles of international law.’
South Africa
‘Allow an independent assessment of the human rights situation in Western Sahara and lift all measures limiting movement of Saharawi Human Rights Defenders and journalists’
Timor Leste
‘enable the people of Western Sahara to exercise their right to self-determination through a democratic referendum’
End Violence Against Saharawi Women
A 16 day-long campaign shed light on violence committed against women in occupied Western Sahara.
To commemorate the International Day on the Elimination of Violence against Women, a collective of Saharawi women human rights defenders and NGOs ran a campaign to shed international light on decades of systematic physical and psychological violence against indigenous Saharawi women by Morocco inside occupied Western Sahara.
The collective shared 16 short stories of courageous Saharawi women living under occupation on social media and is available to download from this folder. The folder also includes information about Western Sahara, a territory closed to international human rights monitors and media, and the human rights situation of Saharawi women.
"All Saharawis including women are subjected to violence because we have a common demand: the independence of our country, and our right for self-determination", states Mahfouda Lefkir an ex political prisoner from Western Sahara and one of the sixteen women sharing their stories of gender violence.
The campaign's main goals are to expose Morocco's human rights violations against Saharawi women, to support the women's peaceful struggle for freedom and to appeal to the international community to show solidarity with Saharawi women, whose struggle has received very little international attention. Some of the women involved in the campaign are family members of political prisoners sentenced to long-term imprisonment. Others have family members that were assassinated or subjected to enforced disappearance, and some were disappeared themselves. All have suffered gender-based violence as punishment for their human rights activism and support for the right to self-determination for the people of Western Sahara.
Poetics of Diplomacy
Joanna Allan’s "Poetics of Diplomacy" project is funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. On the one hand, it involves research into the historic relationship between poetry and diplomacy in the Saharawi case (in negotiating peace between tribes, for example) and how this has evolved to the present day, in which we see new Saharawi poetry reflecting on the return to war and the failed UN peace process. On the other hand, the project focuses on promoting public engagement with Saharawi poetry in the UK and in other Anglophone countries. Joanna is recording Saharawi poets reciting their works and life histories for a Special Collection in the British Library Sound Archive, inspired by Violeta Ruano's earlier work archiving Saharawi music. She is also connecting Saharawi poets with UK poetry and literary organisations. For example, two Saharawi poets involved in the project will be party of the Poetry Translation Centre’s upcoming Winter workshops series.
Joanna is working with a Saharawi poet to translate all works featured in the project into English, and will be creating and sharing teaching resources with the aim of encouraging Hispanic Studies lecturers to include the Saharawi oral tradition on their syllabi in the UK and US. In July, she will host an international conference on Spanish-speaking African cultures at Northumbria University. It will be free and online. For more information, please email Joanna (joanna.allan@northumbria.ac.uk) or follow the project’s Twitter account, which will soon link to the project website with details on the conference, poetry translations and life history recordings.
Комментарии