UN correspondence with POLISARIO leader Mohamed Abdelaziz

On 5 May 2001, I met with your Personal Envoy, Mr. James A. Baker III, with whom I discussed his efforts to achieve a just and definitive settlement of the conflict in Western Sahara. During our meeting, I reiterated the importance that we attach to the United Nations and Organization of African Unity (OAU) Settlement Plan, which has been accepted by the two parties and endorsed by the international community and which calls for the holding of a free, fair and impartial referendum for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara; this is the only means of achieving a just solution to the conflict which has pitted the Sahrawi people against the Kingdom of Morocco for a quarter of a century.

I also reaffirmed to your Personal Envoy our total opposition to any solution that would ignore the inalienable right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination and independence, as enshrined in the relevant United Nations resolutions and in international law, and that would ultimately lead to the legitimation of the existing colonial domination of Western Sahara.

Aware of the obstacles to the implementation of the Settlement Plan, which have existed for some time and are attributable solely to the Kingdom of Morocco, and in reply to the Security Council’s appeal to the parties to “resolve the multiple problems relating to the implementation of the Settlement Plan” (Security Council resolution 1349 (2001) of 27 April 2001), the Frente POLISARIO has agreed to make further concessions and to submit proposals with a view to restarting the process of implementing the Settlement Plan.

To that end, I have instructed Mr. M’hamed Khadad, my Special Envoy, to submit detailed proposals to you and your Personal Envoy in the firm belief that they will help to facilitate your and Mr. Baker’s renewed efforts to expedite the holding of the long-awaited referendum on self-determination.

I am writing to your Excellency to inform you that I charged Mr. M’hamed Khadad to present to your Excellency our proposals aimed at overcoming the obstacles hindering the continuation of the implementation of the settlement plan.

I frankly continue to believe that the unique and credible way for a lasting resolution of the conflict remains the implementation of the peace plan despite all the difficulties and doubts created by the Moroccan attitude. For that purpose and after our last meeting of 5 May 2001, I am confident that our proposals will be taken as a sincere effort to contribute to your efforts to move forward the peace process which is the way that got the support of the two parties and of the international community.

These proposals are dealing with:
1. The appeals issue
2. The repatriation of refugees
3. The respect of the outcome of the referendum
4. Humanitarian issues and confidence-building measures
5. Post-referendum guarantees

This stage comes before the publication of the final list of voters. An earlier compromise was reached through the May 1999 protocols, which have defined clear and detailed rules to deal with the appeals requests:

(a) By indicating two different stages: admissibility and in-depth examination of the issue;

(b) By defining the means of proof for the applicant and the assessment by the appeals section. Between July 1999 and February 2000, the Identification Commission of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) received 131,000 appeals, 95 per cent of which were lodged by candidates presented by Morocco.

The Frente POLISARIO is ready to accept that the Commission, within the framework of the appeals process, examine the requests made by those who reached 18 years of age after 31 December 1993 and whose fathers have been declared as voters by the Identification Commission.

(a) Only those refugees who were accepted as voters (and their immediate family) are concerned by the repatriation;

(b) Other Sahrawi living abroad, even if they are not refugees, are concerned by the repatriation since they are listed as voters. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is in charge to carry out the repatriation operation in accordance with its practice in the matter. UNHCR practices in this matter are understood to be the respect of the free choice made by the refugees themselves regarding both the principle of repatriation and the point of destination.

(b) The Frente POLISARIO leaves to the Security Council the responsibility for the conduct and supervision of the implementation of the settlement plan from its approval up until the holding of the referendum itself. The Council has, according to chapters VI and VII of the Charter of the United Nations, the authority, the prerogative and the necessary means for the accomplishment of its mandate and to ensure respect for the results of the referendum. The Security Council could also, when authorizing the full deployment of the military component of MINURSO, envisage that the strength, duration and mandate of the Mission may be adapted in order to ensure a peaceful and ordered transfer of the administration of the Territory.

(b) Regarding the prisoners of war, the political detainees and the disappeared persons, the Frente POLISARIO reaffirms its availability once the referendum process is resumed to take further measures concerning the Moroccan prisoners of war, provided that Morocco takes similar measures regarding the Sahrawi political detainees, disappeared persons and prisoners of war, whose whereabouts are unknown to their families;

(c) In this connection, respect for human rights in the Territory and its opening to humanitarian organizations and foreign media, as well as the exchange of visits of families separated by the Moroccan military berm, will contribute to the building up of confidence between the parties and will create a climate conducive for the implementation of the settlement plan in a serene and ordered manner.

1. The proposals submitted by the Frente POLISARIO to overcome the obstacles in the implementation of the settlement plan address five issues: the appeals process; the repatriation of refugees; respect for the outcome of the referendum; humanitarian issues and confidence-building measures; and post-referendum guarantees.

2. The proposals raise a number of difficulties and questions, which can be divided into three sets: (a) some proposals, while offering concessions (such as by allowing the examination of all appeals received, as well as of applications by those born after 31 January 1993), attach certain conditions thereto; (b) other proposals would require action by the Security Council; and (c) some others are imprecise, and would require further clarification. Overall, some of these proposals seek to provide technical solutions, but they do not address the main problem with the implementation of the settlement plan as a whole, namely the United Nations inability to implement any measures unless both parties agree to cooperate (S/24646, para. 55).

4. The Frente POLISARIO also accepts that, in the framework of the appeals process, the Commission could examine the requests for identification of those who reached 18 years of age after 31 December 1993 (closing date for applying to be identified), as long as their father was accepted as a voter by the Identification Commission. However, Morocco’s position in this regard is that all those Saharans who reached 18 years of age after 31 December 1993 but were not included in the identification process must be identified.

6. In this connection, the settlement plan provides that it is the Special Representative who will decide that security conditions for the safe return of Saharan refugees eligible to vote and their immediate families are met and that the existing (Moroccan) police forces will be responsible for the maintenance of law and order “closely monitored by the MINURSO Civil Police” (S/21360, paras. 67 and 68). The Frente POLISARIO’s past insistence that the refugees be repatriated east of the berm was based on the conviction that these particular provisions did not respond adequately to their security concerns. POLISARIO’s position was also based on the claim that refugees should freely choose to repatriate to whichever location in the Territory they wished, including east of the berm, although no permanent settlement or infrastructure has existed in that area.

7. By conceding that the refugees can be repatriated west of the berm, the Frente POLISARIO seems to have modified its position on two issues. First, it appears to be ready to accept the determination to be made by the Special Representative regarding security conditions in the Territory. Second, POLISARIO also appears ready to accept the standard practice whereby all refugees are normally expected to return to their places of origin (for the vast majority of the Saharan refugees, these are located west of the berm, as illustrated by the names of the four Tindouf camps - El-Aiun, Dakhla, Smara and Ausard, which correspond to the names of towns west of the berm).

8. However, it is not clear from the above whether the Frente POLISARIO is no longer concerned that the Moroccan police forces, closely monitored by the MINURSO civilian police, will continue to maintain law and order in areas of the Territory other than the United Nations premises connected with the referendum and their immediate vicinity, as provided in the settlement plan (S/21360, para. 68). Nor is it clear which, and to what extent, “security conditions” are expected by the Frente POLISARIO to be met, notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs 67 and 68 of S/21360. POLISARIO’s current position would therefore need to be further clarified.

10. The Frente POLISARIO thus conditions its “taking further measures” on the Moroccan prisoners of war that it holds, on Morocco ‘s reciprocal gestures. On 9 October 2000, POLISARIO received from the Special Representative the annotated list with Morocco’s responses on the fate of the 207 presumed Saharan political prisoners and detainees. This list had been compiled by the former Independent Jurist and had received POLISARIO’s endorsement, prior to being given to Morocco for reply. The International Committee of the Red Cross has stated that it has no knowledge of any POLISARIO prisoners of war still held by Morocco. Furthermore, the POLISARIO position is contrary to the settlement plan, which states that the exchange of prisoners of war is to take place as soon as possible after the ceasefire comes into effect (S/22464, para. 18).

12. It is not the first time that the Frente POLISARIO calls on the Security Council to assume the responsibility for implementing the results of the referendum. Since the settlement plan does not provide for an enforcement mechanism, it will be for the Security Council to decide whether or not to adopt a resolution to that effect. As for POLISARIO’s second suggestion, that the Council adapt the strength, duration and mandate of MINURSO, this would require a revision to the settlement plan. Morocco’s agreement would be needed for such a revision, unless it is adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.

13. Finally, the Frente POLISARIO reiterates its readiness, depending on which of the two referendum options envisaged by the settlement plan would prevail, to offer political, economic, social and security guarantees to promote confidence and cooperation between the two parties and in the region.