Moroccan Sahara: De Mistura's Statement, A Diplomatic Turning Point or a Headlong Rush
91
The UN Secretary-General's Personal Envoy for "Western" Sahara, Staffan de Mistura, made a statement in Italian, his most comfortable language for expressing emotions, that was remarkably frank. His tone, unusual for a diplomat, was direct and unambiguous. In essence, he said that the Moroccan Sahara conflict is not a "decolonization" issue but rather an indirect confrontation between Morocco and Algeria. He thus broke a diplomatic taboo and deconstructed a narrative sustained for fifty years with billions of dollars by a military regime from another era, which projects its frustrations and shortcomings onto this conflict. For the first time, a UN emissary publicly said what researchers, diplomats, and observers have been repeating behind closed doors for nearly half a century.
Since the Green March in 1975, the Sahara question has been marked by two irreconcilable narratives. Morocco rightly considers this territory an integral part of its territorial integrity. History and geography prove this. This position is now supported by Washington, Paris, Madrid, London, most Arab countries, and nearly 110 other UN member states. Morocco, acting in good faith for decades, has spared no effort to find common ground with its eastern neighbor. Tired of Algeria's chronic and toxic animosity, Morocco proposed an autonomy plan for the region in 2007, within the framework of its sovereignty. Since then, nearly the entire international community views this proposal as the only feasible one. In reality, it is the only one on the table: the opposing party has never offered a credible solution apart from the partition of Morocco.
Algeria, meanwhile, supports its proxy, the Polisario Front, militarily, diplomatically, and financially, while denying direct involvement in the conflict. Algeria continues to call for a self-determination referendum that has become unrealistic as demographic, political, and security balances have shifted. It is worth recalling that Algeria deliberately obstructed a referendum that King Hassan II himself had proposed.
Until now, the UN had maintained a façade of neutrality, speaking of a "political process" under its aegis. But everyone knew that behind the polished phrases, this was a strategic power struggle between Rabat and Algiers.
In this context, how should De Mistura’s comments be understood, if not as a calculated move ahead of a crucial Security Council meeting? This time, it came after several powers, notably the United States, France, and the United Kingdom, openly supported Morocco’s autonomy initiative.
Two interpretations are possible:
- Is it pressure on Algeria to publicly acknowledge its central role? De Mistura thus pushes Algeria to take responsibility and abandon its comfortable posture as a "mere observer."
- Is it a recognition of impotence? The Italian diplomat implicitly acknowledges that the UN has failed to impose a solution, and that the outcome now depends on a political power balance within the Security Council.
In either case, Algeria stands more contradictory than ever.
For fifty years, Algiers has contributed to freezing the conflict, at great cost:
- A lasting blockage of Maghreb integration, depriving North Africa of vital economic integration;
- Eroding regional opportunities in energy, trade, and collective security;
- A burden on the international community, with a UN mission (MINURSO) unable to fulfill its mandate, but whose funding and costs continue indefinitely.
This policy has gradually isolated Algeria diplomatically, while Rabat gains increasing support, especially after the US recognized Morocco’s sovereignty over the territory in 2020.
Are we finally moving toward a historical clarification? The central question now is whether the Security Council is ready to take a step forward. Two options present themselves:
- Fully endorse the Moroccan approach, recognizing the autonomy plan as the only serious negotiation basis;
- Or maintain the diplomatic fiction of a decolonization process, risking prolonging a conflict that undermines the UN’s credibility and regional stability.
By confronting Algeria with its responsibilities, De Mistura has changed the tone of the debate. Even if his gesture can be read as a sign of frustration or a last warning, it has the merit of bringing political reality back to the forefront.
The future of Western Sahara no longer depends on technical reports or ambiguous language: it requires clear political will. Sooner or later, that will must end a costly historical anomaly in the Maghreb, Africa, and the world, which also weakens the credibility of the multilateral system.
Staffan de Mistura has gone further than his predecessors. At the very least, he deserves the medal of candor.
The Security Council will no longer read the question the same way and must change course, the wind has definitively turned.
Share:
Moroccan Sahara: De Mistura's Statement, A Diplomatic Turning Point or a Headlong Rush
copy:
https://bluwr.com/p/385062716
Moroccans’ Relationship to the Law: A Great Misunderstanding…
431
The relationship between Moroccans and the law reveals a profound ambiguity, fueled by a build-up of paradoxes and historical, cultural, and political contradictions. It cannot be explained solely by a lack of communication or pedagogy, but by a deeply rooted perception in which the law is not seen as a collective framework to be respected out of conviction, but as an external constraint, often imposed and rarely internalized.
First, one must highlight the ignorance—sometimes deliberate—of the very existence of many laws. In numerous cases, the Moroccan citizen only discovers a text when it is opposed to them in a conflictual situation. This reactive, rather than proactive, relationship with the law generates paradoxical behaviors: resigned acceptance when it imposes itself forcefully, but also recourse to excuses, justifications, or feigned ignorance whenever its application becomes restrictive.
To this lack of knowledge is added an ambivalent attitude: the law is respected not out of moral adherence, but out of fear of sanction. Road traffic provides the clearest illustration: the presence of a police officer results in scrupulous respect for the code, while their absence unleashes anarchic behavior. In other words, authority substitutes for civic conviction.
But the problem does not lie solely in individual behavior. The legal framework itself suffers from a lack of updating and adaptation. Many Moroccan laws are inherited from a bygone era, conceived in another social context, and struggle to address today’s realities. The legislative process, too slow and often opaque, widens the gap between texts and citizens’ aspirations. Public debates on bills are rare, if not nonexistent, and civil society finds only a marginal place in them. This democratic shortfall is compounded by the chronic passivity of political parties and the decline of union membership, depriving the public arena of genuine contradictory debate. The situation is also aggravated by the language issue: when debates do take place, laws are written, discussed, published, and applied in a language that is not the everyday language of Moroccans.
Added to this is the perception of institutional inefficiency: a parliament marked by a lack of competence and seriousness, a political elite sometimes disconnected, and local authorities unable to translate citizens’ needs into effective texts and decisions. Thus, some laws appear disconnected—or even foreign—to social realities. They sometimes criminalize harmless behaviors that harm neither the individual nor the community, but instead reflect the imposition of a conservative morality at the expense of individual freedom. Religious morality is never far away. Hence the crucial question: where does law end and morality begin? And above all, what place should ethics have in the governance of a country in transition, a country aspiring to development and modernity and making colossal efforts in that direction?
Faced with these gaps, citizens develop strategies of adaptation, sometimes of survival. The law becomes flexible, respected or not depending on the situation, depending on the eye of authority. Respect is no longer a conviction but a calculation. But can one demand respect for a law perceived as illegitimate, useless, or unjust? Can texts be maintained in force when the majority of citizens systematically bypass them, and even the agents charged with enforcing them transgress them individually?
This ambiguous relationship is built from childhood, in the transmission of social norms. A child learns at school that alcohol is forbidden out of respect for religion and the law, but at home or nearby sees it consumed casually. They are taught respect for the traffic code, but their father runs red lights whenever the police are not around. This contradictory education creates lasting confusion between proclaimed values and lived practices, reinforcing the idea that the law is not a universal rule but a contextual constraint. Thus emerges a sense of fear rather than respect for laws, a belief that they are meant for others and not oneself; a perception that the law is imposed rather than serving to protect everyone’s rights.
Social networks and certain public voices, as YouTuber Maysa recently did, contribute to exposing these inconsistencies. In a video, she highlighted the multiple Moroccan laws that, although still in force, are almost never applied. This illustrates an implicit permissiveness that undermines the credibility of the rule of law. A law that exists without being enforced becomes a mere symbol, even an instrument of arbitrary selectivity. It should at the very least be revised.
Law is not meant to be a mere tool of control, much less an end in itself. It must enable social harmony, protect freedoms, and regulate collective life. It must evolve with its time, reflect society’s aspirations, and avoid imposing outdated modes of thought. Today, Moroccans have changed, their lifestyles have evolved, but the legal framework and collective mentality remain frozen in old representations. Many openly speak of “social hypocrisy,” denouncing the double language between words and deeds in public, between official discourse and actual practices.
Breaking out of this ambiguity requires a twofold shift: on the one hand, a bold legal reform that adapts laws to social realities and contemporary values; on the other, an effort of awareness-raising and education to reconcile citizens with the law. This transformation can only succeed if Moroccans agree to break with the social ambivalence and split personality that corrode daily behaviors.
Reflection on the relationship between Moroccan citizens and the law thus opens a broader field: that of ethics, social evolution, and modernization of the legal framework. A state of law cannot thrive without collective adherence, and a society cannot be built on rules that everyone strives to circumvent. Restoring the law’s legitimacy and credibility is to lay the foundations for a more coherent, just, and respected coexistence.
Judging from the clashes around the *Moudawana* and other legislative projects—between the Minister of Justice and certain parliamentarians of a political current that sees itself as guardian of the temple—it seems difficult to move forward at the necessary speed in today’s world.
Share:
Moroccans’ Relationship to the Law: A Great Misunderstanding…
copy:
https://bluwr.com/p/382246716
Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa
666
Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim (1486–1535) was a German polymath, physician, soldier, and occult philosopher whose writings laid the intellectual foundations for much of the Western esoteric tradition. He is best known for his magnum opus, *De Occulta Philosophia Libri Tres* (Three Books of Occult Philosophy), a comprehensive synthesis of magic, Kabbalah, Neoplatonism, Hermeticism, and Christian mysticism. In Agrippa, the currents of the Renaissance—scientific curiosity, classical revival, and spiritual yearning—converged in a deep and somewhat controversial body of work.
Born in Cologne in 1486, Agrippa was educated in classical literature, theology, and law, but he also immersed himself in the esoteric arts—alchemy, astrology, angelology, and ceremonial magic. He traveled widely across Europe, engaging with scholars, nobility, and religious authorities. He often served as a physician and lecturer, while simultaneously pursuing his deeper passion for the hidden structure of reality that he believed could be revealed through magickal philosophy.
Agrippa was a direct student and correspondent of Johannes Trithemius (1462-1516), the abbot of Sponheim and a key figure in early modern magical and cryptographic studies. Trithemius, known for his own influential work *Steganographia*, served as a mentor who inspired Agrippa’s lifelong pursuit of hidden knowledge and spiritual science. He also encouraged Agrippa to refine his ideas on occult philosophy into a systematic form, which would later become *De Occulta Philosophia*.
In *De Occulta Philosophia*, Agrippa organizes magick into three interconnected worlds:
1) The Elemental world, governed by natural philosophy and the powers of the four elements (earth, water, air, fire).
2) The Celestial world, influenced by the movements of the stars and planets—i.e., astrology.
3) The Intellectual or Divine world, ruled by angelic hierarchies, divine archetypes, and the mysteries of the Kabbalah.
For Agrippa, true magick was not superstition but a sacred science, a means by which the human soul could ascend through the created order toward union with the divine. He viewed the magician not as a manipulator of forces for selfish ends, but as a philosopher-priest who, through study, virtue, and divine illumination, could harmonize with the cosmos and act as a mediator between heaven and earth.
Yet Agrippa’s life was marked by tension and contradiction. He often ran into problems with church authorities, accused of heresy or subversion. In his later years, he published *De Incertitudine et Vanitate Scientiarum* (On the Uncertainty and Vanity of the Sciences), a scathing critique of dogmatic knowledge, including his own magickal writings—though many scholars interpret this as rhetorical irony or spiritual disillusionment rather than renunciation.
Agrippa died in 1535, likely in Grenoble. Though seen by some as a charlatan and heretic, his influence endures until today. His Occult Philosophy became a cornerstone of Renaissance magic, shaping later figures like John Dee, Giordano Bruno, and Eliphas Levi. Even modern Hermetic and ceremonial traditions—such as the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn—owe much to Agrippa’s system of correspondences and metaphysical cosmology.
Nowadays, Agrippa is recognized not merely as a magician, but as a pioneer of symbolic thought, a bridge between medieval mysticism and modern esotericism. His work continues to guide and inspire those who seek the hidden harmonies of the universe—through reason, reverence, and the transformative power of the imagination.
Share:
Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa
copy:
https://bluwr.com/p/380966293
Perfect Imperfection
782
She has beautiful imperfection
The right kind of right
The sad song played happily when the black dog critic cries here after her Fragility and lies from un-cropped truth- this is something entirely surreal Hold on to embrace her necessity, and life gives life to her again
The failed faucets of memories are for the taking- hurry up, love and let’s start to make mementos
See the seas to sight and songs played loudly, quiet between the space of us
I am trust and bare bones, I see the perfect imperfection in passing lines formed on your face
Imperfection by society's eyes and mouth, unmoved and unbreakable determination - you make the bitter taste sweet.
You are perfect imperfection.
Share:
Perfect Imperfection
copy:
https://bluwr.com/p/380196483
