Think Forward.

Elections sud-africaines: changement ou continuité... 1089

C’est acté, l’ANC a beaucoup perdu lors des élections sud-africaines de 2024, contrairement à toutes celles d’avant où elle trônait sans rivalité notoire. La rente mémorielle et le populisme au goût de luttes contre toutes sortes de chimères, les promesses, jamais tenues par ailleurs, n’ont plus suffit pour amadouer les masses et les faire voter pour ceux qui aujourd’hui sont plutôt tenus pour être responsables de ce que bon nombre de sudafricains ressentent comme une trahison. Les résultats confirment aujourd’hui la débâcle du parti au pouvoir depuis Mandela. L’ANC de Ramaphosa est toujours le premier parti du pays certes mais il est lourdement sanctionné avec seulement 40% des votes. C’est une perte sèche de 17 points par rapport aux élections de 2019. Celles-ci annonçaient déjà la débâcle d’aujourd’hui. Pour les africains du sud. Les résultats des élections de 2019 étaient déjà une sorte d’alarme…Mais cela n’a pas suffi pour le réveil attendu, pour une prise de conscience que quelque chose devait changer. De ce fait les élections législatives sud-africaines de cette année resteront dans les annales politiques du pays, certains interprétant les résultats comme étant l’expression d’un ras le bol du système politique imposé depuis 1994 par l’ANC. Les résultats aujourd’hui obtenus imposeraient une cohabitation et c’est plutôt inédit, l’ANC ayant gouverné sans partage depuis1994. La question et de savoir avec qui elle va s’opérer cette coalition ? Beaucoup pencheraient à penser qu’elle se fera avec Zuma ; multi récidiviste moult fois condamné, il a su aller reprendre en main et raviver les nostalgiques de la lutte à savoir le bras armé de l’ANC…Umkhonto we Sizwe…dit MK. Ce "nouveau parti" a réussi à glaner 14.9 % des voix, se plaçant à la troisième place. S’il ralliait l’ANC cela donnerait en fait au même parti, avec ces deux mouvances, une majorité confortable d’un peu plus de 55%, soit un score assez proche de celui de l'ANC en 2019 qui était de quelques 57%. Si cette coalition se faisait, alors l’Afrique du Sud n’aura pas changé et l’ANC aura cinq années soit pour réformer le pays et le remettre sur les rails, soit pour l’enliser davantage dans les problématiques économiques et sociales. Les séparatistes de la région du Cap qui estiment que le pays ne peut pas être sauvé auraient davantage possibilité de se faire entendre. Les scandales de corruption du parti au pouvoir avec tout récemment celui de l’ancienne présidente de l’Assemblée nationale, Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula ont certes pesé mais pas au point d’apporter un changement radical. Jacob Zuma président de 2009 à 2018, jugé coupable est aujourd’hui de retour par la fenêtre avec le soutien de la branche armée de l’ANC… C’est dire qu’une partie de la société n’est point sensible au scandale et vote par appartenance plutôt que pour le respect de la moralité, quand il s’agit d’exercice du pouvoir. Cyril Ramaphosa, président sortant est plutôt certain, selon ses dires, d’obtenir la majorité car il voit mal l’ensemble des oppositions se mettre du même côté et refuser la majorité à l’ANC. C’est dire que rien ne va changer dans les faits. La question est alors de savoir si cette nouvelle situation de coalition va trouver les bonnes réponses pour la question du chômage endémique par exemple ? Le taux de participation de l’ordre de 60% sur les 27 millions de personnes appelées aux urnes est quasiment le plus bas depuis le début de l’expérience politique actuelle du pays arc en ciel. C’est un autre indice de désamour entre les 62 millions d’habitants et leur modèle politique qui ne les rassure plus pour leur avenir. La fuite du capital vers les pays limitrophes est un gros indice de ce désamour. Les jours à venir risquent d’apporter leur lot de surprises mais seront-elles de tailles à surprendre vraiment ? Voici les résultats définitifs de ces élections • ANC 40.18, • Alliance démocratique (DA) 21.82 • Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) 14.59 • Combattants pour la liberté économique (EFF) 9.49 • Parti Inkhata de la liberté (IFP) 3.86 • Alliance patriotique (PA) 2.06 • Front de la liberté (VF) 1.36 • ActionSA 1.18 • Parti chrétien démocrate africain (ACDP) 0.60 • Mouvement démocratique uni (UDM) .049 Vous aurez remarqué que trois partis sur les 10 ayant obtenu des voix, ont le mot liberté dans leurs appellations et que trois se revendiquent démocrates…Ce ci en dit long sur les attentes de ce peuple sud-africain et sur ses rêves. Dans tous les cas, ces élections auront un impact sur l'histoire du pays et des répercussions sur l'ensemble du continent. L'Afrique du Sud est actuellement la deuxième économie d'Afrique.
Aziz Daouda

Aziz Daouda

Directeur Technique et du Développement de la Confédération Africaine d'Athlétisme. Passionné du Maroc, passionné d'Afrique. Concerné par ce qui se passe, formulant mon point de vue quand j'en ai un. Humaniste, j'essaye de l'être, humain je veux l'être. Mon histoire est intimement liée à l'athlétisme marocain et mondial. J'ai eu le privilège de participer à la gloire de mon pays .


6200

33.0

The Polisario Front Confronted with Increasing Accusations: Moving Towards Being Designated as a Terrorist Organization 41

For several years now, the Polisario Front, a separatist movement supported and armed, as everyone knows, by Algeria, which has provided it with an entire territory in the Tindouf area, has been at the center of a growing international controversy. In the United States, Japan, and Europe, voices are rising to have this group officially classified as a terrorist organization. This shift is based on tangible evidence of its links with actors qualified as terrorists, its involvement in violent actions, but also on a network of international alliances that go beyond the regional framework. While Algeria, Iran, and Hezbollah are often cited as the main supporters of the Polisario, as well as South Africa, Cuba has also played a historic and decisive role in the military and logistical training of separatist fighters. As early as 1977, under the impetus of Fidel Castro and at the request of Algeria, a tripartite military agreement was signed between Cuba, Algeria, and the Polisario, paving the way for intensive cooperation. This agreement allowed the sending of many separatist fighters to Cuba to receive specialized military training. Dedicated military schools were created on the island, where Polisario recruits were trained in guerrilla tactics, special operations, and military logistics. A Cuban delegation even went to Tindouf in 1988 to study Moroccan defenses and help develop strategies to breach the defense wall erected by the Kingdom. Cuba also provided naval logistical support, notably in the waters near the Canary Islands, where Cuban ships were involved in operations to facilitate Polisario infiltrations. Between 1975 and 1991, Cuba delivered to the Polisario a significant arsenal including assault rifles, mortars, rocket launchers, and ammunition, thus strengthening its military capabilities. Even after the 1991 ceasefire, Cuba maintained its support, continuing to train warriors especially in special operations. The last known class trained in Cuba dates back to 2003. More recently, six-month training courses have been given to groups of about forty separatists, focused on special forces tactics. Moreover, for a long period, damning testimonies report the kidnapping of children from the Tindouf camps, sometimes as young as 9 years old, to send them to Cuba on a "youth island" under high military surveillance. They undergo intensive military training mixed with strong political indoctrination. These children, isolated from their families, are trained to become soldiers in the service of the Polisario, under conditions denounced as inhumane by witnesses and former detainees. Some recent signals suggest a possible repositioning of Havana. Indeed, at the 2019 Non-Aligned Movement summit, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel omitted any reference to the Polisario, marking a break with the tradition of support displayed by Fidel and Raúl Castro. This evolution could reflect a diplomatic realignment, notably after the resumption of diplomatic relations between Morocco and Cuba in 2017, relations broken for nearly 37 years due to Cuban support for the Polisario. However, to date, the aforementioned tripartite agreement has not yet been repealed. Cuba's role is part of a larger network of Polisario alliances. Algeria, the main political and military supporter, continues to arm and shelter the movement. Iran, through Hezbollah, provides military and logistical support, notably also training fighters and delivering sophisticated weapons. This is well documented. There are also hundreds of Polisario mercenaries captured in Syria, where they operated alongside Assad's army, reinforcing the image of a group involved in international terrorist conflicts. On the ground, the Polisario is also accused of violence against civilians in southern Morocco. The missiles launched against the city of Smara bear witness to this, in addition to the blockage of the strategic Guerguerat passage. The sequestration of Sahrawi populations in the Tindouf camps, where it refuses, with Algerian support, any official census, is another proof of the true nature of the movement. Faced with these elements, several American, European, and Asian political leaders advocate for the Polisario Front to be quickly listed as a terrorist organization. American Congressman Joe Wilson has proposed a bill to this effect, denouncing the use of the Polisario by Algeria and its accomplices to destabilize the Kingdom of Morocco, a long-standing strategic ally of the United States in the region. This eminent designation would deal a major blow to Algeria, which seems tireless in supporting the Polisario for nearly 50 years, while it simply costs the country development. It would further strengthen Morocco's position on the international stage, notably after the American recognition in 2020 of Moroccan sovereignty over its southern provinces, that of Spain, France, the recent one of the United Kingdom, and many other African and Latin American countries. The historical, military, and educational support of Cuba, combined with the role played by Algeria, Iran, and Hezbollah, places the Polisario in a network of actors with manifest destabilizing and terrorist activities. The rise in calls for its classification as a terrorist organization fits into a logic of regional and international security, requiring a coordinated response to restore stability in North Africa, the Sahel, and beyond. This page must be quickly turned for the good of the populations of the entire region

A Major Geopolitical Transformation in the Middle East 139

The Middle East is undergoing a major geopolitical transformation, marked by a strategic realignment between Israel, the United States, and the Gulf powers. These latter, long marginalized from traditional alliances or subjected to them, are now asserting themselves as indispensable actors on the political, economic, and military stage, reshaping balances once considered historic and immutable. Since its creation in 1948, Israel has been the main Western ally in the Middle East, notably of the United States, which initially opposed its establishment, in a region marked by recurring conflicts. Its expansionist and influential policies, supported by Washington, have long crystallized tensions with several Arab countries and armed groups. However, this belligerent stance now seems contested, both by its neighbors and some of its traditional allies. In any case, it is widely disapproved of and even condemned by civil society everywhere. This cannot last. The most notable evolution in the region has come from the Gulf monarchies. After decades of hostility, they initiated a historic rapprochement with Israel, formalized by the Abraham Accords in 2020, under American impetus. These accords, signed notably by the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, opened the way to strengthened cooperation, especially against Iranian influence, while fostering unprecedented economic and technological exchanges. The monarchies that did not sign these accords also have no qualms about dealing with Israel. Strong relations are also often mentioned between the Israeli state and Turkey, especially since it has been governed by Erdogan, a champion of Islamism. In this rapidly changing context, the United States has gradually reoriented its regional policy, focusing more on the Gulf monarchies, which offer political stability, financial power, and strategic positioning. The American military presence in the region, notably at the Al-Udeid base in Qatar, illustrates this new reality. During the 2025 American tour of the Middle East, nearly two trillion dollars in investments were announced, particularly in defense, technology, and artificial intelligence sectors. At the same time, Washington seems to adopt a more nuanced stance towards Israel, especially in the framework of negotiations with Iran, reflecting a diversification of regional alliances. Despite its military weight, Israel is gradually losing its exclusive influence, increasingly perceived as a source of tension. The current policies of Netanyahu’s cabinet, leading to a near-genocide in Gaza, do not help matters. Unlike previous decades, Arab countries, especially those in the Gulf, no longer systematically respond to Israeli provocations with force. Current leaders favor a pragmatic approach, now distinguishing the Palestinian cause from the actions of armed groups like Hamas. This evolution marks a turning point compared to the belligerent attitudes of past military regimes, which over time became de facto allies of the Zionist cause. Hassan II, a visionary, once said on this subject, "Hatred of Israel and the Jew is the most powerful aphrodisiac in the Arab-Muslim world." The Gulf monarchies, long proponents of a moderate discourse favorable to dialogue, are now imposing themselves as regional models of stability and cooperation with the West, as well as with Asian powers. Israel’s traditional role as the pivot of Western interests in the Middle East seems to be eroding in favor of a dynamic where Gulf monarchies take center stage. The multiplication of conflicts and the perception of an increasingly isolated Israel on the international stage—albeit mostly among populations—weakens its position. Europe, while hesitant, shows a hardening of tone towards Israeli actions, notably after recent incidents in the West Bank where diplomats were targeted by heavy fire from the Israeli army. This change in attitude can only strengthen the legitimacy of the Gulf monarchies as reliable partners for the West, as guarantors of regional stability and calm. The recent organization of a global conference on the Palestinian issue in Morocco, a signatory of the Abraham Accords and co-chaired by the Netherlands, illustrates this new dynamic. It is worth noting again that Morocco is a strategic ally of the Gulf monarchies, linked by multiple agreements, including defense. The words of Moroccan Foreign Minister Nacer Bourita are clear about the need to condemn all extremisms—implicitly Hamas extremism but also that of the current Israeli government. This discourse symbolizes hope for political renewal in the region, emphasizing respect for international law and the only possible solution: two states living side by side. This is also the position of France, whose president no longer hesitates to speak of recognizing the Palestinian state, making it a key element in his discussions during his many foreign visits. Addicted to blood and violence, Netanyahu no longer hesitates to accuse President Macron of crusading against the Jewish state. Excuse me? The Israeli leader is deeply wounded and has no plausible argument except to hide behind his own definition of antisemitism, which he throws around indiscriminately. It must be said that repeated American vetoes at the Security Council somewhat reinforce his delusion. Israel’s disproportionate reaction following the senseless Hamas attacks has become counterproductive for the Jewish state. As it seems to lose its role as the undisputed leader of Western interests in the region, the Gulf monarchies appear as the new stabilizers and promoters of peace in the Middle East. This geopolitical reshuffling could well redefine the balance of power in a region marked by incessant conflicts. The strong interconnection of the American economy with these countries, in light of the latest announced investments, will inscribe this emerging situation in a stable and likely lasting perspective. Israeli voters would do well to understand this quickly. At the next election, they should definitively rid themselves of these zealots who have only death on their lips and the extermination of a legitimate people as their goal.