Think Forward.

Ouarzazate : d’un enclavement logistique à une urgence systémique de développement 50

Aziz Daouda, 1 d.
- Politics - Society - Business -
2.4 min read.
Les professionnels du tourisme et du cinéma à Ouarzazate ont une fois de plus exprimé leur colère avec force et clarté. Ce n’est pas la première fois qu’ils s’insurgent ainsi. À l’inverse, les citoyens murmurent leurs frustrations en sourdine. Même quand ils crient leur bouillonnement, leurs voix semblent bloquées par la hauteur des cimes de l’Atlas. Elles n’arrivent donc pas, ou pas clairement là où il faut. Depuis que Ouarzazate relève de la région d’Errachidia, les autorités et les instances élues régionales se focalisent sur leur ville et ses abords immédiats, reléguant Ouarzazate « de l’autre côté », à l’oubli. Ces cris ne sont donc plus de simples revendications sectorielles. Ils révèlent une crise structurelle multidimensionnelle qui dure depuis longtemps. Au-delà de la connectivité aérienne défaillante, symptôme le plus visible d’un isolement profond, se cache un modèle de développement territorial fragilisé et incohérent. Les professionnels opérant à Ouarzazate disent à qui veut l’entendre que l’attractivité touristique et cinématographique est en péril. Dans une économie mondialisée, la fluidité des flux détermine la compétitivité. L’absence de vols directs depuis les marchés émetteurs européens et nord-américains érode l’attractivité d’Ouarzazate, pilier économique local avec ses deux industries phares : tourisme et cinéma. La dépendance aux hubs de Casablanca ou Marrakech rompt la chaîne de valeur, tandis que l’imprévisibilité logistique rebute les tour-opérateurs et les productions internationales. À cela s’ajoute, faut-il le mentionner, la faiblesse étonnante des liaisons aériennes internes. Cet effet domino frappe l’économie locale. Les hôtels enregistrent une baisse de fréquentation, les marges se compriment, les investissements récents manquent de rentabilité. Les emplois indirects en guides, transporteurs, artisans, et restaurateurs s’en précarisent. Si les tour-opérateurs contournent la destination, les productions cinématographiques optent elles pour des rivaux plus accessibles. Les séjours raccourcissent de façon drastique. Ouarzazate n’est pas rejetée : elle est contournée, ce qui, dans le tourisme, équivaut à une disparition progressive. ### Le paradoxe minier : richesse sans retombées locales Le Sud-Est marocain regorge de ressources minières stratégiques : argent, manganèse, cobalt. Pourtant, la valeur générée échappe au territoire : - Faible redistribution locale : les revenus sont peu réinvestis en infrastructures, emplois qualifiés ou services publics. - Effet d’enclave : les sites miniers sont isolés, sans intégration économique. - Externalités négatives : la pression sur l’eau est très forte, entraînant une dégradation environnementale sans compensation. - Absence de transformation : l’exportation de matières brutes prive la région de chaînes de valeur industrielles. Ainsi, le territoire produit de la richesse sans bâtir son avenir, accentuant un sentiment d’injustice profonde. ### Défis de gouvernance et risques systémiques Sa Majesté le Roi Mohammed VI a maintes fois dénoncé le « Maroc à deux vitesses », pointant des défaillances graves en gouvernance. Pourtant, malgré une valorisation discursive sans précédent: hub cinématographique, porte du désert, Ouarzazate reste mal intégrée dans une stratégie de désenclavement véritable. Où est la coordination entre transports, tourisme et développement territorial ? Pourquoi les infrastructures immatérielles (connectivité, logistique) traînent-elles en comparaison avec d’autres régions du pays ? A-t-on une vision claire du rôle que Ouarzazate peut jouer dans l’économie nationale ? Le déficit criant transforme un potentiel énorme en fragilité. L’image pâtit gravement: accès complexe pour les voyageurs, incertitudes pour les productions. La perception étant un actif clé, une marginalisation silencieuse s’installe ansi, menaçant une sortie des radars internationaux : moins de nuitées touristiques, moins de films, moins d’investissements, moins d’emplois. Un cercle vicieux relègue ce véritable pôle d’excellence en périphérie oubliée. ### Repenser le modèle : leviers pour un développement cohérent L’enjeu dépasse le désenclavement tel que se l’imaginent certains. Il y a lieu de repenser le modèle dans son intégralité : - En faisant participer le secteur minier en levier à des fonds régionaux de développement, aux infrastructures et à la formation. - En créant des synergies entre l’ensemble des secteurs (mines, tourisme, énergie). - En garantissant une redistribution équitable des richesses. - En encourageant les cadres, notamment natifs ou originaires de la région, à s’y installer, à y retourner et à y investir. - En intégrant la région dans une vision nationale cohérente. Sans cela, Ouarzazate continuera à cumuler les paradoxes : - Riche en ressources, pauvre en retombées ; - Visible mondialement, marginalisée localement. À terme, ce n’est plus une crise économique et sociale qui pénalise Ouarzazate et ses habitants, mais une menace pour la cohésion territoriale et la justice tout court. Les cris d’Ouarzazate n’ont d’autre but que de faire prendre conscience de sa crise structurelle ignorée… Jusqu’à quand ?
Aziz Daouda 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 .


10200

33.0

Hassan II Trophy: Fifty Years of History, Memory, and Royal Vision... 77

Aziz Daouda, 4 h.
- Society - Sports -
1.8 min read.
There are anniversaries that are more than mere numbers. They are milestones in a life, landmarks in memory. This 50th edition of the Hassan II Golf Trophy is one of them. And for me, it holds a special flavor: that of half a century of history that I have had the modest privilege of living through. I can still picture myself, young and enthusiastic, assigned by my friend Najib Salmi to cover the very first edition for *L’Opinion*. We didn't yet know we were witnessing the birth of an event destined to span decades and place Morocco on the world map of golf. At the time, the gamble seemed bold. Golf was not a popular sport in Morocco, let alone a vector for international image. But that gamble bore the mark of a vision. That of Hassan II. To put it bluntly: the Hassan II Trophy is not just a sports competition. It is the expression of a strategy. A way, for a visionary sovereign, to anticipate what modern diplomacy would become: a diplomacy of influence, image, cultural and sporting outreach. Hassan II understood, well before many others, that sport could be a universal language. A space where nations meet without rigid protocol, where elites exchange in an informal setting, and where a country's image is built with subtlety. Golf, in particular, offered that prestigious yet discreet dimension, perfectly aligned with his idea of Morocco's positioning. Golf in Morocco had its own tradition and unique flavor, which a certain Winston Churchill regularly came to savor... Over the editions, I watched this trophy grow. From a still-confidential tournament, it became a recognized stop on the international circuit. I saw champions come and go, infrastructure evolve, and organization professionalize. But more than that, I saw a royal intuition proven right, year after year. What strikes me today, looking back, is not just the event's longevity. It is its coherence. Nothing was left to chance. The choice of courses, the quality of hospitality, the attention to detail... all of it meets one demand: to make Morocco a reference. And then there is that human dimension, often overlooked in official reports. The encounters, the chats by the green, the bonds forged over the years. Najib Salmi is no longer here to share this moment, but I know he would have savored it, like me, this continuity. We had begun this adventure almost as curious onlookers; today we see it consecrated. Fifty editions later, the Hassan II Trophy is far more than a tournament. It is a legacy. That of a king whom history will surely remember as one of the greatest of the Alaouite dynasty, not only for his political acumen, but for his ability to see far, very far ahead. Today, the vision is renewed. His Majesty King Mohammed VI has revitalized the approach with vigor, and His Royal Highness Prince Moulay Rachid ensures it translates into reality in the best possible way. And I, a mere chronicler of this long span of time, today measure the privilege of having been there at the beginning... and of still being here to recount its trajectory and savor the spectacle with the pride of a fulfilled citizen living his Moroccan identity.

Moroccan Football: When Spectacle Becomes a Pretext for Confrontation... 264

Aziz Daouda, 1 d.
- Politics - Society - Sports -
2.8 min read.
There was, at the outset, a kind of almost naive optimism. By modernizing infrastructure, offering fans stadiums to international standards, professionalizing organization and hospitality, and shifting to what's now called the "fan experience," many believed Moroccan football would cross a threshold—not just sporting, but civic as well. The idea was simple: by elevating hosting conditions, public behavior would automatically improve. Recent events during FAR–Raja at the Moulay Abdallah Complex brutally contradict this hypothesis. A rude awakening that, naively, no one anticipated. What happened there is neither trivial, nor isolated, nor should it be dismissed as a mere incident. On the contrary, it's the symptom of a deeper malaise that categorically transcends the realm of football. The illusion of infrastructure as a driver of change has simply shattered. Morocco has massively invested in its sports facilities, eyeing continental and international ambitions, and of course a legacy and assets for youth and football. The Moulay Abdallah Complex, a showcase of this policy, is meant to embody this new era, with security, comfort, and organization. Yet these modern infrastructures failed to prevent scenes of violence, vandalism, and clashes. This highlights a fundamental analytical error. Social problems aren't solved by purely material responses. Stadiums aren't airtight bubbles insulated from society's tensions. They often mirror and amplify them. For some time now, they've become the venue and crucible for claims and expressions that go far beyond football. The fundamental question is to open our eyes. Are we dealing with football fans or organized groups, manipulated and spurred on as the spearhead of obscure agendas? Doesn't this echo the methods of the Open Society? It would be misleading to reduce these outbursts to mere "fan excesses." A portion of the crowd in the stands clearly isn't there for the football. In many cases, these are structured groups, mostly young, sometimes very young, who instrumentalize the sports event as a space for violent expression. They themselves are likely manipulated and victimized. The match then becomes a pretext, and the stadium a stage where power struggles unfold that have little to do with the game. Clashes with law enforcement aren't accidental. They're sought, prepared, sometimes even ritualized. Should we see manipulation at play? The question deserves to be asked without naivety. In numerous international contexts, fan movements have been infiltrated, instrumentalized, or co-opted for political, ideological, or criminal ends. Morocco isn't inherently immune to such drifts. Thinking otherwise is ingenuous. Faced with these derailments, another element stands out: the silence of certain clubs. This muteness is, at best, cowardice. At worst, implicit complicity or simply fear of confrontation. Clubs are the first affected. Their image and finances are directly hit by these behaviors. Their moral responsibility is engaged. Yet few take a clear, firm, public stance to condemn these acts and disavow these groups. Why this silence? Fear of losing part of their fan base? Inability to control groups that have become autonomous? Or calculation, viewing these radical fringes as contributors to stadium atmosphere and pressure despite everything? Whatever the reason, this stance is untenable. Clubs can't claim the benefits of popular support, enjoy colossal subsidies and investments at taxpayers' expense, while turning a blind eye to their gravest excesses. Treating them as incidents handed off to security services isn't acceptable. Clubs must speak out, express themselves, disavow, and openly condemn. FAR's leaders have just broken this silence with a statement denouncing what happened. All football clubs and their league likely need to go further. Why not join as civil parties? The image of clubs, football, and the country is severely damaged. This is also a matter of authority and societal project. At bottom, the issue transcends football. It points to a broader stake: authority, youth guidance, and meaning given to collective spaces. When youths use a match to "settle scores," it reveals deficits in integration, benchmarks, and prospects. The stadium becomes an outlet, but also a training ground for confrontation. Action is thus needed, and quickly. Youths all dressed in black eerily recall fascist movements from another era, another world. The response can't be purely securitarian, though necessary. It must be holistic: educational, social, cultural. It requires holding all actors accountable—notably, it bears repeating, parents, society, clubs, the federation, local authorities, and media. Labeling openly dangerous behaviors as "festive expressions" and broadcasting their images is reckless. It implicitly gives visibility to movements that thrive on it, demonstrating their power and attracting more followers and sympathizers. Some, naively, push crowds toward extreme behaviors through inappropriate narratives and semantics they don't master. More than ever, it's time to restore football's essence: a cultural moment of sharing, collective emotion, framed rivalry. When it becomes a battlefield, it loses its purpose. It's thus urgent to reaffirm clear lines: - Zero tolerance for organized violence - Clubs held accountable for their supporters - Professional league held accountable - Identification and sanctioning of troublemakers behind the scenes - Rebuilding a healthy bond between youth and sport. For without this, the world's finest stadiums will remain empty shells devoid of meaning, unable to contain tensions they're not meant to resolve. Moroccan football deserves better. And it's still time to right the course—if we face reality head-on, with intelligence and without complacency.

AFCON 2025, Regulations and Narrative: When the Laws of the Game Catch Up with the Debate... 866

Aziz Daouda, 4 d.
- Sports -
2.4 min read.
The controversy surrounding the AFCON 2025 final has been decisive. It now resembles less a debate than a serialized drama, where law and passion vie for the starring role, each convinced it has the superior script. For several weeks, the Confederation of African Football's (CAF) appeal jury decision, ratifying Senegal's defeat on a technicality and crowning Morocco as the official winner, has been scrutinized, dissected, contested, and even rewritten according to various biases. The most vehement commentators invoke a principle they elevate to the status of sanctity: a football match must be decided on the pitch, not in air-conditioned offices. Fair enough... until the fundamental rules are transgressed and trampled. The argument is noble, of course... but it conveniently overlooks that without regulations, sanctions, and bodies to enforce them, football would quickly resemble a giant playground where everyone redraws the rules at halftime. In reality, this debate says less about the match itself than about our collective difficulty accepting that in football too, as in life, the final whistle can sometimes blow... off the field. The seductive argument in the abstract, that the result must be earned on the pitch, collides with an inescapable reality: football is also, and perhaps above all, a universal normative framework. Without rules, there is no competition, no fairness, no legitimacy, no universality. And precisely, the recent adjustments by The International Football Association Board (IFAB) shed light on this tension between sporting idealism and regulatory discipline. For context, the IFAB establishes football's Laws of the Game fairly independently from FIFA's governing bodies. A legacy from the past, but a fine inheritance ensuring a degree of objectivity and neutrality. By introducing some modifications to the Laws of the Game recently, the body has brought a major clarification. From now on, any player leaving the pitch in protest risks a red card and ejection, and any team responsible for abandoning a match will be declared to have forfeited. This is the logical follow-up to what happened in Rabat. A truly welcome legacy here too. The IFAB is simply saying: never again. This point is crucial. It’s not an interpretation, but an explicit intent to strengthen the referee's authority and preserve competition integrity through stricter adherence to the rules of play and competition. In other words, the behavior seen in this controversial final is not just morally regrettable; it is now formally regulated and sanctioned. This profoundly changes the nature of the debate. For while one can question the wisdom of a past decision, it becomes hard to ignore that the direction of legal evolution aligns precisely with the CAF's choice, explicitly backed by the body that crafts football's rules, and, by extension, by FIFA itself. Thus, a question arises: why do some analysts highlight secondary elements of the new rules, like the ban on players covering their mouths during protests or exchanges, while omitting the core provisions on match abandonment? Have they not grasped the importance of the most significant change in world football, effective immediately? This editorial choice raises questions. It suggests less a desire to fully inform than an attempt to sustain a weakened argumentative line amid evolving legal frameworks. Refusing to integrate this new data risks accusations of bias, or even deliberate narrative distortion. It would be far more productive to recognize that modern football cannot survive without collective discipline. The romanticism of “a game decided on the pitch” cannot justify behaviors that undermine referee authority and threaten the very order of competition. In this light, the CAF's decision now appears less an anomaly than a fortunate anticipation, perhaps severe, but coherent with a normative evolution embraced at the highest levels of world football. The polemic around this final thus far exceeds a single match. It reveals a rift between two visions of football: one emotional and narrative, clinging to the idea of the game regardless of how it's played; the other institutional and legal, aware that without strict rule observance, the game itself loses all meaning. And in this showdown, the laws of the game seem to have gained an irrevocable lead. This aligns with history, perhaps innovation, but undoubtedly the normal evolution of things. From now on, no one will use the threat of walking off to influence the referee's decisions. From now on and forever, the law will take precedence in all circumstances.

Kingdom of Morocco: towards the recovery of a suspended, not lost, greatness. 1158

Aziz Daouda, 6 d.
From the geopolitical rupture of the 18th century to the strategic recomposition of the 21st: the Kingdom of Morocco is waking up, finding itself, and asserting its place. Morocco’s history defies simplistic narratives of internal rise and decline; it reveals a deep continuity, interrupted only by imposed global shifts. The end of the 18th century did not mark a civilizational collapse, but rather a systemic marginalization caused by a missed turn toward industrialization and modernity, a project rejected by religious elites and a largely conservative society, exacerbated by internal struggles between dominant traditionalists and minority modernists. This impacted and slowed the country's evolution. This "fall" remains relative, stemming from global change rather than purely internal decline. Without tracing the history further back, under Moulay Ismaïl and his successors, Morocco radiated as a structuring power, controlling vital trans-Saharan routes, exercising influence in the Sahel, and capturing a significant share of trade toward Europe. Its embassies were everywhere, but the rise of industrial Europe disrupted this balance. Maritime dominance, the bypassing of Saharan caravans, and colonial pressure redrew the world on a scale the Kingdom could not control, did not foresee, or suffered helplessly. But Morocco did not decline; the world-system simply evolved without it. To weaken it durably, in an attempt to paralyze and handicap it forever, Morocco was sliced and divided between two colonial powers. It did not lose the last part of its historical, legitimate territory until the 1950s. Unlike the Ottoman or Persian empires, eaten away by internal weaknesses, Morocco remained coherent, ready to reinsert itself as soon as the balances shifted. Immediately upon its independence, it did not take long to begin a real struggle to reclaim its historical place, which was naturally its own. As an important sign of greatness, it was on its territory that the Allies sealed the pact for the final fight against the Nazis, in the presence of Sultan Mohamed Benyoussef and Moulay Elhassan, who thus met all the great figures of the time. The Franco-Spanish protectorate (1912-1956) disjointed the country’s traditional African networks and oriented the economy toward dependence. Yet, the Alaouite monarchy survived, the State remained structured, and the Sharifian legitimacy remained intact. This resilience, rare among colonized nations, preserved a unique historical continuity. The relationship between the people and the ruling dynasty is foolproof, forming the foundation of an inevitable reconquest. Today, an unprecedented convergence of internal and external factors is closing this parenthesis. Morocco is reactivating its imperial vocation in the geopolitical sense, not through domination, but through strategic cooperation. Since the enthronement of His Majesty Mohammed VI in 1999, the Kingdom has reversed the trend on three major fronts: - Return to Africa: Reviving ancestral roots, Morocco invests massively in West Africa (banks, telecoms, agriculture) and consolidates a religious diplomacy, positioning itself as a bridge to the continent. This ancestral role, held under the Alaouites, is reborn in a modern form based on cooperation and complementarity for shared development. - Diplomatic victories: The growing recognition of sovereignty over the Southern provinces by the United States (2020), Spain (2022), France (2024), nearly all Arab countries, and the majority of African and European nations, along with the opening of consulates in Laâyoune and Dakhla, have transformed a defensive posture into an offensive one. "The Sahara is the prism through which Morocco views its international environment," declared the sovereign on August 20, 2022. - Geostrategic centrality: Partnerships with the United States (major non-NATO ally status since 2004), European security cooperation, and African anchoring make it an Africa-Atlantic-Mediterranean pivot. Tanger Med, the 16th global logistics hub in 2025, is proof; Dakhla Atlantic, operational by 2027, will open the other Atlantic facade. The desire to recover one's fundamentals is not an illusion. The Kingdom possesses all the assets to assume what it is and what it intends to become, as it has for centuries, if not millennia. The country's internal foundations, historical and modern, are solid. It is the oldest nation-state in the world. Monarchical stability, institutional continuity, and flagship projects (FIFA World Cup, TGV, solar energy, efficient industrial ecosystem, high-ranking motorway network, and port infrastructure) forge a true base for development. This credible and accelerated renaissance relies on three converging dynamics: - Shift toward Africa: The continent's explosive demography (2.5 billion inhabitants by 2050), natural resources, and emerging markets confirm and explain Morocco's choice, where it is already a leader with 1,200 investment projects. - Crisis of rivals: Sahelian instability and Algerian ideological failures (gas dependence, diplomatic isolation) isolate competitors, while Morocco offers a credible, stable, and pragmatic alternative. - Historical continuity: The kingdom is not "becoming" a power; it is becoming, once again, a political center, commercial hub, and investment catalyst, as it has always been in the past. This is a total historical alignment, supported by a clear vision and resources mobilized toward the development of the region and, consequently, the continent of the future that is Africa. Speaking of "lost greatness" is a mistake; it was slowed by global mutations, frozen by colonization, and contained by externally imposed regional balances. Today, the international context, internal stability, and external strategy are aligning for the first time since at least the 1800s. Morocco is not returning to the stage of history; it is simply emerging from a moment when history was written without it. It now intends to reclaim its natural place with a perspective of co-development for the benefit of Africans wherever they are.

A Secretary-General at the Mercy of the Powers: Between Displayed Transparency and Real Veto... 1148

Aziz Daouda, 6 d.
- World Politics -
3 min read.
As the 2027 deadline looms, the race to succeed António Guterres is firmly entrenched in the global diplomatic agenda. Behind a modernized staging, with public hearings and strong rhetoric around transparency, unfolds a competition ruthlessly dictated by power dynamics among major powers. This apparent openness poorly masks a structural truth. The Secretary-General position remains a geopolitical trophy, where democratic lightness gives way to strategic calculations by veto-holders. Officially, the Secretary-General is elected by the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Security Council, in a two-step procedure outlined in the UN Charter. In practice, the permanent members of the Security Council, United States, China, Russia, France, and United Kingdom, share the final decision, often relying on an implicit geographic rotation rather than a strictly meritocratic contest. Four candidacies have emerged in recent weeks, embodying a deliberately calculated diversity. Michelle Bachelet, former High Commissioner for Human Rights, represents a progressive Latin American profile, strongly identified with human rights struggles. Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is presented as the nuclear expert par excellence, adept at managing tensions between major powers. Rebeca Grynspan, Deputy Secretary-General of the UNDP, is a Central American voice on sustainable development and inequality reduction. Macky Sall, former President of Senegal, is a champion of regional governance and continental diplomacy in Africa. These profiles blend political experience, technocracy, and multilateralism, reflecting a sought-after geographic balance: Latin America and Africa at the forefront, within a rotation logic to appease Global South claims. Yet, it is the candidates' acceptability to major powers, far more than their expertise, that will ultimately matter. The flagship innovation of the 2026–2027 process lies in public hearings before the General Assembly, inspired by criticisms from previous selections. During Guterres's selection, these debates had already revealed their limits, notably with Russia's veto against certain Eastern European candidacies deemed too close to NATO. Today, the hearings allow candidates to present their visions on climate, conflicts, UN reform, and human rights protection, in an unprecedented exercise of accountability. This transparency remains largely cosmetic. It primarily engages public opinion and smaller states, but in no way undermines the decision-making power of the Security Council's five permanent members. The hearings cannot replace the indispensable recommendation vote. Behind the scenes, the Security Council remains the sole effective arbiter of the process. The candidacies carry a deeply geopolitical dimension. The 2016 example, where Bulgarian Irina Bokova was sidelined by Russia for geostrategic reasons, illustrates this. A candidate's personality matters less than their relationship with Moscow, Washington, Beijing, Paris, or London. Each contender is thus scrutinized not only for their competencies. Rafael Grossi will be judged on his ability to manage nuclear tensions without ruffling Moscow, while Macky Sall must reassure Paris, Beijing, and Washington alike on his neutrality in the Sino-American rivalry. Candidates' speeches on UN reform, strengthening multilateralism, or better crisis management make headlines, and then fade. Bachelet emphasizes human rights defense, Grynspan fights against inequalities and for sustainable development, Sall pushes for a stronger African voice in international bodies. These are carefully calibrated rhetorical positions designed to seduce. Yet, the Secretary-General wields only moral and diplomatic power. He is not the head of the UN, but the head of its administration, tasked with implementing members' decisions. Guterres's repeated calls for Security Council reform have repeatedly hit a wall of opposition from veto-holders, despite the urgency of crises. Renewal clashes with a structure frozen by the 1945 Charter. Multilateralism, battered by Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin's discourses, limits the Secretary-General to a facilitator role, not a reformer. The designation of the next Secretary-General must, in theory, balance explosive political variables: **Geographic rotation:** After an Asian (Ban Ki-moon) and a European (Guterres), logic dictates a Latin American or African candidate to respond to G77 claims. **Gender question:** A woman for the first time? Michelle Bachelet embodies this possibility, reigniting debate on parity and women's representation at the highest levels of UN diplomacy. **Global power dynamics:** Sino-American rivalry structures the game. Beijing has every interest in neutral profiles like Grossi, while Moscow will seek to block any candidate too close to NATO. **Regional games:** Africa, via the African Union, claims greater weight in global governance. Macky Sall positions himself as the symbol of this push, amid strong Chinese (Belt and Road) and American (Prosper Africa) competition. In practice, reality is more ambiguous. To date, Sall lacks clear African Union support or a mandate from his own country, Senegal, weakening his candidacy from the start. In this setup, the ideal candidate is not necessarily the most visionary, but the one who crystallizes minimal consensus among actors with divergent interests. The next Secretary-General will be less the product of a transformative program than of a diplomatic compromise. Their room for maneuver will depend less on their agenda than on their ability to skillfully navigate a fragmented international environment, as Guterres did with the Covid-19 pandemic or the Ukraine conflict. More than ever, the position reflects a precarious mediator function, tasked with maintaining a fragile balance among powers, rather than strong global leadership. The upcoming election should thus be read not as the emergence of a world authority, but as the designation of a constrained referee, essential to the survival of multilateralism on life support. In this arena, transparency is but a veil. Major powers decide; others applaud. The Secretary-General will remain, for a long time yet, the one who governs the world system... without truly leading it.

April 6: The Moroccan Idea That Conquered the World... 1564

Aziz Daouda, 9 d.
- Society - Sports -
2.2 min read.
April 6 is now etched into the global calendar as the International Day of Sport for Development and Peace. A celebration championed by the United Nations, echoed across all continents, and enthusiastically embraced by millions of athletes, institutions, and enthusiasts. Yet behind this worldwide recognition lies an origin that often goes unnoticed. It’s a Moroccan idea, that of Hamid Kamal Lahlou. The irony is striking. While the world fervently celebrates this day, Morocco—the birthplace of the initiative—sometimes seems to lag behind, as if hesitating to fully claim its paternity. Yes, there have been scattered initiatives and events here and there. But they fall far short of what we might have hoped for. We won’t list the few organized manifestations, so as not to ruffle feathers by omitting any. In any case, there are no major events from the sports authorities, such as the ministry, the National Olympic Committee, or the major Royal Moroccan Sports Federations. Is this simply an oversight, or a more subtle form of distancing? The question deserves to be asked, especially when you know the personality of its originator. Kamal Lahlou is not a consensual figure. Journalist, sports leader, communicator, he has established himself over decades as a singular voice in Morocco’s media and sports landscape. His career is dense: former handball player, originally a physical education teacher and inspector, committed actor in the development of national sports, he has held important responsibilities, notably within the Moroccan National Olympic Committee and the Association of African National Olympic Committees. He remains president of the Royal Moroccan Weightlifting Federation and vice-president of the Mohammed VI Sports Champions Foundation. But beyond titles and roles, it’s his words that stand out and his stance that impresses. Direct, clear, often critical, Lahlou disturbs as much as he inspires. He practices neither doublespeak nor complacency. In an environment where restraint is sometimes elevated to an implicit rule, his frankness cuts through. He points out shortcomings, challenges decision-makers, and defends a demanding vision of sport as a lever for development and national influence. This positioning has earned him as many admirers as detractors and doubtless even more denigrators. Some praise his courage and consistency, others reproach him for a tone deemed too incisive. Still others find nothing to fault him for, yet behind his back, lavish him with gratuitous reprimands. But all agree on one point: Kamal Lahlou is an incontournable figure, impossible to ignore. His patriotism admits no ambiguity. Behind every statement, every critique, emerges a clear ambition: to see the Kingdom take the place it deserves on the international sports scene. The April 6 Day fits precisely into this logic. By proposing to dedicate a date to sport as a vector for peace and development, Lahlou sought not personal legitimation, but recognition of the fundamental role sport can play in modern societies. He thus transcribed, in his own way, the royal vision of sport and the role the country can play on a universal scale in service of peace. So why this relative discretion in Morocco around this day? Is it the price to pay for free speech? The backlash of rivalries that have no place? An implicit way to marginalize a figure deemed too independent? A means to silence an ambitious voice? Or simply a deficit of collective memory? Whatever the answers, or the answer, one reality remains. April 6 is an idea born in Morocco, carried by a Moroccan, and adopted by the entire world. At a time when the country seeks to strengthen its soft power and highlight its successes, it might be time to reconcile origin and celebration. For recognizing this initiative to Kamal Lahlou is not just about honoring a man. Does he really need it? It’s rather about embracing a part of contemporary national and global sports history, and reminding that beyond infrastructure and performances, ideas too can change the world. And if it’s the Kingdom of Morocco at the origin, that’s even better.