Think Forward.

La gauche radicale espagnole, le Maroc et la question du bout de Sahara un laps de temps espagnol... 2038

J’avoue ici que ce sont les écrits de Si Lahcen Hadad qui m’ont poussé à m’intéresser de plus près à cette gauche espagnole, qui campe à l’opposé de la position du gouvernement de Sánchez, pourtant lui aussi de gauche. Ne lisant pas l’espagnol, je suis donc un peu moins enclin à prêter attention aux ignominies pourtant répétées de cette gauche, malade de ne pas pouvoir accéder au pouvoir, malade de son histoire avortée, malade de ce qu’elle est en fait. Alors, pour exister, elle s’est inventée une cause. Tant pis si elle n’y comprend rien, tant pis si cela nuit aux intérêts de l’Espagne, tant pis si elle dénature l’histoire, fait fi de la géographie et de la démographie, tant pis si son raisonnement, s’il en est un, est loin de toute logique, tant pis si elle ment outrageusement. L’important, c’est d’exister et de passer aux yeux du public espagnol comme la défenseuse des causes des plus démunis… Peu importe si ceux-là ont nui au peuple espagnol ; peu importe s’ils ont du sang espagnol sur les mains. Une mauvaise foi manifeste. En Espagne, donc, une partie importante de la gauche radicale, principalement représentée par des formations telles qu’Unidas Podemos, une alliance entre Podemos, Izquierda Unida et d’autres groupes minoritaires, entretient une posture, disons critique, pour ne pas dire belliqueuse, à l’égard du Royaume du Maroc. Ce positionnement antinomique se nourrit d’un prisme historique marqué par la mémoire coloniale, les luttes « anti-impérialistes », mais aussi par la question du Sahara appelé "Sahara espagnol" jusqu'en 1975, car ancien territoire sous domination espagnole jusqu’à la Marche Verte en 1975. Cette gauche radicale considère le Maroc comme un acteur belliqueux et menaçant. Le débat ne se réduit pas à des différends territoriaux : il s’inscrit dans une vision idéologique où l’État marocain est souvent présenté comme un régime autoritaire et répressif, décrit comme une puissance néocoloniale. Voilà donc sur quoi repose le soutien répété à l’artificielle cause sahraouie, présenté comme un combat anti-colonial et anti-impérialiste. Le soutien au Front Polisario semble ainsi inscrit dans l’ADN de ces gauchos peu importe les évolutions. Historiquement, plusieurs composantes de la gauche espagnole ont exprimé un soutien clair au Front Polisario, fondé en 1973, qui a pourtant été soutenu par Kadhafi, puis hébergé, nourri et armé par le régime algérien dans le but de nuire aux intérêts du Maroc. Ce soutien se manifeste sous diverses formes : - Dépôt de motions parlementaires en défense du droit à l’autodétermination de cette seule petite partie du Sahara ; - Participation à des forums internationaux pro-Polisario et à des réseaux associatifs le soutenant aveuglément, peu importe les rapports sur les détournements d'aides, les viols et outrance aux droits de l'homme à Tindouf ; - Pression sur le gouvernement espagnol et sur les institutions européennes pour qu’elles reconnaissent le statut politique du Sahara, qu’ils oublient de dire anciennement occupé par leur pays, comme territoire à décoloniser, en opposition à la souveraineté pourtant historique du Maroc. Même la proposition d’autonomie, bien connue en Espagne, ne semble pas leur convenir. Il faut cependant savoir que ce soutien s’inscrit dans un contexte de forte contestation interne en Espagne. Depuis que le gouvernement socialiste de Pedro Sánchez, en 2022, a exprimé son soutien au plan d’autonomie marocain, cette position radicale s’est quelque peu fracturée. Ce changement reflète une adaptation pragmatique de certains aux réalités géopolitiques, économiques et migratoires qui lient étroitement les deux pays. Face aux défis liés à la gestion des flux migratoires à travers les enclaves occupées de Ceuta et Melilla, ainsi qu’à la coopération sécuritaire et économique avec le Royaume Marocain, le gouvernement espagnol a recentré sa diplomatie. Cela a conduit à un éloignement progressif de la gauche, mais pas de la gauche radicale, vis-à-vis du Polisario, marginalisant ainsi son influence sur la politique officielle. Dans ce contexte, certaines voix au sein de la gauche radicale tentent encore de persuader les institutions européennes de maintenir la pression contre le Maroc, réclamant que le Sahara dit occidental reste au cœur des priorités pour régler un « conflit colonial » non résolu. Des groupes parlementaires et des ONG "pro-sahraouis" continuent de dénoncer les accords bilatéraux entre Madrid et Rabat, refusant que la question soit délaissée au profit d’une diplomatie plus «pragmatique». Les institutions espagnoles et européennes, théâtre de ces tensions idéologiques, voient ainsi les forces radicales de gauche chercher à faire reconnaître la question du Sahara dit occidental comme une « affaire d’État ». Elles dénoncent la mainmise marocaine sur ce dossier et contestent vivement les politiques de normalisation diplomatique menées par Madrid. Cette ligne traduit une fracture politique profonde, où l’idéalisme post-colonial et les revendications autodéterministes d’un autre temps s’opposent frontalement à un réalisme politique marqué par la recherche d’équilibres stratégiques régionaux. Le soutien à la cause dite sahraouie n’est pas sans controverse. Des militants, commentateurs et victimes ont rappelé que le Front Polisario a, par le passé, été impliqué dans des opérations violentes dans les eaux territoriales espagnoles, causant la mort de pêcheurs espagnols. Ces épisodes douloureux résonnent dans l’opinion publique espagnole et nourrissent une critique virulente des positions radicales qui soutiennent un mouvement au passé mêlant lutte politique et actions violentes. Cette mémoire pèse fortement dans le débat contemporain et est exploitée par des forces politiques opposées à ces positions de gauchos radicaux, notamment la droite espagnole. La question du Sahara, territoire espagnol pendant un temps, reste un point important dans les relations entre l’Espagne et le Maroc. Cependant, les réalités politiques, économiques et sécuritaires actuelles poussent une diplomatie espagnole pragmatique, favorable à une coopération renforcée avec Rabat, marginalisant ainsi cette posture radicale sur la scène gouvernementale et internationale. L'héritage historique est ici parfaitement exploité pour les nécessités contemporaines dans la gestion des relations ibéro-marocaines. Aujourd’hui, après avoir consulté de nombreux articles et écrits relatant les positions de cette gauche d’un autre temps, je comprends un peu mieux le combat de Si Lahcen Hadad sur le sujet, et encore plus ses réponses cinglantes aux propos d’un certain Ignacio Cembrero, que je ne perçois plus que comme un névrosé sans relief. Merci, Si Lahcen. Une question tout de même : pourquoi la gauche marocaine n’est-elle pas plus encline à prendre position et à dénoncer avec force la posture aliénée de leurs homologues espagnols ?
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 .


8100

33.0

African Football’s Leading Force: The Moroccan Model Amidst Regional Headwinds 268

The curtain fell on AFCON 2025, leaving a trail of striking contrasts. While the event confirmed the Kingdom’s supremacy as a world-class logistical hub, the tensions witnessed during the final on January 18, 2026, in Rabat, served as a stark reminder of the contingencies still weighing on continental football. Between the seamlessness of the infrastructure and the archaic nature of certain disciplinary attitudes, a fundamental question emerges: how will the transition from CAF’s regulatory framework to that of FIFA in 2030 reshape the management of these organic crises? This shift represents more than a mere scaling up; it is a true paradigmatic rupture where technocratic neutrality will serve to sanctify Moroccan excellence. I. Moroccan Excellence: A Technological Showcase for Africa The massive investment deployed by the Kingdom—ranging from the deep modernization of sports complexes to the systemic integration of VAR—presented the world with the image of a modern, rigorous, and visionary Morocco. This material success, lauded by international observers, aimed to establish an African benchmark. However, this pursuit of perfection encountered a persistent psychological phenomenon: the "host country complex." In this configuration, organizational mastery is sometimes perceived by competitors not as shared progress, but as a lever of dominance, mechanically fueling theories of favoritism. The events of the final illustrate this at its peak. The disallowed goal for Ismaïla Sarr and the late-match penalty became, through the lens of regional suspicion, instruments of controversy rather than technically grounded officiating decisions. Yet, data from DM Sport reveals the opposite: Morocco was among the most penalized teams in the tournament. This discrepancy highlights a major flaw: technology is insufficient to validate a result unless it is protected by a jurisdictional authority perceived as exogenous. II. Solidary Leadership and the Diplomacy of Resentment It would be erroneous, however, to view this quest for excellence as a desire for isolation. On the contrary, Morocco maintains deep and unwavering historical ties with the majority of its sister nations across the continent. Faithful to its African roots, the Kingdom continues to actively promote continental football within CAF, offering its infrastructure and expertise to federations seeking professionalization. This "open-hand" policy ensures that Moroccan success translates into success for all of Africa. Nevertheless, such leadership breeds friction. A "diplomacy of resentment" has emerged from certain foreign media spheres—particularly in specific Arab and African countries—aiming to tarnish the prestige of the Moroccan organization. By framing Morocco as a favored "ogre," these narratives attempt to transform factual superiority into moral injustice. This media harassment specifically targets the emergence of a governance model that now aligns with the most demanding global standards. III. The Advent of "Cold Justice": Legal Sanctification The transition to FIFA’s aegis in 2030 will signal the end of the geographical proximity that fosters such smear campaigns. Unlike the continental framework, the globalization of officiating bodies will dismantle zonal rivalries. Where CAF must often navigate between diplomatic compromise and sporting imperatives, FIFA deploys a "cold justice"—purely procedural in nature. The chaos observed in Rabat would meet a surgical response in 2030. Article 10 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code is unequivocal: any refusal to resume play results in an automatic forfeit and severe sanctions. In 2030, the rule of law will act as a protective cleaver for the host, rendering victimhood narratives obsolete. IV. Technology and the "2030 Bloc": Toward an Indisputable Truth The 2030 edition, spearheaded by the Morocco-Spain-Portugal trio, will benefit from total judgment automation (Shadow VAR, semi-automated offside) and absolute transparency. The FIFA Hosting Agreement will prevail as a superior norm, guaranteeing impartiality. This legal framework will serve as a shield, preventing disciplinary incidents from being politically instrumentalized against the Kingdom. AFCON 2025 was a successful demonstration of organizational strength for Morocco, confirming its role as the driving force of African football. However, it also revealed that excellence remains vulnerable to peripheral noise. In 2030, the definitive anchoring in FIFA law will allow the Kingdom to transform its organizational prowess into a lasting institutional legacy. Sport, finally shielded from geopolitical dross, will align with the strategic vision of a Morocco turned toward the universal, making the rule of law the bedrock of its global legitimacy.

Light Pollution and the End of the Construction of Imagination – Part 1 353

One of the memories I carry most fondly is when my interest in everything related to outer space first awakened. I clearly remember that in 1980 I saw a TV report about a lunar eclipse that we would be able to observe. The images shown on the news program impacted me so deeply that I could hardly sleep that night. The sight of the lunar craters, caught in that characteristic interplay of light and shadow, became etched in my mind. The next day, I questioned a teacher who was a friend of my family almost to the point of exhausting him, asking so many questions about the subject. Next year, I also saw TV advertisements announcing the theatrical release of "The Empire Strikes Back". In a way, my imagination was launched in a manner analogous to the catapult effect that spacecraft and space probes use when they swing around planets. There wasn’t a single clear night when I didn’t spend hours looking up at the sky, at the immensity of the universe. At that time, the night sky was truly dark, since light pollution caused by city lights did not yet have as significant an effect as it does today. In 1982, Carl Sagan’s series "Cosmos" also premiered on television, and even its soundtrack struck me deeply. Then, in 1984, with the debut of several animated series, two of them being "Groizer X" and "Star Blazers", the American version of "Space Battleship Yamato", I experienced yet another “gravitational catapult” effect, further fueling my imagination. In 1986, the passage of Halley’s Comet took over newspapers, magazines, TV programs, and even my school science books. That was it! This was the definitive confirmation of my passion for the space. At that time, however, I still lived in the realm of fantasy, driven solely by what my imagination brought me. I would look at the sky on clear nights and think that traveling through space was like it was in the movies, challenging, full of adventures and dangers, yet seeming simple and even comfortable. After all, in science fiction films, many aspects of physics were disregarded, using a kind of poetic license. But I grew up. I became a scientist. My gaze acquired a new perspective, yet without ever losing the magic of imagination from the beginning of this story. What came next? In the second part of this story, I will conclude… Clear skies to all, and Ad astra!

Trump’s “Council of Peace”: Strategic Pragmatism or Alarm Signal for the International Order? 1106

The invitation extended by U.S. President Donald Trump to His Majesty King Mohammed VI to join the new “Council of Peace” marks a significant turning point in contemporary international relations practice. It stems neither from protocol nor symbolism, but fits into an assumed reconfiguration of global conflict management mechanisms. The Sovereign's acceptance of this invitation, while the Algerian president was not invited and Africa remains largely underrepresented, if not ignored, highlights a selective logic based not on geography or ideology, but on political utility as perceived by the USA as a global actor. In the official communiqué announcing the Sovereign's acceptance, Morocco's diplomatic fundamentals regarding the Palestinian issue were explicitly reiterated, particularly the two-state solution with states living side by side. The trust-based relations with the concerned Arab parties, especially Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank on one side, and Israel on the other, perfectly foreshadow the role the Kingdom will play in establishing peace and rebuilding the region. Isn't this a direct way to consecrate a results-oriented diplomacy in the face of the long-ailing multilateralism that has been faltering for quite some time? For decades, major international institutions, starting with the UN, have struggled to resolve protracted conflicts. The Security Council is paralyzed by the veto right, peace processes are stalled, UN missions lack a clear political horizon: the symptoms of a saturated system are evident. Donald Trump's envisioned Council of Peace, by contrast, follows a logic of rupture. It seeks neither to produce international law nor to impose universal norms, but to create an informal framework for direct negotiation among influential actors, including those the UN system struggles to integrate operationally. In this context, Morocco is undoubtedly a stability actor and a discreet, credible, and effective mediator. The presence of the King of Morocco in this body reflects international recognition of a diplomatic model founded on stability, continuity, and pragmatism. Morocco has established itself as an actor capable of dialoguing with partners of divergent interests while maintaining a clear strategic line, and everyone knows that it is His Majesty himself who initiated this vision and leads this distinguished diplomacy. This explains the particular nature of the invitation addressed to the Sovereign. Conversely, the exclusion of certain states reveals the limits of a diplomacy based on permanent conflictuality and blind ideological posturing. In a Trumpian logic, effectiveness trumps representativeness. Pragmatism prevails over sterility and outdated ideological blindness. The question then becomes: in this context, is the UN being marginalized or pushed toward reform? This Council does not signal the immediate end of the UN, but it exposes its existential crisis. If a parallel body achieves tangible results quickly, as claimed on certain African dossiers, among others, then the question of the UN system's functional legitimacy will arise acutely. President Trump's initiative can thus be seen as a trigger: either for a progressive weakening of the UN, which he has little fondness for, or for a profound reform of its decision-making mechanisms, particularly the Security Council. And since President Trump is already midway through his term and cannot run again, things will move very quickly. The context is also highly particular, with a transatlantic fracture revealing a malaise that has been simmering since Trump's first term, he no longer accepts defending a hostile Europe that is increasingly dependent on American budgets for its defense. The refusal of European countries, including France, to join this new body translates a growing strategic divergence between Europe and the United States. While Washington prioritizes power dynamics and direct negotiation, Europe remains attached to a normative multilateralism, sometimes disconnected from ground realities. Its diplomatic hypocrisy and double standards on many issues are laid bare here. Its position and quagmire in Ukraine testify to the anachronistic state of its strategy. The invitation to Vladimir Putin accentuates this fracture, especially in the context of the Ukraine conflict and geopolitical tensions in the Arctic. Europe no longer knows on what ground to engage with President Trump. How to interpret President Macron's statement at Davos, where he said he did not accept the law of the strongest without naming it? Who is the strongest, then, when the one he alludes to is precisely the initiator of the new Council? Isn't this truly a sharing of power? Why refuse to be part of it! And then Trump responds to Macron by declining an invitation to a G7 meeting... For now, Donald Trump's Council of Peace is neither a complete institutional alternative to the UN nor a mere conjunctural initiative. It is the symptom of a world impatient with the ineffectiveness of traditional frameworks. In this context, the role that the King of Morocco will play illustrates the rise of actors capable of articulating pragmatism, stability, and international credibility. More than an architectural change, this initiative reveals a profound transformation of the implicit rules of global governance. And since the Council's seat is not yet known, why not envision it being established in Morocco? The special invitation addressed to His Majesty King Mohammed VI is a good omen and could even be understood in this light. Morocco would thus become the nerve center of Peace in the world.

The First Kill and the Conquest of Outer Space 1505

When I watched "2001: A Space Odyssey" for the first time, directed by Stanley Kubrick, I must have been around 12 to 14 years old. Obviously, I understood absolutely nothing. I watched it driven purely by my affinity for science fiction, more specifically for the theme of space. However, when I watched it again almost 20 years later, already graduated as a biologist, I arrived at an understanding of the first act that I believe few people have had. At least that was my perception, since none of the people I spoke to about it saw the connection that I am about to present. There is a striking scene in the film that I call “The Cut”: the abrupt transition from the first to the second act, in which an ancestral primate of humankind, holding a bone, throws it into the air, and the camera follows the bone as it rises until the director cuts to a space station in a future time. The message I perceived was that, at the moment these hominids began to consume meat, since before that they gathered seeds, ate roots and vegetables alongside herbivorous animals, there was a significant change that, in my view, represented an evolutionary leap. When an individual noticed the skeleton of an animal, there was a long, robust bone, probably a femur. He picked up this bone and began to manipulate it until he discovered that it could be used as a weapon. Wisely, the director alternates scenes of this individual testing the new weapon with scenes of him killing an animal that lived among them, followed immediately by scenes of them feeding on the meat of that slaughtered animal. We know that, among all sources of protein, meat has the highest protein content in the diet, and it is very likely that this increase in protein intake in the diet of our ancestors enabled an increase in brain mass and, consequently, an increase in cranial volume. This can be observed by comparing skulls of other closely related primates, such as chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans, and even fossil skulls that have been found. This difference is evident, allowing us to conclude that this was what propelled us evolutionarily in relation to our relatives within the primate order. It is clear in the scenes that, in addition to using the bone as a tool to kill prey, it was also used as a weapon to attack other groups or to defend against them, since behavior related to dispute and conquest has always been part of our construction as a biological species. And what is the relationship between all of this and the famous “cut” at the end of the film’s first act? It is that, at the moment our ancestors began to feed on meat, a process of brain enlargement began, which led to an increase in intelligence, an essential condition that would later make possible the conquest of outer space, as shown in the abrupt cut from the scene of the bone being thrown into the air to a space station in orbit. Well, this was my free interpretation of that important moment in the film. For this reason, I invite everyone to take a careful look at the messages that are conveyed, whether in films, songs, or works of art in general. The author has the need to communicate something through their art.

AFCON 2025: When Morocco Believes in Itself and in Africa.. 1502

In 1961, John F.Kennedy issued an immortal challenge to Americans: "Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country." This call to individual responsibility helped forge a collective mindset rooted in civic engagement and self-transcendence. Contemporary America still bears the imprint of this philosophy in many ways. Decades later, Barack Obama rallied crowds with "Yes we can," a cry of unity and collective determination, while Donald Trump popularized "Make America Great Again," a slogan of national rebirth. These formulas are more than mere words: they crystallize moments when a people rediscover themselves, mobilize, and project toward the future. A kind of regeneration for a power afraid of falling, a way to revitalize a nation prone to forgetting itself or resting on its laurels? Morocco has also known this grammar of national mobilization. The late Hassan II forcefully reminded in one of his speeches: "We will only achieve this goal by translating nationalism into citizenship and by moving national consciousness from mere love for the homeland to effective engagement in building a Morocco that is a source of pride for all Moroccans." A founding vision: loving Morocco is not enough; it must be built. In the same spirit, His Majesty King Mohammed VI stated, on the occasion of the 2019 Throne Day, that "Morocco belongs to all Moroccans because it is our common home," calling on each to contribute to its construction, its development, as well as to the preservation of its unity, security, and stability. More recently, on the 2024 Throne Day, the Sovereign again emphasized the need to "pool the efforts of all Moroccans" and appealed to their patriotism as well as to their sense of individual and collective responsibility. A message that resonates, in Moroccan style, like a national "Yes we can," aimed at overcoming socio-economic challenges and consolidating achievements. **AFCON 2025: A Revealer of National Confidence.** It is in this context that Morocco experienced a major turning point with the organization of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations. Well before kickoff, the AFCON was already acting as a powerful revealer: a revealer of the level of development achieved by the Kingdom, but also of the renewed confidence of Moroccans in their collective capacities. The international competition hosted by Morocco demonstrated unparalleled capacity: modern stadiums meeting the most demanding standards, extensive highway networks, efficient rail hubs, increasingly clean and organized cities, civility widely praised by visitors. Casablanca, Rabat, Tangier, Marrakech, or Agadir as examples only, embody this Morocco that advances, invests, and projects toward a bright future. These progresses are not the fruit of chance. They result from a strategic vision driven by His Majesty King Mohammed VI and translated into structuring investments: more than 2,000 km of highways built since the early 2000s, the Tanger Med port complex becoming a global reference in transshipment, or an ambitious energy policy aiming for over 52% renewable energies in the national mix by 2030. Thus, AFCON 2025 crowns a long-term process, not just a one-off flash. **Resilience, Solidarity, and International Credibility.** Even before the sporting event, the Al Haouz earthquake in September 2023 had already highlighted the resilience of the Moroccan nation. Faced with a major human tragedy, spontaneous solidarity—mass collections, citizen volunteering, mobilization of institutions, and the state's rapid intervention under royal impetus—demonstrated the strength of the national bond. The ongoing reconstruction has reinforced the conviction that Morocco knows how to face adversity. At the same time, macroeconomic indicators attest to an overall positive trajectory: gradual improvement in GDP per capita over the medium term, rise of sectors like automotive, aeronautics, and green energies, affirmation of the Kingdom as a central diplomatic actor in Africa. This international credibility, sometimes a source of regional tensions or criticisms, above all confirms that Morocco has crossed a strategic threshold. **A Success That Calls for More Engagement.** But this success is not an end in itself. It calls for more individual and collective efforts, more mutual trust between citizens, businesses, and institutions. More than ever, the question posed by Kennedy remains relevant: "What am I doing for my country?" Every Moroccan, at their level, is called upon. This dynamic rests on a common denominator: solidarity, extended by work, innovation, and responsibility. It translates into local initiatives, the rise of tech hubs in Casablanca, Rabat, or Tangier, investment in human capital, and adherence to the New Development Model, which aims for a more inclusive, more productive Morocco, better positioned in the global economy. **An Assumed African Ambition.** AFCON 2025 must also be understood as a moment of African fraternity. Morocco has affirmed its continental vocation there: to pull upward, share experience, strengthen South-South partnerships and economic interdependencies. Security, climate, social, and economic challenges are common; responses must be too. Morocco's destiny is inseparable from that of Africa, and Africa's depends on Morocco as well. A prosperous Morocco is an excellent locomotive for the rest of the continent, especially in the region. Sterile criticisms and entrenched or passing jealousies never withstand the seriousness of work, the constancy of effort, and the clarity of vision for long. Only the countries that advance, invest, and unite endure. **A Clear Mission.** The mission is now crystal clear: persevere, aim higher, stronger, and more united, under the leadership of His Majesty King Mohammed VI. Not by copying imported slogans, but by innovating, assuming our singularity, and confidently occupying the place that is naturally Morocco's on the global chessboard. Yes, "Yes we can," Moroccan style. Let us build together a stronger Morocco and a more confident Africa, not through denigration or sterile comparison, but through work, complementarity, and collective engagement. The world advances and waits for no one. Morocco has understood this. It is now up to each to choose: join this movement or stay on the sidelines of History. There will always be football cups.

Morocco Facing the Red Poppy Syndrome: When Success Becomes a Target... 1494

We often speak of the "red poppy syndrome," or *Tall Poppy Syndrome* in English. This is a sociological and cultural theory according to which, in certain groups or societies, those who outperform others, succeed too much, or stand out excessively are criticized, belittled, or "cut down" to preserve a semblance of equality within the group. In short, success disturbs and becomes detrimental to those who lack it. Efforts are then made in all directions to at least denigrate and gossip about those who excel. The metaphor comes precisely from the idea that, in a field of poppies, those that grow taller than the others are cut down to keep the field uniform. The red poppy syndrome thus refers to this well-known mechanism by which success that is too visible calls not for emulation, but for the will to bring it down by any means necessary. On the African regional scale, Morocco today provides the clearest illustration. Not because it proclaims itself a model, but because its achievements impose themselves, provoking tensions, jealousies, and obstructionist strategies. In essence, a Morocco that disturbs because it succeeds. In recent years, the Kingdom has relentlessly accumulated transformative successes: active African diplomacy, high-quality infrastructure, especially world-class sports facilities, recognized organizational credibility, and sports results that are no longer exceptions but the norm. This dynamic, far from rallying others around the country, has awakened in certain regional actors an obsession with systematic contestation, without scruple or limit. The hosting of the Africa Cup of Nations in Morocco should have been celebrated as a moment of continental unity and collective African success. Instead, for its detractors, it turned into a battlefield for sabotage aimed less at the event itself than at the host country. The neighborhood is not unrelated to this evident strategy of indirect sabotage that anyone can verify. In this context, it would be naive not to see the role played by Algeria, locked in a rivalry with Morocco that has become almost doctrinal. Unable to compete on the field of performance, Algiers has long shifted the battle to the terrain of discreditation, suspicion, and peripheral agitation. Failing to prevent the awarding or holding of the competition, the strategy consisted of polluting its narrative environment: questioning fairness, sowing doubt about refereeing, insinuating collusions, manufacturing suspicion where facts resist. A classic method: when you can't cut down the poppy, you try to tarnish its color. And since it always finds support among some, ideologized media relays have perfectly taken up the baton. This enterprise would not have had the same reach without the active involvement of certain ideologically aligned French journalists, often from circles marked by long-standing hostility toward Morocco and its monarchy. Throughout the competition, a segment of this so-called "progressive" press poured out venom in the form of insinuations, kangaroo courts, and barely veiled accusations against the Royal Moroccan Football Federation and its leaders, if not the Moroccan state itself. Investigative journalism here gave way to disguised activism, where suspicion substitutes for proof and Moroccan success becomes, by principle, suspect. This treatment was neither neutral nor innocent: it was part of a delegitimization strategy, carefully maintained. By ricochet, certain African complicities emerged, and recycled frustrations became uninhibited. Even more concerning, attitudes from some African officials or leaders have fueled this toxic climate. Untimely statements, outrageous contestations, misplaced victimhood postures: so many elements that gave the impression that sports frustrations were recycled into political accusations, in disregard of sports ethics. Whether conscious instrumentalization or mere opportunism, the result is the same: an attempt to weaken Morocco by voices supposed to embody the spirit of African fraternity. But despite everything, the maneuver failed and is turning against its instigators. For reality is stubborn. The Africa Cup of Nations in Morocco was a resounding organizational, popular, financial, media, economic, and sporting success. African fans, delegations, and honest observers saw and experienced it. Suspicion campaigns did not mask the essential: Morocco delivered what it promised. In the end, this episode reveals a simple and disturbing truth: the problem is not that Morocco wins, organizes, and advances. The problem, for some, is that it does so too well, too visibly, too sustainably while they fail to do so. And in an African field of poppies, those who relentlessly try to cut down the one that stands out often end up revealing their own inability to grow. The beautiful poppy will continue to grow... especially since it has been well watered by abundant rain. Thank God. As for the Cups, there will be plenty more opportunities to lift them...