Washington describes Algeria as a reliable partner and its role is constructive in the Sahrawi file:
father-in-law
Senior Advisor to the US President for Arab and African Affairs, Massad Boulos
Massad Boulos: There is currently no solution that can be felt or touched
The American administration is awaiting Polisario’s comments on the proposed proposals
“We do not approach the process with the logic of imposing a preconceived result or setting a final date for a decision.”
The US President’s senior advisor for Arab and African affairs, Massad Boulos, said that Algeria does not bear responsibility for obstructing efforts to settle the Western Sahara issue, describing it as a “very good partner” of the United States, and praising the constructive role of President Abdelmadjid Tebboune and the Algerian government in this file.
In an interview with France 24, in its English version, Boulos indicated that three rounds of negotiations were held with the participation of the foreign ministers of Algeria, Morocco, Mauritania, and the leadership of the Polisario Front, adding that these meetings, although “constructive and fruitful,” did not lead to a final agreement on the conflict.
The chief American advisor explained that Algeria provided great assistance in this file, noting that “the Algerians in the end cannot impose a solution on the Sahrawis by force,” before adding: “But they can certainly encourage, and we believe that they are already doing that.”
Boulos added that Washington is still waiting for the Polisario Front to submit its observations and proposals regarding the so-called autonomy plan, indicating that his country does not see, at the present time, an imminent solution to the Western Sahara conflict, despite the rounds of discussions that took place with the participation of Morocco, the Polisario Front, Algeria and Mauritania.
He explained that the United States worked on Security Council Resolution No. 2797, which he said was pushing towards reaching a solution “acceptable to both parties,” stressing that “there is still a lot to be done, and more work to be accomplished,” and that the American side continues “to engage and communicate with the Polisario Front.”
Boulos’s statements remove any responsibility from Algeria in obstructing the process of settling the Western Sahara conflict, at a time when Moroccan propaganda is trying to involve Algeria as a major party in the conflict. It also confirms that the issue is still on the international track, and that reaching a settlement regarding it passes through a political path that guarantees the agreement of both parties to the conflict.
Boulos’s statements came after a series of diplomatic contacts he made in New York on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, which included two separate meetings with the Minister of State, Minister of Foreign Affairs, the National Community Abroad and African Affairs, and the Moroccan Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Commenting on the statements made by the senior White House official, former Ambassador Ammar Blani said that Paul’s speech carried four messages that “put an end to the Moroccan reading that considered that the Western Sahara issue had been decided in its favor.”
Blaney explained, in a reading of the interview, which he posted on his Facebook page, that the first of these messages is Paul’s acknowledgment that there is no imminent solution to the conflict, despite the diplomatic efforts made during the recent period. He was quoted as saying: “There is currently no solution that can be felt or touched,” considering that this statement contradicts the proposal presented by UN Resolution No. 2797 as decisive for the file, and that what remains is implementing its outcomes.
The former diplomat pointed out that the negotiations are still at a standstill after three rounds, which means, according to his reading, that the UN resolution does not constitute a final result as much as it provides a framework for negotiations, and that reaching a settlement requires an agreement between the parties concerned.
Blani stopped at the second message, which he saw as representing Washington waiting for the Polisario Front’s response, without setting a time limit or issuing a warning to it. He said that Pauls confirmed that the American administration was waiting for the Front’s comments on the proposed proposals, which he considered an indication that Washington was not dealing with the process with the logic of imposing a pre-conceived result or setting a final date for a decision.
As for the third message, according to Blaney, it relates to the American position on Algeria, after Paul praised what he described as a constructive partnership with it, and thanked the Algerian authorities for their role in the political track. The former ambassador considered that this praise contradicts the Moroccan proposal, which presents Algeria as the main obstacle to settling the conflict.
Blani added that the fourth message was Paul’s clarification that Algeria “cannot impose a solution” in Western Sahara, but it can encourage the political path, a role that he said Washington recognized Algeria playing.
The former ambassador linked this position to the nature of the roles played by the parties in the international track, pointing out that Morocco and the Polisario Front are the two parties to the conflict, while Algeria and Mauritania, as neighboring countries, participate in supporting the track and cooperating in order to reach a settlement.
Blani concluded that the American official’s statements mean, from his point of view, that the American administration did not give Morocco a “blank check,” and that Resolution 2797 alone cannot be considered a final solution to the conflict.
He stressed that the negotiating framework does not automatically produce a settlement, and that any agreement needs the acceptance of the parties concerned, considering that obtaining the acceptance of the Polisario Front remains an essential factor in reaching a workable solution.
