The UN Security Council’s failure to reach a new resolution on Western Sahara has reopened the debate on the future of the United Nations Referendum Mission in the region, MINURSO, after the United States of America failed to pass its project related to the conflict, amid continuing disagreement regarding the foundations on which the political settlement should be based, and the international reference that is supposed to frame the solution.
While Rabat is trying to present the recent developments as a shift that opens the door to ending international follow-up to the Sahrawi issue, the fate of MINURSO remains unresolved, in light of the failure to reach an agreement on the next step. Several possibilities remain on the table, including resuming deliberations and holding a new session in the coming days to discuss a different formula, or resorting to a technical extension of the mission’s mandate decided by the United Nations, or not extending it, which then raises the problem of its continued existence without legal cover. The deliberations may extend for an additional week or two before the final position becomes clear, which makes talk about closing the file or resolving the future of the mission premature.
In the first positions that followed these developments, the advisor to the Sahrawi president, Nana Labat Rasheed, criticized Morocco’s attempt to present what happened in the Security Council as an end to international follow-up of the issue. She was surprised that the Moroccan occupation treated the Council’s deliberations as if it were the party that was organizing and controlling them, despite the fact that the Sahrawi issue has been internationalized for five decades, and that the Security Council issued its decision more than three decades ago to organize a self-determination referendum for the Sahrawi people.
Labat Al-Rashid said: “It is as if the Moroccan occupation was organizing the Security Council’s deliberations on Western Sahara!” The Sahrawi issue has been internationalized for five decades, and the Security Council issued its decision more than three decades ago to organize a referendum on self-determination for the Sahrawi people.
She added that the failure of the United States of America to pass the Moroccan occupation plan did not prevent the Moroccan king from coming out and saying that the Security Council had lifted its hand from Western Sahara, in an attempt to present the recent developments as an end to international follow-up, before responding with a decisive phrase: “Protection has been lifted for the Moroccan occupation only.”
This statement places the issue of the faltering American efforts in the Security Council in its political context, far from the reading that Rabat is trying to promote, given that failure to adopt a draft resolution does not mean the transfer of sovereignty over the region to Morocco, and does not constitute a final ruling on the conflict, which has been on the United Nations agenda for decades, and is primarily linked to the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination.
Failure to renew MINURSO does not end the process of decolonization
From a legal standpoint, former Ambassador Ammar Ballani provided a detailed reading of the possible repercussions of not renewing MINURSO’s mandate, stressing that this step, even if taken, does not mean closing the Western Sahara file within the United Nations, nor ending the path of decolonization, given that the legal status of the territory and the powers of the UN bodies are not exclusively linked to the continued existence of the mission.
In an analysis entitled “Western Sahara: Failure to renew the mandate of the MINURSO mission does not mean closing the file in the United Nations nor ending the path of decolonization,” Blani stopped at the Moroccan Royal Court’s communication issued on October 30, considering that it reflects Rabat’s will to end the international framework that has been framing the conflict, and that Morocco is trying to use the non-renewal of the mission’s mandate as a prelude to withdrawing the international presence from the region, and ending the periodic consideration of the issue within the Security Council, including reports and briefings by the Secretary-General of the United Nations. His personal envoy.
The diplomat explained that Morocco’s position on MINURSO is due to the nature of the mission for which it was established in 1991, as it is seen as a restriction on attempts to impose a fait accompli, especially since its name is explicitly linked to the referendum, which reflects that the final status of the territory has not been decided, and that the international mission remains linked to the search for a settlement that guarantees the Sahrawi people’s exercise of their right to self-determination.
In his refutation of the Moroccan reading, Blani relied on the sixth paragraph of Security Council Resolution No. 2797 of 2025, which explicitly states that the Council retains consideration of the Western Sahara issue, explaining that not renewing the mandate of MINURSO does not mean the end of the Security Council’s jurisdiction, nor does it cancel its powers derived from the Charter of the United Nations, especially Articles 24 and 34, as well as the procedural rules of the Council, which are Rules 7 and 10. And 11.
According to this analysis, the Security Council’s failure to adopt the two draft resolutions during the October 30 session cannot be interpreted as a closure of the file or an acknowledgment of the Moroccan position, because failure to reach consensus on a draft resolution does not mean resolving the dispute, and does not give any party a legal basis to change the status quo. The faltering American efforts reflect the continued disagreement over the foundations and conditions of the political settlement, and not the end of the need to address the issue within the international framework.
The continuation of the international character of the issue, according to Blani, does not stop with the Security Council alone, as Western Sahara has been included since 1963 on the list of non-self-governing territories, which is monitored by the United Nations General Assembly and the Twenty-Four Committee on Decolonization, on a path independent of the mandate of MINURSO and the decisions related to its extension.
This point is of special legal importance, given that the inclusion of the territory on the list is based on Chapter Eleven of the United Nations Charter and Resolution 1514 regarding granting independence to colonial countries and peoples, which imposes that the process of decolonization be based on enabling the territory to achieve full self-government in accordance with the free will of its residents.
Palace talk is empty
In addition to the legal and political dimensions, Blani warned of the potential field repercussions of ending the MINURSO mission without providing an alternative mechanism, especially since the mission carries out tasks related to monitoring the military situation, verifying incidents, following up on field developments, and contributing to preventing incidents and containing escalation.
Blani also warned that the repercussions of the mission’s withdrawal without an alternative are not limited to the region alone, but may extend to the regional environment, including the possibility of the escalation spreading to the Algerian border, stressing that the end of the MINURSO mission cannot be understood as a license for any party to change the military situation unilaterally.
Blani concludes that the Moroccan Royal Court’s communication, whatever its political implications, does not have a legal effect on the jurisdiction of the Security Council, the General Assembly, or the Committee of Twenty-Four, and does not change the legal status of the region, stressing that the end of the mission’s mandate, if decided, does not mean the end of the process of decolonization, nor the closure of the Western Sahara file within the United Nations.
A Moroccan criticizes Rabat’s marketing of the diplomatic faltering as a victory
From within Morocco, activist Mohamed Qandil criticized the official speech that followed the Security Council developments, describing what he called “the bankruptcy of the warehouse… and the acrobatic victory” as an attempt to turn a diplomatic stumble into an occasion for political celebration, and to present the results of the deliberations as a gain for Morocco, even though the Sahrawi issue has not been resolved, and that the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination does not lapse as a result of the faltering of a draft resolution or the expiration of the mandate of a UN mission.
Qandil considered that the Royal Court’s report reflects, in his estimation, political confusion and an attempt to hide the failure of the bets built on passing an American project that goes beyond the issue of the referendum and establishes a fait accompli, noting that marketing the developments as a victory does not change the fact that the Security Council did not give Morocco the international cover it was seeking for its claims regarding Western Sahara.
The Moroccan activist went on to link the method of managing the Western Sahara file to the internal situation in Morocco, criticizing the use of the issue in the official discourse to mobilize Moroccans and divert their attention from the social and economic crises, most notably poverty, unemployment, and declining purchasing power, in addition to what he described as tyranny, oppression, and the plundering of wealth.
In this context, Qandil considered that transforming the Western Sahara issue into a permanent focus of political mobilization serves, according to his proposal, the interests of the authority in the face of internal criticism, while the challenges related to the living situation of citizens continue, which makes celebrating the diplomatic faltering, in his view, an attempt to present a political victory that is not reflected in the reality of Moroccans.
He also devoted part of his criticism to the external alliances on which Rabat depends, focusing on normalization with Israel and security and military cooperation with it, and what he considered a penetration of Moroccan institutions, in addition to the Emirati role, which he described as financial, political and military leverage for axes that intersect with the Israeli project in the region.
The Moroccan activist stressed that the stumbling of the Security Council or the possibility of the end of the mandate of MINURSO does not mean the end of the Sahrawi issue, nor does it give Morocco the right to act in the future of the region, calling for a just solution based on the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination, far from attempts to impose a fait accompli or to present diplomatic developments as having resolved a still-existing dispute.
