The UN Security Council Resolution and the Exit of the Sahara Issue from the Fourth Committee: From the Logic of Conflict to the Logic of Sovereignty
The recent UN Security Council resolution on the Moroccan Sahara is not a routine diplomatic text, nor a passing gesture of support. It is a turning point—a historical pivot where the logic of conflict gives way to the logic of sovereignty, and where Morocco no longer appears as one party among others, but as the framework itself of the solution.
When former minister and Sahara expert Mustapha El Khalfi describes it as a “major legal and political turning point,” he is pointing to a deeper transformation: the beginning of the Sahara’s exit from the UN Fourth Committee on decolonization. This shift is not procedural—it is conceptual. The dispute is no longer about “decolonization,” for that question was settled in 1975. Keeping the Sahara on that list has long blurred the political reality of Moroccan sovereignty.
The new resolution does more than endorse Morocco’s autonomy plan. It redefines self-determination, separating it from the outdated idea of an open referendum that once included the option of secession. Now, self-determination is framed exclusively within one path: autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty. The paradigm has shifted—from deciding who owns the land, to negotiating how the land is governed.
This is not without precedent. The case of Sidi Ifni in 1969 offers a similar trajectory: the UN General Assembly favored negotiation over decolonization, leading to Morocco’s recovery of the territory. Once again, diplomacy proved stronger than ideological noise.
Today, the UN itself seems to be aligning with Morocco’s pragmatic vision: no more referenda, no more separation, but a political, negotiated solution within sovereignty. Does this signal an implicit recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over the Sahara? Possibly so. Behind this resolution lies a long, patient strategy led by King Mohammed VI, built over decades through firmness, legal clarity, and strategic diplomacy.
From the liberation of the Guerguerat crossing to Morocco’s return to the African Union, from the opening of foreign consulates in Laayoune and Dakhla to the historic U.S. recognition of Moroccan sovereignty, each milestone prepared this moment. It was not force that brought about this shift, but the power of an idea—that of legitimate and steadfast sovereignty.
Beyond the political dimension, the decision carries major economic implications. The Sahara is emerging as a hub for continental development—renewable energy, green hydrogen, modern ports, and transatlantic trade corridors. The resolution sends a message of confidence to global investors, reinforcing Morocco’s role as a bridge between Africa and the Atlantic.
Yet questions remain:
Will this legal evolution translate into the Sahara’s actual removal from the Fourth Committee’s agenda?
Will Morocco’s opponents accept that the era of confrontation is ending, replaced by negotiation and realism?
And can Moroccan diplomacy transform this implicit recognition into an explicit global consensus?
One thing is certain: this resolution does not close a chapter—it opens one. It marks the end of ambiguity and the birth of a new diplomatic era. A silent victory for Moroccan strategy, where patience triumphs over rhetoric, and where sovereignty becomes not a claim, but a lived reality.
