Polisario Front Accuses Morocco of Using Western Sahara as a Cover for Expansionist Ambitions Toward Ceuta and Melilla
MADRID – The Polisario Front’s representative in Spain, Abdallah Al-Arabi, has forcefully pushed back against what he describes as a persistent and misleading narrative in Spanish political discourse, arguing that the recurring diplomatic crises between Madrid and Rabat cannot be reduced to the Western Sahara dispute. In a strongly worded opinion article published today by the Spanish online newspaper InfoLibre, Al-Arabi contends that using the Western Sahara issue as a convenient pretext to explain Spain-Morocco tensions is a deceptive oversimplification that ignores the deeper, historical roots of the contradictions between the two countries. According to the Sahrawi diplomat, the prevailing anxiety among Spanish public opinion is not primarily driven by events in the Sahara, but rather by Morocco’s continued expansionist ambitions toward the Spanish cities of Ceuta and Melilla, as well as by the management of borders and the ongoing efforts to control them. His intervention comes at a time of heightened sensitivity in bilateral relations, marked by periodic friction over migration flows, territorial integrity, and economic partnerships, and it seeks to reframe the debate by reminding Spanish society that the true source of friction lies much closer to home, on the sovereign Spanish enclaves on the North African coast.
Al-Arabi’s article goes on to warn against the use of diplomatic euphemisms and economically flavored language to mask unresolved questions of sovereignty. He specifically critiques terms such as “shared prosperity” and “economic cooperation,” which he says are increasingly being deployed in official Spanish and European discourse to blur the political and legal specificity of Ceuta and Melilla. For the Polisario Front, these concepts are being weaponized to conceal fundamental questions about territorial equity and the legitimate rights of states and peoples. The representative insists that the border situation between Morocco and the Spanish enclaves cannot be reduced to a mere technical issue of customs, trade, or migration management; rather, it is intrinsically linked to Morocco’s persistent claims over territories that remain part of the Kingdom of Spain under international law. By framing the debate in terms of economic collaboration and regional development, Madrid and Brussels risk normalizing Moroccan pressure tactics, which historically have included mass migrant surges at border crossings and the use of territorial leverage to extract political concessions. The op-ed thus urges Spanish political actors and the public alike to resist the temptation to treat the Western Sahara conflict as the sole lens through which all bilateral problems must be viewed, since doing so obscures the strategic and geopolitical realities that have long shaped relations between the two neighbors.
Turning to the legal dimension of the conflict, the Polisario Front’s representative asserted that the dispute over the territorial waters adjacent to Western Sahara has been conclusively settled through the repeated jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union. He highlighted that the CJEU has consistently ruled that these waters form an integral part of the Sahrawi territory, which is officially listed by the United Nations as a Non-Self-Governing Territory with the Polisario Front recognized as its sole legitimate representative. This legal reality, he argues, is not subject to negotiation, reinterpretation, or political convenience, regardless of the pressures exerted by member states or external actors. The reference to the CJEU’s rulings is significant, as the Court has, in a series of decisions regarding fisheries and agricultural agreements between Europe and Morocco, repeatedly affirmed that the Sahrawi people’s consent is required for any agreement that extends to Western Sahara or its waters. Al-Arabi’s emphasis on this jurisprudence serves a dual purpose: first, to remind Spain and the European Union that their trade agreements and economic arrangements with Morocco do not legally cover Sahrawi territory; and second, to undercut any suggestion that the issue is merely diplomatic rather than legal. By anchoring the Sahrawi position in the authority of European courts, the article attempts to remove the debate from the fluctuating realm of political compromise and place it firmly within the framework of binding judicial interpretations.
Having established the legal status of Western Sahara’s waters, Al-Arabi then delivered a direct warning to Spain and the European Union, declaring that neither has the right to act in a manner that disregards the sovereignty of the Sahrawi people over their land and resources. He stressed that any measure or project undertaken south of latitude 27.40° necessarily requires the explicit and legitimate consent of the Sahrawi people, expressed through their sole legitimate representative, the Polisario Front. This geographical reference is crucial, as it designates the boundary between Morocco’s internationally recognized southern border and Western Sahara, a demarcation that remains politically charged and contested. The statement is clearly aimed at European companies, Spanish institutions, and Morocco alike, making clear that investments in phosphates, renewable energy, fisheries, and other natural resources in the region are legally untenable and politically unacceptable without Sahrawi approval. The op-ed’s wording suggests a growing frustration within the Polisario Front over what it perceives as European attempts to circumvent the court rulings by engaging in voluntary agreements with Morocco that ignore the lawful representative of the territory. By articulating this red line, Al-Arabi signals that the Sahrawi movement will continue to use jurisprudence, advocacy, and international legitimacy to challenge any initiative that fails to respect its fundamental rights, and that the European Union must choose between upholding its own legal principles or becoming complicit in a prolonged occupation.
In the central argument of his article, the Sahrawi diplomat emphasized that achieving genuine stability and a strong, balanced relationship between Spain and Morocco requires moving away from superficial political analyses and from attempts to conceal fundamental problems. He acknowledged that many observers, particularly in Madrid and Brussels, prefer to frame bilateral ties through the language of pragmatism and mutual economic benefit, but he insisted that this approach is unsustainable because it does not address the underlying tensions. Al-Arabi argued that any lasting understanding can only be built on a solid foundation resting on three essential pillars. The first pillar is full respect for international law and the resolutions of international legitimacy, including those adopted by the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council regarding decolonization and self-determination. The second pillar is a commitment to political good faith and the keeping of promises, free from the pressure and blackmail that have characterized Moroccan tactics in previous crises. The third pillar is an explicit recognition of the legitimate interests of both sides, without compromising the territorial sovereignty of Western Sahara and without addressing strategic differences through simplistic narratives that serve short-term electoral or diplomatic interests. For Al-Arabi, this triad is non-negotiable, and he warned that any relationship built on anything less risks repeated breakdowns, mutual mistrust, and new crises that will inevitably spill over into migration management, trade, and regional security.
The op-ed concludes on a broader note, reflecting on the future of Euro-Mediterranean politics and the credibility of the European Union as an actor committed to the rule of law in its external relations. Al-Arabi suggests that by repeatedly deferring to Moroccan demands and by reframing a colonial question as a bilateral diplomatic issue, Spain and Europe are undermining their own proclaimed values and weakening the foundations of a stable regional order. He observes that the recurring nature of Spain-Morocco crises should no longer be treated as an avoidable accident or as a mere consequence of Western Sahara, but rather as a structural flaw rooted in the refusal to confront the actual points of friction, chief among them Ceuta, Melilla, and the exploitation of Sahrawi resources. His article thus serves as a call to the Spanish public, political parties, and the European institutions to recognize that the defense of international legality and human rights in North Africa cannot be perpetually postponed in the name of transactional diplomacy. It also carries an implicit warning: as long as European states continue to indulge Moroccan expansionism and treat the Polisario Front as an inconvenient obstacle, tensions will remain unresolved, and the sovereignty of both Spain and the Sahrawi people will remain under threat. With Spanish elections looming and negotiations over future EU-Morocco agreements ongoing, the perspective offered by Abdallah Al-Arabi provides an uncomfortable but essential corrective to the prevailing political dogma, insisting that only through honesty, international law, and mutual respect can the two shores of the Mediterranean genuinely move toward a future of shared security, dignity, and lasting peace.