Widespread Rejection of Misrepresentations in UN Security Council Report on the Moroccan Sahara

4th June 2025

5 minutes read

Widespread Rejection of Misrepresentations in UN Security Council Report on the Moroccan Sahara

The Permanent Ambassador of Sierra Leone to the United Nations condemned in an official letter to the President and members of the Security Council what he described as a “political and misleading distortion” of reality concerning the Moroccan Sahara issue.

The rejection by several African and European countries, including France, of the content of a report issued by the UN Security Council, which contains a paragraph deemed by Morocco as “biased” regarding the Moroccan Sahara, reflects their alignment with the Kingdom in defending its cause. It also highlights their commitment to the solution proposed by Rabat to resolve the manufactured conflict.

Morocco expressed its strong displeasure and outright rejection of the use of the term “both parties” in the paragraph concerning its Sahara in the report, considering it a deviation from the balanced stance the Council should maintain. This formulation places the Kingdom, whose settlement proposal enjoys near international consensus, on the same level as the separatist Polisario Front, which most countries consider an illegitimate entity, and which the United States is expected to designate as a terrorist organization in the near future.

Sierra Leone’s Permanent Ambassador to the UN, Michael Imran Kanu, sent an official letter to the President and members of the Council condemning what he described as a “political and misleading distortion” of the facts, according to the website “Tellexpress.”

He pointed out that “the report included a political description or assessment of the situation in the Sahara that was neither agreed upon nor officially adopted by Security Council members,” expressing “his country’s deep concern over the adopted wording, which the report falsely attributes to the UN body, in blatant violation of the principle of neutrality and professionalism that should characterize UN documents.”

He affirmed that “his country’s delegation officially distances itself from this paragraph,” considering that it “distorts the report’s content and the Security Council’s practices regarding the Sahara dossier.” The Sierra Leonean representative called for a review of what she described as a “serious misrepresentation,” noting that this primary concern was shared by the majority of member states.

It is believed that the Polisario Front and its backer Algeria are seeking behind the scenes to disrupt the diplomatic victories achieved by Morocco on the Sahara issue by attempting to influence Security Council decisions. However, this appears nearly impossible, given that most members support the Kingdom’s sovereignty over its Sahara.

The Security Council’s decisions are consistent with the Moroccan initiative, having repeatedly called for a realistic, feasible, sustainable, and mutually acceptable political solution for the Sahara, a position supported by Rabat.

The United States representative endorsed Sierra Leone’s position, affirming full support for its approach, demonstrating Washington’s strong backing of Morocco’s sovereignty over its Sahara and support for autonomy under the Kingdom’s sovereignty as the sole solution to the conflict.

The French representative announced France’s intention to submit written comments on the report, indicating that Paris, which strongly supports the Moroccan solution, objects to the paragraph rejected by most Council members.

Morocco’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Omar Hilale, sent a letter to the President and members of the Security Council stating that “instead of comprehensively reflecting the Council’s position and sincere efforts toward a just and lasting political solution to this regional conflict, the report presents a biased and unbalanced reading of the positions expressed within the institution on this matter.”

He added that “this paragraph selectively and out of context reflects the national position of the introduction’s author and the non-permanent Security Council member, while omitting contributions and positions expressed by other members, thus diverging from the consensus within the body.”

He further stated that “no report by the Secretary-General or resolution by the General Assembly has ever restricted the parties involved in the political process to two at the expense of four parties,” adding that “the biased approach of the drafter is contradicted by the current international dynamic, characterized by broad support for resolving this regional conflict based solely on the Moroccan autonomy initiative, respecting the Kingdom’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

4th June 2025

5 minutes read

Dbeibeh Unveils Political Initiative with Three Tracks to Contain Public Anger

The Path to Treating Knee Pain May Begin in the Ear

Related Articles