injustice. this is the 21st century. >> on al jazeera. >> spain's prime minister made a visit to morco this week, looking to support plans for the disputed western sahara territory. will this make a difference? this is "inside story". ♪ anchor: hello. welcome. spain and morocco have been at odds for many years.

they disagreed on territories, immigration, and support for rebels. a visit by the spanish prime minister is raising hopes of improved ties, agreeing to put aside differences and expand economic cooperation, signing more than 20 agreements thursday, promising to work together and a policy of what they called mutual respect. it marked the first high level meeting since 2013, and the first since the plan to grant autonomy to the disputed western sahara territory. the separatist group that once an independent state in the region has rejected that plan. this dispute goes back to 1975, was a former spanish colony of western sahara was annexed, sparking a conflict. in 1991, the united nations brokered a cease-fire with a

promise of referendum on independence that has yet to take place. 16 years later, morocco introduced its western sahara autonomy plan to united nations, then rejected, maintaining its support for referendum. rocco made a dip in attic push in 2020, when -- diplomatic push in 20. since then, they have been trying to gain international support, particularly across europe. ♪ let's go now to our guests. joining us from london is a senior policy fellow at the european council on foreign relations. in kuwait city, moroccan professor who teaches political science at the american international university in kuwait. in brussels, the head of the collective of an organization. a warm welcome.

why has spain reversed five decades of neutrality to back morocco's autonomy plan in the western zahara? hugh: first and foremost, this is spain trying to restore and improve its relations with morocco. over the past few years, they have had a rocky relationship over a number of issues, but the heart is the western sahara conflict. [indiscernible] coordinate immigration control and others are key factors, so there is a lot of reason spain felt there was a need to restore the relationship with morocco, and the price was a change in spain's position towards western sahara and align itself with morocco's position. anchor: it is an interesting move. it's not supported by most spaniards.

hugh: indeed. the way the spanish government did it was problematic in terms of the lack of consultation with spanish parties, but by all indications alike of consultation from within the foreign ministry itself, so this was a political decision taken at the political level for political reasons. now, the pretext for this was that it would also help e peace. [indiscernible] anchor: absolutely. let's get your reactions to spain's move, a political decision, but what of the ramifications for the people in the western zahara? >> this is a position taken by spain, which was rejected by the

overwhelming majority in parliament, even within their own political party. this visit, the vice president refused to join him for this visit due to the controversial nature of this position on the question and violation of the consistent position of spain during decades, especially when we know spain [indiscernible] western sahara, and it is still possible for the declin de-colonialization process in western zahara. it cannot be transferred into

international law. from the sahara perspective, the spanish betrayal to the sahara people, and basically the people calling for spain to resume responsibility and allow the people in the western sahara to freely express their political future. the autonomy plan that was proposed by morocco, and i am quite sure that no one who claimed to support it knows what it is actually in fact. no one knows what are the details of such a plan, nor the constitution, nor the regime [indiscernible] can accommodate such a proposal. anchor: ok. [crosstalk]

clearly, morocco has welcomed support from spain, but what difference does it make on the ground? what actually is the autonomy plan that has now got spain's backing, and will it allow it to move forward at all? give us an idea of what we are talking about here? >> well, first of all i will talk about spain and why it has decided to make this move in international law on the security council. the members of the security council have endorsed the autonomy plan so i don't think they don't know what is inside the plan. anchor: for the sake of our viewers to tell us what is inside of the plan. >> it is supposed to [indiscernible] and the moroccan sovereignty. it was, it was crystal clear, and there were like many resolutions that endorse the

autonomy plan. the powers like the united states, spain, germany, and the members of the security council endorsed the autonomy plan. i think that spain understood well where its interests lies and to make sure morocco is a strategic partner and decided to actually leave this cold war ideology behind by working with rocco, because they know that everyone knows -- with morocco, because everyone knows the dispute is between algeria and morocco. the proof is algeria was cited in more than 30 resolutions, more than five times in the united nations resolution, and more than 89% of member states endorse the autonomy plan. i think that what is happening now in the world is that morocco is gaining momentum, not only at the security council, but at the level of the african union, and

at the level of the european union. we have seen at the european union its recent reports, the 2022 report, actually hid morocco, x in -- actually is using for the resources for the benefits of the population. [crosstalk] western sahara let's bring him in and see if he agrees with us. western sahara does it signify a momentum morocco is building for its support for this autonomy plan, forgiving these people the right to rule, but under morocco sovereignty? that seems to be the key issue of this autonomy plan. is that something that european union is supporting and you are seeing other countries getting behind? >> there is support for morocco's autonomy plan. that is undeniable. what did happen is they came out

more in support strongly. up until then, most members of the united nations security council said it was a good basis for negotiations, but not the only basis. anchor: hmm. >> while there is support for the autonomy plan, members of the security council, european union, they are clear it has to be a negotiated agreement acceptable to both sides. this is a problem. ultimately the people will not accept morocco's autonomy, so yes, you can support it if you are european or u.s., it does not mean you get far in negotiations. the way i see it is it is a dead-end, because it's not acceptable. how can you ask we try to bridge the gap between morocco's proposal and the proposal put forward in 2007 at the same time? anchor: so let's look at the question.

how is the gap bridge between the autonomy plan in the polisario's plans? >> there is only one gap, excepting to freely allow the people to choose, and as the polisario said, to include that as an option, but the final call should be by the people and should be taken freely by the people, but to come back to the autonomy plan which remains unclear to everyone, and we have seen how donald trump declared his support to it, and now the same happening as we are now in an election year in spain, and this position was widely rejected by spanish political parties, and by the spanish people. to come to to a conclusion, any

position that goes in contradiction with international law as it supplies to western sahara will contribute to only intensifying or increasing the destabilization of the region. let us be clear here that western zahara and the position is outside the common policy of the eu, as we have seen with the declaration in the process. at the same time, we should not ignore the eu law, and the decisions made by the highest court of justice in the eu came with three conclusions. morocco and western sahara are separate. morocco has no sovereignty over western sahara polisario --western sahara, and it cannot

be done without the consent of the people. if that applies and western sahara, that pretty much applies when it comes to the decision of the political future of the people. [crosstalk] anchor: i understand that that is the stance of the polisario, but given the reality, morocco making diplomatic advances, what is the response of the polisario ? how will it counter it or offer an alternative? >> well, exactly. that is a major question that polisario has to deal with. we have followed the latest congress of the polisario a couple of weeks ago, where perched on the polisario had tw o candidates for the republic and polisario. it went, of course, in a very new atmosphere, but at the end, it is a good expense we have experienced it at the polisario

level. on the other side, what the polisario can offer is basically what the united nations has proposed, engaging in serious political talks that put a clear roadmap with a determined deadline for the implementation of the political process, and the referendum in western sahara . we have seen that morocco tries to win, and only contributed to the cease-fire in the territories, and now we have the war on going again in the western sahara after being silent for 30 years on the peace process. this comes, of course, as a result of the failure of international community, mainly the security council, implementing its own resolutions. [indiscernible] that could not be implemented, i think they are not to be blamed for waiting daft punk, nor for

having -- that long, nor getting fed up the united nations deals with the processing western sahara. [crosstalk] anchor: i want to bring you back in here. it seems clear that polisario will not accept this autonomy plan, and therefore, is not the only way forward to give the people of western sahara the right to choose their future. >> well, actually emmett talking about the representatives here, the representation here, we are mentioning, some are mentioning the representative of this issue are the people. how about the people who live in the moroccan western sahara? anchor: hmm. >> the population is more than 80% of those who live in the western sahara. they enjoy, they participate in

the economic special political level, so they actually gave their word. they want to be part of morocco, so it was, it was clear-cut. and that is why we have seen the united nations decided to bury the referendum, as it does not go in line with the aspiration of the people. [crosstalk] anchor: ok. i can see. [crosstalk] you are breaking up. disagree with. [crosstalk] [indiscernible] [crosstalk] >> the representative -- [crosstalk] anchor: ok. let's let him respond and we can come back to you in a moment. >> when you look at the history of the piece process and the deliberations within the united nations, the people who have to decide of the people of western sahara, whether they live in western sahara, they will have to decide. in the 1990's and early 2000,

there was a determined and serious process to register the people to participate in a future referendum. i think we need to be clear this is not about those who reside in the western sahara, it is the people of western sahara, which is a clear term under international law, so it is these people who will decide on this was the subject of the negotiations between polisario and morocco, and something morocco realizes. anchor: right, so does living in camps in algeria. is it not the case that morocco quite simply has failed to win the hearts and minds of all of these people and that is why it is in the predicament it is in today? >> well, i don't think morocco, it is important also, i don't think morocco, i am sure that morocco has not failed to win the hearts of the people. war than 80% of the local population of the people live in

bear moroccan sovereignty. they are members of the political parties. they participate. i think whereas in a few kilometers from the western sahara, the refugee camps, we are seeing, hearing there is a dire humanitarian conditions that persist for many decades. young people are incarcerated in the present. -- in the prisons. those in those camps are indoors. the alternatives are in prison. so winning the hearts of the people, we can see it in the western sahara, the moroccan western sahara, with the people who are actually in the, in the spanish -- [indiscernible] so i don't go with those people who say that morocco has not won the hearts of the people, because one has to go to morocco, to western sahara to

see with their own eyes. [crosstalk] anchor: ok. perhaps you can give us an idea from your perspective what life is like in western sahara for the people who lived there, and indeed, the people in the camps? >> well, the people of western sahara have been forced to live separate, because there is a separation wall with millions of landmines that have separated the territory west and east of the berm wall. people live in those areas and the people live in occupied territories. [indiscernible] the population and the people are two different terms, when it comes to demographic engineering and transfer especially knowing and morocco and thousands of settlers into the territory for decades have been sent there of its occupation that has made the people a minority in occupied territories in the occupied cities.

back in relation to the autonomy plan [indiscernible] come in here it comes where i think that the eu and u.s. and all the west claims to defend international law are very, in a very difficult spot was they can't defend international law. would they accept and autonomy plan proposed by russia for the donbas region or crimea? it will not be the case. international law should be defended everywhere and all the time, and when it comes to western sahara, the case is not different. it is a military hostile occupation that has been ongoing for decades and must be ended. morocco denies being unoccupied -- occupying power in the western sahara, and it's the first mistake, negotiation on giving an autonomy plan. we should go back first to define in which capacity you can provide that.

you have no legal plan and western sahara to make such a proposal, so for the western sahara, when it comes to the overall situation in the camps, i am not claiming it is those and and and situation but with [indiscernible] in the occupied territories of the western sahara, i know there are major strategies proposed in the people [indiscernible] in post on the people, to access bread -- imposed on the people to access bread or fish, they have to swear allegiance to the moroccan occupation. [crosstalk] anchor: ok. let's bring -- [crosstalk] anchor: comments to all of that. >> [indiscernible] anchor: this comparison to western zahara --western sahara in ukraine comes up and those that support other polisario.

is it a fair comparison? >> it is totally different. the western sahara, the occupation of the moroccan western sahara did not start in 1975 ford before the creation of the polisario. it started in 1830 by england, by france, sorry, by spain, and in the creation of the polisario came away after that, so we actually have to -- it is important to go back to the history, and then algeria came in during the second presidential [indiscernible] and decided to counter morocco on every step because of psychological, historical or geographical reasons. one has to go back to the history. we are seeing that back into, back into, back in the past in 1895 u.k. said in clear-cut that the territory of western sahara belonged to morocco. let's go back. [crosstalk] anchor: ok we don't want to go

back too far in the past. we only have a few minutes left. >> [indiscernible] anchor: i would like to look forward. [crosstalk] >> 89% of the people, the united nations, the members of the security council called for a solution aligned with the plan for it to me. anchor: ok. >> it does not answer the aspiration. it does not go in line with the aspiration of the people. again, the representation not the representation of the people there, we also have to look at the r representation of those people who live in moroccan western sahara, and go in line with the guest from london that says the people are enrolled in the spanish senses, so let's make things clear. anchor: to the history again. it is saying it is a disputed region. it is not falling on one side or the other.

it drops this plan for referendum. what more doesn't need to be doing? >> first, i should clarify, the united nations has not [indiscernible] the referendum. anchor: it is dead in the water. no one is talking about. >> it has not dropped it. it is clear it is almost impossible in these current conditions. [indiscernible] you need to recognize morocco historically has actually blocked that. [indiscernible] yes, morocco is still certain about the points of view other people. it should allow the referendum to be held. anchor: hmm. >> the united nations has never said morocco's autonomy plan is the only way this should be resolved. so, how do we move forward? clearly we are hitting a wall so there has to be de-escalation. but, my own advice if i was to give it, to actually look back

at what happened in the early 2000's was deep then-united nations envoy proposed his own proposal, so trying to work and consult with morocco but also the polisario and determine a mutually acceptable framework. crucially, whatever, whatever the united nations would come up with, it would need to put to referendum. anchor: hmm. >> from the u.s. point of view, this is ensuring the western sahara and the right to self-determination for the people of western sahara. [indiscernible] potentially, it is the incorporation into morocco, potentially independence, or free association to be free, away that tries to share [indiscernible] , a power-sharing ensuring of sovereignty.

anchor: can any of that be met, be achieved, if morocco and algeria do not see eye to eye on this issue? >> [indiscernible] that is a complicating factor, but we should also be clear this is a conflict in the polisario, not between morocco and algeria. i will also add [indiscernible] , especially the european union and the u.s. [indiscernible] because [indiscernible] their on leverage of the parties , the united nations will not be able to move forward with the current conditions. anchor: ok. we have to leave our discussion today. thank you very much, for joining us. and thank you too very much for watching. you can see the program any time by visiting our website. for further discussion, go to our facebook page. you can join the conversation on twitter.

from me and the whole team here, it is bye for now. ♪ ♪ ♪ óçóçñrç rcrcrcrcrcrcrcrcrcrcrcrc

♪♪♪ ♪♪♪ [speaking foreign language] [speaking foreign language] [speaking foreign language]