After over fifty years of dispute over the Moroccan Sahara, recent developments seem to be leading to a new season titled “The End of the Polisario Front as a Non-Political Actor.” This signals the decline of the separatist movement, which Algeria has supported for reasons beyond just geography, including regional influence. This fall was not caused by a sudden decision or military force, but by a series of political, security, and diplomatic changes that turned the separatist cause into a burden for its supporters and eventually made it an issue for its rivals.
The question now is how regional and international shifts have reshaped the Polisario Front’s prospects, not whether it will end. Emerging in the 1970s as a code of insurgent legitimacy against colonialism amid changing global dynamics—featured by the end of the Cold War and evolving concepts of sovereignty—the Polisario’s decline has been characterized by secession and segregation. It has failed to become a viable political entity, remaining a “political refugee” influenced more by Algerian intelligence than local institutions, changing from a liberation movement into a closed, externally endorsed group without a true local base. Meantime, Morocco has regained control of its southern provinces, reintegrating them into the social and economic sectors through investments in infrastructure, seaports, renewable energy, and education, enhancing the ground reality over any conflicting political narrative.
Second: Algeria and the failure of the regional leadership model. Historically, Algeria’s position on the Sahara conflict has been shaped by its strategic identity as a regional power seeking the so-called “windows of influence” in West Africa and the Atlantic Ocean. Although, this project has encountered several constraints: the shift in the economic balance of power, with Morocco developing a various economy based on services, industry, and clean energy, while Algeria’s economy primarily depends on gas and oil exports, significantly reducing Algeria’s capacity to back its allies, including the insugrent Polisario; loss of diplomatic credibility, as Algeria’s “right to self-determination” argument has lost relevance in the UN context, notably after the UN ended that the only feasible resolution is Autonomy Plan under Moroccan sovereignty; and changing priorities of international allies, including several states that have traditionally supported Algeria—such as some in Latin America and southern Africa—who have turned their political stance, understanding that the issue is no longer about a liberation struggle but about regional stability. Accordingly, the Algerian government finds itself in metaphorical isolation, striving to defend a case with no supporters other than inflexible official statements that do not reflect the reality on the ground.
Third: Over the past twenty years, there has been a clear turning in how the United Nations and major powers handle regional conflicts, stressing stability and security over satisfying all parties’ ideological aims. Successive Secretaries-General, from Ban Ki-moon to António Guterres, have stated that the Moroccan autonomy plan is the only practical and feasible solution, leading the Polisario to slowly lose support within the UN. In Europe and the U.S., the American administration recognized Morocco’s sovereignty over the Sahara in 2020—a strategic choice that future administrations have sustained—and the European Union now considers the Sahara as part of Moroccan territory in trade and agricultural ties. In Africa, this change dealt a significant blow to the Polisario, as dozens of states disrecognized the “Sahrawi Republic” and reopened their diplomatic consulates in Laayoune and Dakhla, underlining their support for Moroccan sovereignty.
Fourth: Morocco and the reoriented of the calculation on the ground. In contrast to the Polisario’s political decline, Morocco has succeeded in building an integrated development project in the southern provinces based on three phases: development as a realistic legitimacy, institutional legitimacy, and smart diplomacy. Morocco has shifted the Sahara from a conflict zone into an area of investment and strategic projects, connecting Africa to the Atlantic Ocean through initiatives such as the Dakhla Atlantic Seaport, the Tiznit-Dakhla highway, and electricity and energy connections. Moreover, Morocco has integrated the Sahara into its administrative and political structure by holding democratic local and regional elections under UN supervision, providing local institutions with legitimate representation that enhances sovereignty. Additionally, Moroccan diplomacy has turned from a fundamentally defensive posture to proactive engagement through alliances with great powers such as the US, France, Spain, and Gulf countries, and by emphasizing its position within the African Union, thereby making Morocco’s stance “consensus” at the continental stage.
The key reasons for the Polisario’s end are: loss of legitimacy due to lack of international support; diplomatic isolation as support lessen and the UN shift from ‘political dispute” to ‘final solution”; Algeria’s support undermines due to economic crises and manifestation, reducing its strategic value; regional security concerns shifts focus to terrorism in the Sahel, making Morocco’s sovereignty vital; and reality over rhetoric, with Morocco’s development establishing a stable geopolitical map.
Sixth: The end of the Sahara conflict is likely to reshape the geopolitical framework in North and West Africa. The end of the Polisario Front not only denotes the dissolution of an entity but also marks a significant shift in regional power dynamics. Morocco’s role as a strategic link to Africa is being strengthened, reinforcing its impact in energy, trade, and maritime security. Simultaneously, Algeria’s influence in West Africa rolled back, mainly after losing the Polisario in the Sahara as a pressure tool against the Kingdom of Morocco. This rapid development opens the possibility for rebuilding relations within the Maghreb, as the disappearance of a significant source of conflict may promote renewed strategic economic collaboration. The situation has also been recognized as a successful UN model for conflict resolution, highlighting realistic, non-separatist solutions that could serve as models for future disputes.
Last: The position of the United Nations and major powers on a final solution has centered on the Moroccan autonomy plan as the essential reference point. UN envoys, from Christopher Ross to Staffan de Mistura, have pointed out that solutions outside Moroccan sovereignty are considered unrealistic, irrational, and unworkable. Major powers have clearly shown their positions: the United States maintains constant support for the Moroccan Sahara; France and Spain regard autonomy as a “serious and credible basis”; Arab and Gulf countries see stability in the Sahara as a milestone for regional security in the Arab and African areas.
In summary, the Sahara issue goes beyond negotiating “who owns the Sahara” and has become a broader impasse focused on implementing regional autonomy and expanding development efforts. This change highlights the importance of promoting sustainable growth and self-governance, both of which are essential to achieving long-term stability and prosperity. By emphasizing these priorities, stakeholders can work together to find solutions that meet local needs and encourage regional progress, thus shifting the focus from territorial disputes to constructive development.
