EU and Western Sahara

Last week, the EU endorsed a fishing deal with Morocco. This wouldn't be a problem if it weren't for the fact that the deal includes the coastal waters of Western Sahara, a territory that has been occupied by Morroco for more than thirty years.

In the same week that the people of Montenegro had to produce a special qualified majority in order to have its independence recognized by the European Union, that same European Union sends now some very dubious signals to the indigenous people of Western Sahara. It endorsed a fishing deal with Morocco worth 114 million euros, and didn't object to the coastal waters of Western Sahara being included in the deal. According to international law, an occupying country isn't allowed to make deals that include the natural resources of occupied territory. The only European country that objected to this deal was Sweden, though the Netherlands stated that «the benefits of the deal should also accrue to the indigenous people of Western Sahara». Whether this has any value is very doubtful. If Morocco would be interested in the fate of the people of Western Sahara at all, then maybe it wouldn't occupy the territory, let alone try to «morocconize» it. Ireland and Finland gave also some support to the Swedes, but at the end of the day they and the Netherlands decided to approve the fishing deal just like the other EU members.

What's the matter with the European Union? Where are all those advocates of the Big Principles, those who object to war and occupation, even when the goal is to overthrow a merciless dictator? In the end, this fishing deal is a de facto recognition of the Moroccon occupation of Western Sahara, and some sort of stipulation that this would not be the case is completely worthless: we're asked to listen what the EU says, but not to watch what they do at the very same time. The only conclusion can be that apparently, fish and oil are two different things to the in its own eyes moral superior Europe.

But on a more fundamental level, this case shows once again that the European Union doesn't care much about a people's right to self-determination when its own interests are at stake. The rights of Western Sahara have to make place for the trawlers of Spain, Portugal and France. In Montenegro, the EU's interests weren't economical, but internal political: countries like Spain, France and Belgium are allergic to referendums about independence, and therefore the European Union would have preferred that Montenegro would have kept quiet in its union with Serbia. Imagine that one day 55% of the Basques would vote for independence in some sort of referendum – how is the EU supposed to handle something like that? That's why it shouldn't come as a surprise that the EU doesn't have much trouble getting over the occupation of Western Sahara when it signs a deal with Morocco. The Kurds, the Catalans, the Basques, the Scottish and the Welsh better watch out.


I some times wonder, if lying is the same thing as stealing. It does seem that many Leaders of todays governments have and are talking out of both sides of their mouths. They seem to say one thing and do another. Truth in what they say is not reflected in what they do. this leaves me to wonder,
"will there be any politicians in heaven".

The EU's true colors

This tell us a great deal about the Union.  Talk a good game about human rights as long as it doesn't cost you anything, but crush anyone or anything that gets in your way when your interests are at stake.

Have you read this week's

Have you read this week's Knack?

One of the two independant weekly 'journals' will probably have to stop due to a 300.000€ fine after Claude Moniquet (ESISC; ) filed a complaint against the journal. The journal had incinuated that Moniquet's rather about the Western Sahara was written in a subjective Pro-Rabat manner.

Knack, normally just lyers!

Claude Moniquet stated earlier he would normally not request that amount and if he would use it for a good action.

That weekly was looking itself for it as they refused his reaction to the diffamation in their paper. Le Soir was even worse in diffamation of Moniquet, but they realised very quickly they better printed his reaction!

Another independant weekly in Morocco could also be easily sued for antisemitism:
and as Tel Quel is also best friend of our Onkelinx, I would love to see that happening!