Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Western Sahara

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 103 posts

Re: Western Sahara

#71

Post by yorwba »

stephbook wrote: post #70
yorwba wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sahrawis on the Moroccan controlled areas basically enjoy a welfare state with free transport, no VAT, and many other benefits. How is this implemented? Do ethnic Sahrawis get special IDs that entitle them to such benefits? Or do they also apply to Moroccan settlers from the north? And considering that Moroccan provincial boundaries don't align with the borders of Spanish West Africa, where does Western Sahara even…

He never said northerners don't get the same benefit. The contrast was obviously with Sahrawis on the Polisario side, which stay poor and Moroccans outside of the Sahara, which have to pay VAT.

Yes, since he said neither of these things nor the opposite, I decided to take the opportunity to ask instead of assuming. For example, is Guelmim-Oued Noun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guelmim-Oued_Noun inside or outside the sahara for VAT purposes, or does it have a VAT border running straight across it? Such things would be interesting to know.

Re: Western Sahara

#72

Post by culi »

foco_tubi wrote: post #39
culi wrote: post #3

It's fascinating. Basically the entire world's phosphate comes from this (it has 70% of the world's proven reserves). No country on earth recognizes Morocco's claims over this Saharawi land. At least they didn't until 2020 when Trump became the first in exchange for Morocco normalizing relations with Israel. The case has been taken to international court multiple times and always ruled against Morocco's claims. Despi…

In 2023, Israel formally recognized Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara.

Ah you're right. That makes two states other than morocco

Re: Western Sahara

#73

Post by applicative »

kombine wrote: post #59

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_March exactly the same thing as what they tried to pull off in Ceuta last week, and with the support of the US. Since the occupation began, Morocco settled hundreds of thousands of its own people. Not surprising that another settler colonial state, Israel, is Morocco's ally.

All the North African states are settler colonies. The Arab states expelled their Jews , who predated Arabs and Islam across North Africa

Re: Western Sahara

#74

Post by fy20 »

timinou wrote: post #53
artnanika wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling Morocco a "constitutional monarchy" when it is a hereditary dictatorship with no binding constitution (meaning no greater authority to punish the king for violating the "constitution") discredits all the other points you've made. Also, there's a difference between undemocratic and antidemocratic. Morocco is antidemocratic, while Polisario is undemocratic. Polisario could be a democracy if it allows its leader…

Here's a link to Morocco's constitution in English: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_2011 We kinda voted for it, so it's quite binding on the king. We also have elections in a couple of months. The king has clear areas where he's limited, for example that he has to appoint the chief of government from the party that came in first. In practice though, democracy doesn't seem to work at enacting ve…

Doesn't sound much different from Britain, especially the part about long term plans and oligarchs. Except no Briton alive today voted for monarchy :)

Re: Western Sahara

#75

Post by timinou »

yorwba wrote: post #46
timinou wrote: post #29

A couple of misconceptions about Western Sahara I've seen pop up over the past few days: - most (90%) of Morocco's phosphate mining is done in non-disputed territories (it's mentioned in the article). The most disputed resource is actually fish, and to some degree predicted oil reserves. - Tribal allegiances to the Moroccan crown date back from way before colonial times. Today, part of the Sahrawi population supports…

> Sahrawis on the Moroccan controlled areas basically enjoy a welfare state with free transport, no VAT, and many other benefits. How is this implemented? Do ethnic Sahrawis get special IDs that entitle them to such benefits? Or do they also apply to Moroccan settlers from the north? And considering that Moroccan provincial boundaries don't align with the borders of Spanish West Africa, where does Western Sahara even…

Ok so anyone making a company ends up getting the same tax benefits on company taxes (to "attract investments"), but they don't get access to the "kartiya", which is the welfare card that ethnic Sahrawis get. Here's a PDF that mentions it https://www.crisisgroup.org/sites/default/files/227-negotiat... and here's an Arabic article about it https://www.dakhlanews.com/63328/

The investment incentives let the local elites coopt the Moroccan government, while the card buys the assent of lower income Sahrawis. It's caused systemic unemployment, despite Sahrawis GDP per capita being 26% over the national average (The PDF is from an NGO so it gives a relatively unbiased view of the situation)

From the Moroccan perspective, Western Sahara is just the Southern provinces. I'm guessing if you're part of a Sahrawi tribe, you get the card. It's less about where you live.

Also, people who relocate from the refugee camps to Morocco get that card + housing.

Re: Western Sahara

#77

Post by timinou »

mohamedkoubaa wrote: post #50
timinou wrote: post #29

A couple of misconceptions about Western Sahara I've seen pop up over the past few days: - most (90%) of Morocco's phosphate mining is done in non-disputed territories (it's mentioned in the article). The most disputed resource is actually fish, and to some degree predicted oil reserves. - Tribal allegiances to the Moroccan crown date back from way before colonial times. Today, part of the Sahrawi population supports…

As a North African, your inability to respect the right to self determination of a an aggreived minority population has nothing to do with the "economic integration of North Africa".

If you can find the empathy to do so, please reread my post realising that the people under a government are not the government itself. Morocco ≠ Moroccans.

The reality is we're all subjugated. Moroccans, Sahrawis, or Americans. And we're all minorities in Morocco: Sahrawis, Riffis, Chlouh, Doukkali, Chamá-lo, Fassi, Meknessi, Soussi, and I can keep going. The issues people are saying about the Moroccan government's behaviour in the Sahara are just as true in other places in Morocco. And they're just as bad as what any government who's taken by oligarchs does to its population.

"Economic integration" = more trade = more power together.

Re: Western Sahara

#78

Post by timinou »

artnanika wrote: post #61
timinou wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a link to Morocco's constitution in English: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_2011 We kinda voted for it, so it's quite binding on the king. We also have elections in a couple of months. The king has clear areas where he's limited, for example that he has to appoint the chief of government from the party that came in first. In practice though, democracy doesn't seem to work at enacting ve…

For reference, Algeria too has a constitution : https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Algeria_2020 But I assume you did not call Algeria a constitutional dictatorship because the Algerian constitution itself isn't really binding. If your constitution doesn't allow for the impeachment of the head of state/government for violations of the constitution, then it is effectively meaningless. That's the difference…

You don't need a constitution to depose leaders, a popular revolution will do the trick. Also, an impeachment clause doesn't prevent fascism. Many supposed democracies see their leaders flout the constitution constantly without consequences.

Constitution aren't truths, they're collective lies we agreed upon. In Morocco, authority is a social contract that is bound by customs, not by a blind belief in the moral superiority of law.

An impeachment clause is only necessary when you believe that government is the ultimate authority. If Moroccans believed that, then yes, your argument about hereditary monarchy would make sense.

That's not the case. No-one believes in authority here; we only accept it. So we know that if the king loses legitimacy, a popular revolution will happen. And the king knows that, so he won't push the buttons too much either.

Re: Western Sahara

#79

Post by gozucito »

There is a lot of simplistic, one-sided information in this thread. Truth is it's a complicated matter to decide how long and how strongly one has to hold a piece of territory before it is considered legitimately theirs. And what about language or cultural differences? Does that change things?

Should the Canaries be Spanish or African? Catalunya? Basque country? Should Gibraltar be British? Sicily Italian? The list goes on and on. In all these cases you will find people who will hold opposing opinions on this.

Moroccans firmly believe Western Sahara to be historically Moroccan. They also believe that Ceuta and Melilla are Moroccan, despite the fact they've been in Iberian hands for 500 years. They are called the colonized cities of Ceuta and Melilla on the TV and Radio.

The Moroccans I spoke to believe the government looked the other way to show displeasure at Spain because a Spanish minister visited Algeria to buy gas and oil. Obviously with the Iran war, Algeria's revenues and importance has grown.

Morocco and Algeria both view a side gaining influence as a zero-sum: if it's good for Morocco it is bad for Algerian interests and vice versa.

Meanwhile if all the north African countries united and built international infrastructure and cooperated like the UAE did, the entire southern Mediterranean coastal region would have been much better off.

One thing is clear: This cold war is a total waste of potential and a socioeconomic poison.

Re: Western Sahara

#80

Post by EdwardDiego »

applicative wrote: post #73
kombine wrote: post #59

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_March exactly the same thing as what they tried to pull off in Ceuta last week, and with the support of the US. Since the occupation began, Morocco settled hundreds of thousands of its own people. Not surprising that another settler colonial state, Israel, is Morocco's ally.

All the North African states are settler colonies. The Arab states expelled their Jews , who predated Arabs and Islam across North Africa

Do you have any references for that claim? I wasn't aware that the Berbers, who've been there since the Stone Age, were predated by the Jewish people.
Post reply on HN