   |
|
afrol News, 18 July - Though it is difficult to sympathise with Morocco's initial move on 11 July, sparking off the crisis over Perejil/Leila Island, Spain's military action yesterday first and foremost is a reminder of the imperfect process of decolonisation in north-western Africa. The region is full of interwoven colonialist anachronisms. If the decolonisation process in southern Africa had ended as it has in north-western Africa, a map over the area would have looked rather ridiculous: The Cape would be a British crown colony in accordance with its thus white majority of inhabitants. Equally, there would have been some Portuguese towns in Mozambique. The small, uninhabited islands off South Africa and Mozambique would be British/Portuguese. And South Africa would still deny Namibians their independence. It's all defendable with a quick look at history: The Cape and Mozambican towns had been on European hands for an equally long time as the Spanish exclaves in northern Morocco - Ceuta and Melilla - have been, and even longer than Gibraltar has been British. Cape Town and for example Beira were founded by European settlers and a referendum at decolonisation would probably have given a massive vote in favour of staying within the ailing empires. Examples of this could be found all over Africa; in the thus French towns of Senegal and Algeria, in the commercial farm areas of Zimbabwe and Kenya, etc. One just has to find the right entity - small or big - and there would be a historic claim to deny decolonisation. Also other tricks to bungle decolonisation have been used. One theory has been that an African nation cannot be labelled a colonial power, an argument that could be used to incorporate a neighbour territory struggling to decolonise. South Africa's occupation of Namibia until 1990 is the main example. All these concepts of imperfect decolonisation are today only displayed in one corner of Africa; the corner most close to Europe. The rest of Africa and the world have accepted the concept of decolonising entire territories and thus the establishment of ethnic minorities, which are to be given special rights. But why was decolonisation never completed in this north-western Africa? The reasons are many, and some may be sought in the proximity to Europe and the strategic importance of the Strait of Gibraltar. Gibraltar itself is a key to the mystery's door. The British possession has been a torn in the eye of Spain since it was given up in 1713. It has meant a constant humiliation for the once largest empire of the world (Spain) to have a rock of its territory colonised by the succeeding world empire (UK). This probably had enormous symbolic importance as Spain gave up its Northern Morocco protectorate in 1956. With Ceuta and Melilla, Spain created its own Gibraltars in North Africa. Further, Morocco's decolonisation was early and complicated. Nowadays' Morocco was composed of a large French protectorate, a northern Spanish protectorate, several southern Spanish protectorates and the demilitarised city of Tangier (also at the Strait of Gibraltar). Decolonisation was gradual and came before the UN in 1960 defined the rules of the game. Having to deal with Spain's nationalist dictator Franco did not make Morocco's task easier. Decolonisation thus ended up imperfect. This imperfection in turn created Moroccan frustrations. Frustration against the colonial powers indeed ended in aggression all over the region. In Algeria, a similar imperfection - the north of the country was an integrated part of France, not a colony - led to a long and brutal liberation war that ended in French defeat. Morocco turned in on the same road - though somewhat less violent - and has staid on it ever since. The Kingdom threatened the use of force to obtain today's South Morocco from Spain. In 1958, Spain ceded Tarfaya and other remaining southern protectorates to Morocco. A few years thereafter, Western Sahara - just south of Tarfaya - was made a Spanish province, which now was claimed by Morocco. While decolonisation remained unfinished at the northern coast, Morocco turned all its attention southwards as the Sahrawi people entered their decolonisation process in the beginning of the 1970s. Ignoring several UN decisions towards the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination, Morocco invades Western Sahara in 1975. Morocco still occupies the territory and still denies the Sahrawi people its right to self-determination. Status quo since 1975 has been a Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, a British possession of Gibraltar, Spanish possession of Ceuta and Melilla and non-engagement by Morocco and Spain on a dozen islands off Morocco's coast. It is a status quo not liked by any party, and it does utter injustice to the Sahrawi people and Moroccan territorial integrity. Status quo was altered one week ago, as Morocco attacked the most ridiculous demonstration of north-western Africa's imperfect decolonisation; an uninhabited rock 200 metres off Morocco's coast and within Moroccan territorial waters. The independent state of Morocco had every reason to be furious about this anachronistic colonial monument called Perejil in Spain and Leila in Morocco. An occupation was however not the most clever way to alter the unpopular status quo. Of course, Spain could not accept the unilateral altering of status quo, however ridiculous its claim over Perejil/Leila might be. It was not a question of Perejil/Leila, it was a regional question. Spain however wasted its chances of reaching a better regional deal by its military attack on the Moroccan soldiers holding the rock. Spain's occupation of Perejil/Leila has made Morocco the humiliated victim. It displays the anachronistic claim of worthless colonial possessions off an African country, rightfully called "an integral part of Moroccan territory" by Rabat. On the long term, the only solution to this will have to be turning them over to Morocco and complete the decolonisation of the area. By occupying Perejil/Leila, Spain however threw away the key to a broader solution to the region's imperfect decolonisation. Before this act, Spain was the perceived victim and could count on the cooperation of the European Union in imposing economic sanctions against Morocco - this time even with the possibility of silencing France, Morocco's main ally. Economic pressure from a united Europe against Morocco would have made a solution on the Sahrawi crisis possible - in exchange for the dissolution of other anachronisms in the region; the uninhabited islands, Ceuta, Melilla and Gibraltar. Spain however prefers to return to status quo, as its government now "nobly" keeps on repeating. A "shared sovereignty" over Perejil/Leila - today presented in Madrid as "status quo" - is nothing less than continued imperfect decolonisation. The Spanish government therefore shows its real face of enduring colonialist ideology. Nothing better can however be said about the Moroccan and British governments, also firmly opposing a final and complete agreement on the region's decolonisation.
|
