“The Spanish support for Morocco in the Sahara is a necessity to walk together”

How do you think Spaniards perceive Moroccans?

I consider that as neighbors we do not know each other well. The Spaniard sees a Moroccan as the opposite of his own identity, a permanent threat. This does not happen with the English or the French despite the continuous wars of Spain with these nations. But his country has the advantage of having an Eastern civilization at its doors and that geographical proximity must be converted into a cultural and human closeness.

Spain and Morocco have just put an end to ten months of diplomatic rupture, why has it not been achieved until the Spanish Government has publicly said that the autonomy plan for the Sahara is the most serious, realistic and credible basis for resolving the dispute?

Spain is Morocco’s first trading partner and its strategic ally in the 21st century. Territorial integrity is a vital issue for Morocco and he expected clear support for his plan for autonomy in the Sahara to settle this conflict that has lasted half a century. The occasion arose when the United States recognized Moroccan sovereignty over this territory. But the socialist government went in the opposite direction, trying to convince the new American administration to withdraw its recognition. Rabat perceived it as a betrayal of its alliance with Spain. Taking into account the new regional and international context and the weight of Spain’s interests in Morocco, support for the Moroccan plan became a necessity so that we can walk together towards the future.

From the point of view of the two countries, what does it mean that stability and mutual territorial integrity will be guaranteed in this new stage?

It assumes that Spain will not act unilaterally against the territorial integrity of Morocco, that is, in relation to the Sahara issue. The reception of the leader of the Polisario Front, Brahim Ghalim, was a unilateral act against the territorial integrity of Morocco. And it means that Morocco will do the same in relation to the territorial integrity of Spain. I think there will be more clarity and dialogue in the face of any problems that arise.

Of what use to Morocco is the support for its proposal from the US, Spain, France and Germany if the solution must come from the hands of the UN and the Polisario Front must accept it?

I wanted to insist on one thing, the real problem is between Morocco and Algeria. This is what explains why Algeria withdrew its ambassador from Madrid, following the Spanish government’s support for the Moroccan autonomy plan for the Sahara, while the representative of the Polisario Front in Spain remained in the country. Any solution would have to be accepted, first of all, by Algeria. The United States, France, Germany and now Spain see that this conflict has lasted a long time and endangers the stability of the entire Maghreb region. They are all countries with great weight in the UN and today recommend a political solution under Moroccan sovereignty because it is the only possible way out to put an end to this conflict, created by Algeria during the cold war era.

Former President Zapatero has said that there is no change in the Spanish position because in 2007 he already welcomed the Rabat plan. The Foreign Minister has pointed out that Rajoy also did it. Why does he believe that the Spanish Executive does not want to recognize this shift?

In my opinion, the decision of the Spanish Government to support the Moroccan autonomy plan for the Sahara has been one of the most complicated that the Executive of Pedro Sánchez has had to take in foreign policy. Because of the sensitivity of Spanish public opinion and some political parties. José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero could not do it, although he was convinced that it was the right thing to do in the national interest of Spain. The Executive of Mariano Rajoy also said it in a diplomatic way, but the political context did not help to take the step. The decision could be seen coming, but it required political courage and a favorable international and regional context.

How do you think this new stage of unprecedented relationship between the two countries will be?

More cooperation and more dialogue. There are many pending issues such as the High Level Meeting (RAN), between the two Governments, the meetings of the mixed commissions of the Interior to cooperate in the fight against illegal immigration and terrorism. Morocco is a key piece for the security of Europe and Africa. And he would add that reconciliation opens a window of opportunity for economic collaboration. Spain is our first commercial partner, 22,000 thousand Spanish companies export their products to Morocco. Relations are always healthy when political pragmatism rules and we prioritize cooperation. If ideology comes into play, turbulence is felt. I believe that the elite of both countries have to begin to reflect on the appropriate solutions to our problems with calm and pragmatism.

Do you think that Felipe VI’s speech last January was important, in which he urged to open this new stage?

The Spanish monarchy enjoys great respect in Morocco, there has always been a good harmony between the two monarchies since the time of King Hassan II and Juan Carlos I. He explained it in my book. The Spanish Royal House has always played a mediating role during bilateral crises. That is why I think that Felipe VI’s speech was an important step to pave the way for reconciliation. The Spanish monarch played an important role in the discreet diplomacy to reach the current agreement between the two kingdoms.

Morocco and Algeria have broken off diplomatic relations. Is there any possibility of resuming them and that Algiers will supply them with gas again?

Our relationship with Algeria goes beyond cooperation in energy matters, it is a sister country with whom we share many things. In my opinion, Morocco has done what it could to return the water to its course, but, unfortunately, the Algerian leaders looked the other way. They see in Morocco a traditional enemy in the Maghreb region, an imaginary enemy that they want to maintain to justify the high bills for the purchase of arms. It pains me to say it, but I am pessimistic on this subject. As they say, the pessimist is an optimist who has had bad experiences.