Biden’s Dangerous Refusal to Reverse Trump’s Western Sahara Policy

Foreign Policy In Focus, Jan. 21, 2022: In his final weeks in office, President Donald Trump stunned the international community in formally recognizing Western Sahara as part of Morocco. Morocco has occupied much of its southern neighbor since 1975, when it invaded and annexed the former Spanish colony in defiance of the United Nations Security Council and a landmark ruling of the International Court of Justice… Find more at Western-Sahara.org.

Sudan’s 2019 Revolution The Power of Civil Resistance

Stephen Zunes’ April 2021 report* reviews the chronology of the resistance struggle in Sudan, the critical role of nonviolent discipline, other factors contributing to the movement’s success, and the current political situation. It seeks to explain how the movement was able to succeed despite enormous odds against it, and what lessons could be learned by those facing similarly difficult circumstances. Given the serious challenges facing the new civilian-led government, there is a real possibility that—as was the case following successful pro-democracy struggles decades earlier—the military could again seize power. However, there are also reasons for hope… Download the PDF here or at *The International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC).

Will Biden Admin Reverse Trump’s “Dangerous” Recognition of Morocco’s Occupation of Western Sahara?

DemocracyNow! Feb. 5, 2021, full transcript and video
President Donald Trump broke with decades of U.S. foreign policy in the waning days of his administration and recognized Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, a territory the country has occupied since 1975 in defiance of the United Nations and the international community. U.S. recognition came as Morocco agreed to establish diplomatic relations with Israel, becoming the fourth Arab nation to do so in recent months as part of a regional push by the Trump administration to strengthen Israel without addressing the Palestinian conflict. Now the Biden administration must weigh whether to reverse Trump’s decision…. “The United Nations Charter is very clear expansion of territory by military force is illegitimate.”
See Zunes’s website and book Western Sahara.

Trump’s deal on Morocco’s Western Sahara annexation risks more global conflict

Washington Post December 13, 2020: Last week, President Trump formally recognized Morocco’s annexation of Western Sahara as part of a deal to get Morocco to normalize relations with Israel. But Morocco’s claim on Western Sahara is rejected by the United Nations, the World Court, the African Union and a broad consensus of international legal scholars that consider the region a non-self-governing territory that must be allowed an act of self-determination. This is why no country had formally recognized Morocco’s takeover — until now…

Trump Recognized Morocco’s Illegal Occupation to Boost the Israeli Occupation

Truthout: On December 10, the US became the only country to formally recognize Morocco’s illegal annexation of Western Sahara, the former Spanish colony forcibly seized by Moroccan forces in 1975. Trump’s proclamation is directly counter to a series of UN Security Council resolutions and a landmark World Court ruling calling for self-determination. Trump’s decision was a quid pro quo…

The East Timor Model Offers a Way out for Western Sahara and Morocco

Foreign Policy Dec. 9, 2020 – It’s not often that Western Sahara makes international headlines, but in mid-November it did: Nov. 14 marked the tragic—if unsurprising—breakup of a tenuous, 29-year cease-fire in Western Sahara between the occupying Moroccan government and pro-independence fighters. The outbreak of violence is concerning not only because it flew in the face of nearly three decades of relative stasis, but also because Western governments’ reflexive response to the resurgent conflict may be to upend—and thereby hamper and delegitimize for perpetuity over 75 years of established international legal principles…

Sudan’s Democratic Revolution is Being Undermined by the United States

By Stephen Zunes, June 20, 2020: Last year’s nonviolent pro-democracy revolution in Sudan which brought down the brutal 30-year dictatorship of Omar al-Bashir and the subsequent military junta inspired the world. Few popular uprisings in history faced such extremely difficult circumstances and few displayed the kind of courage, tenacity, and effective strategy by pro-democracy activists which led to their victory. Unfortunately, the United States has been pursuing policies which almost seem designed to destroy Sudan’s fragile democratic experiment…

INTERVIEW: The Sudanese Ousted a Dictator Last Year—Why Is Washington Still Imposing Sanctions?

The Nation and Rethinking Foreign Policy, March 20, 2020:
Middle East scholar Stephen Zunes… January 2020, traveled to Sudan to learn about the protest movement that ousted longtime dictator Omar al-Bashir last year. While the military regime Bashir headed is still a powerful force in Sudan, it has been pressed into sharing power with a civilian government in formation. Sudan’s future remains undecided… Sudan is still under strict US sanctions [d]espite now having a moderate, secular, civilian-led government… still listed as a state sponsor of terror. The U.S. spends billions to prop up a military dictatorship in Egypt and sells billions in arms to the Saudis and Emiratis in the Gulf, while a nearby democratic experiment is being punished by sanctions.

Sudan’s Democratic Revolution: How They Did It

Reposted April 2020 from Inside Arabia by ICNC,
Nonviolence International and The Conversation

Conditions under Sudan’s oppressive autocratic regime did not fit into what Western analysts see as the right ones for a successful pro-democracy civil resistance movement and yet they have emerged victorious—for now. Among other things, its success points to perhaps the single most important factor: nonviolent discipline

Reasons to oppose the proposed state anti-boycott bill

Santa Cruz Sentinel June 2, 2016:  The California State Assembly is considering a bill entitled the “Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions of Recognized Sovereign Nations or Peoples Act” (AB 2844) that could lead to penalizing California businesses that boycott any country or any products from a particular country — even if the product is being made in a colony or occupied territory or if it is made under illegal, inhumane or environmentally deleterious conditions. It would also deny state or local government contracts to sole proprietorships who participate in such boycotts.