The Polisario Front is no longer demanding a referendum, independence, or the implementation of the settlement plan drafted nearly four decades ago by the UN and the Organization of African Unity. Instead, it now advocates for a «mutually acceptable political solutio» to the Sahara issue. Are we witnessing a turning point? To better understand the reasons behind this shift in the Front's leadership, Yabiladi spoke with Mohamed Elghet Malainine, Vice President of the Moroccan Center for Parallel Diplomacy and Dialogue of Civilizations (CMDPDC). Did the Polisario give in to Donald Trump's demands by setting aside some of its claims? Not exactly. It's less about abandonment than about a temporary strategy, driven largely by pressure from the UN Security Council. This body has moved from a wait-and-see approach to gradually adopting Morocco's pragmatic discourse: first by downplaying the referendum, then by elevating the autonomy option, and ultimately recognizing the legitimacy of that project. In this context, U.S. pressure under Trump, backed by France and the United Kingdom, has not pushed the Polisario to surrender, but rather to buy time for its political survival. That pressure, however, creates an existential dilemma: if the Polisario continues to reject autonomy, it risks being labeled a terrorist organization by Washington, with all the consequences that would entail. But if it accepts, it loses its very raison d'être. This turning point reflects not only the failure to impose the referendum but also an unspoken acknowledgment of how far the dynamics of the dossier have shifted. Is this shift simply a tactic to wait out Trump's presidency, or the consequence of the Polisario's repeated failures to assert itself? A bit of both. On one hand, the leadership is trying to buy time, as if history could be paused. On the other, it is paying for decades of strategic failure. The referendum deadlock is no accident, it's the result of a failed strategy. More critically, the movement has not grasped the scale of ongoing geopolitical changes. Defending the referendum today means defending an obsolete solution, already buried by reality and by the Security Council's push toward autonomy. And hoping that Trump's departure would change things is an illusion: he has been gone for four years, and under Biden the U.S. line has not shifted an inch. Is this turning point due to Algerian pressure? Largely, yes. Algeria remains the Polisario's main backer, but it is also under strain. Internationally, momentum is moving against it: Washington, Paris, and London continue to repeat that Moroccan autonomy is the only credible option. The stronger pressure, though, is internal. The economy is fragile, society is tense, and many Algerians see the Sahara as an expensive burden. Voices like that of Noureddine Boukrouh, a former minister under Abdelaziz Bouteflika, openly argue that this path is a dead end. The problem is that the regime remains captive to Boumediene's legacy and Cold War-era rhetoric. It cannot bring itself to acknowledge an obvious truth: there will be no victory, only the possibility of an honorable compromise. In your view, will this turning point be accepted by members of the Polisario? It depends what we mean by «members». If we are talking about the inhabitants of the Tindouf camps, the answer is clear: they are not militants but population trapped in an endless conflict. The latest UN Secretary-General's report, published in July 2025, gave alarming figures: 13% of children suffer from acute malnutrition, a rate the WHO says is just one step from famine. In this context, talk of acceptance or rejection makes little sense: these families above all aspire to dignity and a better future. If, however, we mean the core militants who still belong to the Polisario, it's worth noting that many do so less out of ideological conviction than because of everyday constraints: unable to return to Morocco or to emigrate to Spain, they remain stuck. Their «acceptance» is not a political choice, but the result of social and existential entrapment.
