Follow us on social

President_trump_meets_with_israeli_prime_minister_benjamin_netanyahu_49452464996-scaled

Trump continues to mock int'l law with move on Israel-Morocco

The U.S. agreed to become the only country in the world to recognize Moroccan control over Western Sahara.

Analysis | Middle East

The Trump administration’s decision to recognize Moroccan control over Western Sahara in exchange for Moroccan normalization of relations with Israel marks a shameful day for America’s commitment to international law, human rights, and diplomacy.

With this decision, the United States becomes the only country in the world to recognize Morocco’s unilateral annexation of Western Sahara and further isolates itself on the international stage through its wanton disregard of the international norm of self-determination. Further, while Trump may claim this is an essential move toward peace in the Middle East, in fact this decision threatens to plunge an already volatile region deeper into crisis.

Located along the Atlantic Ocean and sandwiched between Mauritania and Morocco, Western Sahara is a former Spanish colony and current disputed territory. Roughly 70 percent of the territory is under de facto Moroccan control with the remaining 30 percent controlled by the Polisario, a local Sahrawi independence movement backed by Algeria and recognized by 39 other nations and the African Union as the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.

Large-scale conflict between Morocco and the Polisario began in 1975 following Spain’s withdrawal from the region. After a ceasefire in 1991, a U.N. peacekeeping force, MINURSO, was established with a primary mandate to “organize and ensure a free and fair referendum” on independence for the territory. Yet to date, no referendum has been held, and more than 100,000 refugees remain in camps located in the southern Algerian desert, with an additional 20,000 in Mauritania.

The International Court of Justice, in a major advisory ruling, supported this right for a free and fair referendum on self-determination in Western Sahara. A multitude of subsequent U.N. General Assembly and Security Council resolutions reaffirmed the right to self-determination for the Sahrawi people.


As the United Nations notes at the start of each resolution on Western Sahara, there is an “inalienable right of all peoples to self-determination and independence.” The Trump administration’s decision to unilaterally disregard this international norm dangerously undermines international law and the ability of peoples around the world to determine their own political status.

This decision not only subverts the power and authority of international law, but it also flies in the face of the long-held U.S. policy in support of a just and lasting political solution between Morocco and the Polisario.


Washington has consistently held the position that Morocco and the Polisario must come together to determine a mutually acceptable political solution to put an end to their conflict. In fact, from 1997 to 2004, former U.S. Secretary of State James Baker served as the U.N. Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy to Western Sahara and consistently pushed for a referendum on independence. The decision by a lame-duck president to disregard this policy damages U.S. credibility by calling into question Washington’s commitment to other long-held American positions elsewhere in the world.

Trump’s pronouncement also threatens to upend regional peace and security at an extraordinarily volatile time. While President Trump crowed on Twitter that this decision was “a massive breakthrough for peace in the Middle East,” in reality it is the opposite.

This unilateral decision will fuel recently renewed fighting between Morocco and the Polisario, which last month led to the collapse of the 29-year ceasefire. At a time of rising tensions in the Maghreb, this is a decision that will likely have far-reaching consequences for stability in the region, deeply complicate U.S. relations with Algeria, and stifle any chance for the Sahrawis to determine their own political future.

Undermining international law, disregarding long-standing U.S. policy, and contributing to the risk of regional conflict just to add a veneer of legitimacy to the Abraham Accords is a deal not worth making. As one of his first moves as president, Joe Biden must walk back this rash decision to recognize Moroccan control of Western Sahara.

At the same time, the Biden administration should work to ensure that Morrocco remains a close and valued American ally. The issue here is the recognition of the importance of following international law and maintaining global norms. Regardless of whether the people of Western Sahara choose autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty or independence, the decision must remain theirs alone.


President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence participate in an expanded bilateral meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Monday, Jan. 27, 2020, in the Oval Office of the White House. (Official White House Photo by D. Myles Cullen)
Analysis | Middle East
POGO The Bunker
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

Bombers astray! Washington's priorities go off course

Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.


keep readingShow less
Trump Zelensky
Top photo credit: Joshua Sukoff / Shutterstock.com

Blob exploiting Trump's anger with Putin, risking return to Biden's war

Europe

Donald Trump’s recent outburst against Vladimir Putin — accusing the Russian leader of "throwing a pile of bullsh*t at us" and threatening devastating new sanctions — might be just another Trumpian tantrum.

The president is known for abrupt reversals. Or it could be a bargaining tactic ahead of potential Ukraine peace talks. But there’s a third, more troubling possibility: establishment Republican hawks and neoconservatives, who have been maneuvering to hijack Trump’s “America First” agenda since his return to office, may be exploiting his frustration with Putin to push for a prolonged confrontation with Russia.

Trump’s irritation is understandable. Ukraine has accepted his proposed ceasefire, but Putin has refused, making him, in Trump’s eyes, the main obstacle to ending the war.

Putin’s calculus is clear. As Ted Snider notes in the American Conservative, Russia is winning on the battlefield. In June, it captured more Ukrainian territory and now threatens critical Kyiv’s supply lines. Moscow also seized a key lithium deposit critical to securing Trump’s support for Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russian missile and drone strikes have intensified.

Putin seems convinced his key demands — Ukraine’s neutrality, territorial concessions in the Donbas and Crimea, and a downsized Ukrainian military — are more achievable through war than diplomacy.

Yet his strategy empowers the transatlantic “forever war” faction: leaders in Britain, France, Germany, and the EU, along with hawks in both main U.S. parties. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz claims that diplomacy with Russia is “exhausted.” Europe’s war party, convinced a Russian victory would inevitably lead to an attack on NATO (a suicidal prospect for Moscow), is willing to fight “to the last Ukrainian.” Meanwhile, U.S. hawks, including liberal interventionist Democrats, stoke Trump’s ego, framing failure to stand up to Putin’s defiance as a sign of weakness or appeasement.

Trump long resisted this pressure. Pragmatism told him Ukraine couldn’t win, and calling it “Biden’s war” was his way of distancing himself, seeking a quick exit to refocus on China, which he has depicted as Washington’s greater foreign threat. At least as important, U.S. involvement in the war in Ukraine has been unpopular with his MAGA base.

But his June strikes on Iran may signal a hawkish shift. By touting them as a decisive blow to Iran’s nuclear program (despite Tehran’s refusal so far to abandon uranium enrichment), Trump may be embracing a new approach to dealing with recalcitrant foreign powers: offer a deal, set a deadline, then unleash overwhelming force if rejected. The optics of “success” could tempt him to try something similar with Russia.

This pivot coincides with a media campaign against restraint advocates within the administration like Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon policy chief who has prioritized China over Ukraine and also provoked the opposition of pro-Israel neoconservatives by warning against war with Iran. POLITICO quoted unnamed officials attacking Colby for wanting the U.S. to “do less in the world.” Meanwhile, the conventional Republican hawk Marco Rubio’s influence grows as he combines the jobs of both secretary of state and national security adviser.

What Can Trump Actually Do to Russia?
 

Nuclear deterrence rules out direct military action — even Biden, far more invested in Ukraine than Trump, avoided that risk. Instead, Trump ally Sen.Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), another establishment Republican hawk, is pushing a 500% tariff on nations buying Russian hydrocarbons, aiming to sever Moscow from the global economy. Trump seems supportive, although the move’s feasibility and impact are doubtful.

China and India are key buyers of Russian oil. China alone imports 12.5 million barrels daily. Russia exports seven million barrels daily. China could absorb Russia’s entire output. Beijing has bluntly stated it “cannot afford” a Russian defeat, ensuring Moscow’s economic lifeline remains open.

The U.S., meanwhile, is ill-prepared for a tariff war with China. When Trump imposed 145% tariffs, Beijing retaliated by cutting off rare earth metals exports, vital to U.S. industry and defense. Trump backed down.

At the G-7 summit in Canada last month, the EU proposed lowering price caps on Russian oil from $60 a barrel to $45 a barrel as part of its 18th sanctions package against Russia. Trump rejected the proposal at the time but may be tempted to reconsider, given his suggestion that more sanctions may be needed. Even if Washington backs the measure now, however, it is unlikely to cripple Russia’s war machine.

Another strategy may involve isolating Russia by peeling away Moscow’s traditionally friendly neighbors. Here, Western mediation between Armenia and Azerbaijan isn’t about peace — if it were, pressure would target Baku, which has stalled agreements and threatened renewed war against Armenia. The real goal is to eject Russia from the South Caucasus and create a NATO-aligned energy corridor linking Turkey to Central Asia, bypassing both Russia and Iran to their detriment.

Central Asia itself is itself emerging as a new battleground. In May 2025, the EU has celebrated its first summit with Central Asian nations in Uzbekistan, with a heavy focus on developing the Middle Corridor, a route for transportation of energy and critical raw materials that would bypass Russia. In that context, the EU has committed €10 billion in support of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route.

keep readingShow less
Syria sanctions
Top image credit: People line up to buy bread, after Syria's Bashar al-Assad was ousted, in Douma, on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria December 23, 2024. REUTERS/Zohra Bensemra

Lifting sanctions on Syria exposes their cruel intent

Middle East

On June 30, President Trump signed an executive order terminating the majority of U.S. sanctions on Syria. The move, which would have been unthinkable mere months ago, fulfilled a promise he made at an investment forum in Riyadh in May.“The sanctions were brutal and crippling,” he had declared to an audience of primarily Saudi businessmen. Lifting them, he said, will “give Syria a chance at greatness.”

The significance of this statement lies not solely in the relief that it will bring to the Syrian people. His remarks revealed an implicit but rarely admitted truth: sanctions — often presented as a peaceful alternative to war — have been harming the Syrian people all along.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.