The Interplay of Diplomatic Calculations and Economic Interests in North Africa and the Sahel

 

The Western Sahara dispute can no longer be understood solely through the political and legal disagreement over the territory’s final status. It has become part of a broader regional equation in which diplomatic, economic, and security interests intersect, ranging from Atlantic ports and trade corridors to relations among the Maghreb states and competition for influence in the Sahel. This convergence highlights the territory’s geographical significance, its connections to transportation and trade networks, and the impact of the protracted dispute on prospects for regional cooperation.

In this context, the positions of Spain, Mauritania, and Algeria stand out as influential factors in the regional environment surrounding the dispute, although each country has different motivations and priorities. Madrid seeks to balance its relations with Morocco and Algeria with its economic and security interests. Nouakchott focuses on maintaining stability along its borders and strengthening its commercial role, while Algiers maintains its support for self-determination and rejects the notion that Morocco’s autonomy initiative should serve as the exclusive basis for a settlement.

The coincidence of these positions with economic and strategic projects does not, however, establish the existence of confirmed political quid pro quos. Rather, it calls for an examination of how different interests interact and how they might affect the settlement process and the future of regional relations.

First: The United Nations Process and the Limits of Change in Settlement Approaches

The United Nations-led process remains the principal international framework for reaching a political solution to the dispute. Negotiations related to Morocco’s autonomy initiative gained additional significance following the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 2797 on October 31, 2025. The resolution extended the mandate of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) until October 31, 2026, and called for negotiations based on the Moroccan initiative, with the aim of achieving a just, lasting, and mutually acceptable political solution that provides for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara. The resolution also indicated that genuine autonomy could represent a viable outcome.

This development reflects the strengthened position of Morocco’s initiative within the UN negotiating framework. It does not, however, mean that the dispute has been definitively resolved or that all parties have accepted a single vision for the territory’s final status. Fundamental differences remain over sovereignty, the form of self-determination, and the political and legal mechanisms required to end the dispute.

It is therefore necessary to distinguish between shifts in the positions of influential states and the achievement of a final agreement acceptable to the parties concerned. Diplomatic support for a particular proposal may strengthen its negotiating position, but it cannot replace agreement on implementation details and institutional and legal guarantees.

This distinction is particularly important when analyzing the economic interests of neighboring countries. Changes in diplomatic positions cannot automatically be attributed to economic arrangements connected to the dispute. A more rigorous approach is to examine declared interests, documented developments, and possible links between them, while avoiding the assumption that temporal coincidence constitutes proof of a causal relationship.

Second: Spain Between Economic Interests and Shifts in Foreign Policy

Spain provides an important case for understanding the relationship between foreign policy, economic interests, and security considerations in the Western Sahara dispute. In March 2022, the government of Pedro Sánchez announced its support for Morocco’s autonomy initiative, describing it as the most serious, realistic, and credible basis for resolving the dispute. This represented a shift from Spain’s previous approach, which had emphasized the need for a just, lasting, and mutually acceptable solution without endorsing a specific settlement formula.

The announcement was followed by an improvement in relations between Madrid and Rabat, alongside a deterioration in Spanish-Algerian relations and the imposition of restrictions and disruptions affecting aspects of bilateral trade.

These developments demonstrate that positions on Western Sahara cannot be separated from the broader network of bilateral relations and interests involving energy, trade, security, and migration. Nevertheless, explaining Spain’s policy shift requires consideration of these factors collectively, without reducing it to a single economic interest or assuming the existence of an undisclosed agreement concerning specific projects.

Within Spain, the government’s position remains the subject of political debate, with differing assessments of its implications for relations with Algeria and Morocco and for Spanish interests in the western Mediterranean and the Atlantic. This debate reflects the multiple centers of influence involved in shaping Spanish foreign policy, where government considerations intersect with party, parliamentary, and economic positions.

The Dakhla Atlantic Port and Competition in the Maritime Domain

The Dakhla Atlantic Port project is one of the initiatives that could influence the region’s economic geography over the long term, given its location on Morocco’s Atlantic coast and its potential connections to trade routes leading toward sub-Saharan Africa and international markets.

These prospects raise questions about the future relationship between Moroccan ports and Spanish ports, particularly those in the Canary Islands, where maritime transport, logistics services, and trade account for a significant share of economic activity. Expanded Moroccan port capacity could redistribute some trade flows and investment, but it could also create opportunities for integration in transportation, storage, and distribution services.

This comparison brings to mind the experience of Tanger Med Port, which has strengthened Morocco’s position in international maritime transport networks. However, assessing the potential impact of the Dakhla port requires consideration of differences in geographical location, target markets, operational infrastructure, and the types of services offered, as well as actual demand for the port once it becomes operational.

It is therefore premature to conclude that the project will necessarily weaken ports in the Canary Islands. Nor is it reasonable to assume that it will automatically produce a transformation comparable to that achieved by Tanger Med. Its eventual economic impact will depend on its ability to attract shipping lines and investment, develop road and logistics connections, and provide competitive and sustainable services.

Spanish interests are also connected to discussions concerning maritime zones and natural resources in the Atlantic, as well as unresolved issues in bilateral relations, including Ceuta and Melilla. Although these issues are strategically important, they require separate analysis. Their coincidence with Madrid’s shift in position on the autonomy initiative is insufficient to establish the existence of a political quid pro quo.

Third: Mauritania Between Diplomatic Neutrality, Border Security, and Economic Development

Mauritania occupies a particularly important position in the Western Sahara equation because of its geographical location between Morocco and the Sahel, its commercial and security ties with West African countries, and the reliance of part of its economy on ports and land and maritime corridors. Regional stability is therefore a direct interest for Nouakchott, regardless of the final outcome of the negotiations.

Mauritania has adopted an approach characterized by positive neutrality in the dispute, maintaining relations with the parties concerned while avoiding alignment that could limit its ability to manage its security and economic interests. A UN report on developments in the dispute noted the continuation of consultations by the Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy with Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, and the Polisario Front as part of efforts to advance the political process.

This position gives Mauritania the opportunity to play an important diplomatic role, but it also requires caution in responding to developments that could affect border security or trade flows through its territory. A political settlement, provided that the necessary conditions for stability and implementation are met, could reduce the risks associated with the continuation of the dispute and create a more favorable environment for economic cooperation with Morocco and the Sahel countries.

Borders and La Güera: Distinguishing Legal Clarification from Political Claims

The question of borders is likely to arise in the context of any potential settlement, as certain issues may require precise definitions of jurisdiction and legal and security arrangements. However, claims that Mauritania is seeking clarification of the territory’s final borders, based on media reports about meetings or UN documents, require examination of the original documents to verify the wording, context, and official status of the reported position.

Analytically, it is essential not to confuse a request to clarify international borders and the legal arrangements accompanying a final agreement with an assertion that an unsubstantiated territorial claim or sovereignty dispute exists.

The same principle applies to La Güera, located at the southern end of the territory near Nouadhibou. Its geographical position gives it significance in discussions concerning borders and maritime routes, but this fact alone does not justify concluding that Mauritania has an undisclosed territorial claim or that an official dispute exists over territory under Mauritanian sovereignty.

A scholarly examination of this issue requires a clear distinction between geographical facts, documented official positions, and assessments of possible future scenarios. Without such distinctions, analytical possibilities may be transformed into political conclusions unsupported by sufficient evidence.

Nouadhibou and Atlantic Ports: Opportunities for Integration and the Limits of Competition

Nouadhibou is an important economic and maritime center for Mauritania. Its port, fisheries, and commercial activities provide a foundation for expanding the country’s connections with regional and international markets. In this context, the development of Moroccan and Mauritanian port infrastructure could create opportunities to integrate logistics services and cross-border trade, particularly with markets in the Sahel and sub-Saharan Africa.

This possibility does not eliminate competition for investment, cargo flows, and services. Whether the relationship between the ports is primarily complementary or competitive will depend on their respective specializations, operational efficiency, transportation costs, and the quality of their connections to road networks and target markets.

Mauritania’s interests therefore extend beyond border issues to include broadening the national economic base and strengthening the country’s position in Atlantic trade. Political stability could support these objectives, but it is not the only determining factor. Infrastructure quality, the investment climate, and the ability to attract commercial activities remain crucial to turning geographical location into a genuine economic advantage.

Fourth: Algeria and the Continuing Divergence over the Territory’s Future

Algeria remains one of the most influential regional actors in the dispute, given its support for the Polisario Front and its commitment to the principle of self-determination. Morocco, by contrast, asserts its sovereignty over the territory and promotes an autonomy initiative under Moroccan sovereignty. This divergence is one of the principal sources of tension in Moroccan-Algerian relations and also affects prospects for broader regional cooperation.

Disagreements over Western Sahara have affected Algeria’s relations with some European partners. In 2022, Algeria suspended its Treaty of Friendship, Good-Neighbourliness, and Cooperation with Spain following the Sánchez government’s change of position. Trade relations between the two countries subsequently experienced disruptions and restrictions.

This case illustrates how disagreements related to the dispute can have economic consequences extending beyond the parties directly involved, particularly when diplomatic positions conflict with the calculations underlying bilateral partnerships and trade and energy interests.

Nevertheless, it is important to distinguish between the documented impact of political disagreements on economic relations and the assumption that all trade or investment decisions are directly linked to the dispute. International relations are influenced by multiple factors, and an economic decision may coincide with political tensions without being caused by them alone.

Meanwhile, Moroccan diplomacy has sought to broaden international support for the autonomy initiative, building on the positions of an increasing number of countries that view it as a basis for negotiations. International positions, however, remain divided, and expanded political recognition of the initiative is not equivalent to a final settlement accepted by the parties concerned.

These developments suggest that the continuing disagreement between Algeria and Morocco is not solely a result of their differing positions on Western Sahara. It is also connected to broader competition for regional influence and divergent conceptions of security and Maghreb cooperation. Resolving the dispute could create more favorable conditions for dialogue, but it would not automatically eliminate all bilateral disagreements.

Fifth: Future Scenarios Between Political Settlement and the Reshaping of Economic Interests

The region’s future can be examined through three analytical scenarios. These should not be understood as certain predictions, but rather as possibilities dependent on the outcome of negotiations and the conduct of the parties concerned.

Scenario One: Reaching an Implementable Political Settlement

An agreement acceptable to the parties could reduce legal and political uncertainty, improve the investment climate, and expand opportunities for cooperation in infrastructure, ports, and trade. It could also open the way for broader regional dialogue on security and development in North Africa and the Sahel.

The realization of these outcomes, however, would depend on the substance of the agreement, the accompanying guarantees, the mechanisms for implementation, and the extent to which the parties accept and comply with it.

Scenario Two: Continued Negotiations Without a Final Agreement

In this scenario, diplomatic initiatives could continue alongside competition among countries to attract investment, develop ports, and expand trade partnerships. Economic cooperation might persist in some areas despite political disagreements, while other projects would remain exposed to risks arising from uncertainty.

Under this scenario, economic interests could develop unevenly without necessarily producing a fundamental change in the positions of the parties.

Scenario Three: Continued Regional Polarization

If political disagreements persist without meaningful progress, diplomatic and economic competition could intensify, further constraining opportunities for cooperation among the Maghreb countries. This could affect the coordination of trade and security policies and limit the region’s ability to capitalize on its position in Atlantic trade and its economic links with the Sahel.

Nevertheless, the scale of these effects would depend on the extent to which political tensions translate into actual economic decisions.

These scenarios demonstrate that the relationship between political settlement and economic development is neither automatic nor unidirectional. Stability may create more favorable conditions for investment and cooperation, but realizing economic benefits also requires effective public policies, appropriate infrastructure, stable legal frameworks, and the capacity to manage competition among projects and ports.

Conclusion: A Settlement as a Pathway to Regional Stability

The positions of Spain, Mauritania, and Algeria demonstrate that the Western Sahara dispute extends beyond the political disagreement over the territory’s final status. It affects a broader network of diplomatic, economic, and security relations across North Africa and the Sahel. Spain seeks to balance its partnerships and Atlantic interests; Mauritania prioritizes border security, development, and the strengthening of its commercial position; while Algeria continues to advocate a different vision for the territory’s future amid ongoing tensions with Morocco.

These interactions alone, however, are insufficient to establish the existence of a comprehensive regional deal linking diplomatic positions to economic projects. Demonstrating such a connection would require direct evidence, official documents, or reliable information revealing the nature of the relationship between political decisions and economic interests.

The United Nations remains the principal framework for the political process, while prospects for a settlement depend on the parties’ ability to overcome disagreements concerning sovereignty, self-determination, and the future system of governance. A final agreement could create opportunities to develop trade, infrastructure, and security cooperation. Such outcomes would not materialize automatically, however, but would depend on the quality of the political and legal arrangements and the extent to which they are implemented.

Ultimately, the strategic importance of resolving the dispute lies not merely in realigning diplomatic positions, but in the possibility of building a more stable regional environment—one that allows geographical advantages, ports, and trade corridors to become instruments of development and cooperation rather than remaining entangled in political competition among the countries of the region.