Washington Examiner
by Michael Rubin
Bipartisan revulsion at President Trump’s betrayal of the Syrian Kurds reflects that, even in an age when foreign policy has become a partisan football, there is still broad belief that allies matter and that the word of the United States should mean something.
The ramifications of the betrayal of the Kurds in favor of Turkey — an ally in name only, whose leader is perhaps the world’s friendliest toward al Qaeda and the Islamic State — will be seen for generations. But, while the outrage at Trump’s actions dominates discussion of foreign policy in Congress, the slow-motion betrayal of Morocco, a consistent ally, remains mooted.
For most Americans, Morocco is simply a tourist destination, a touch of Africa and the Middle East amid youth hostels and five-star resorts. Yet for U.S. national security, it is much more.
Morocco was the first country to recognize American independence, just one year after the Declaration of Independence (the U.S. returned the favor by pressuring France to restore Morocco’s full independence after World War II). The northern city of Tangiers hosts the American Legation, the oldest U.S. diplomatic property, and the only U.S. national historic landmark outside the U.S.
Throughout the Cold War, Morocco sided with the U.S. even when it was inconvenient to do so. In the post-Cold War years, Morocco has been at the forefront of efforts to counter violent extremism not only in the kingdom itself, but throughout the Maghreb, Sahel, and Western Africa. Almost every year, Morocco hosts African Lion, the largest U.S. military exercise in Africa.
Despite this, the U.S. has increasingly turned a blind eye to Morocco’s own security concerns. After having been divided by the Spanish and French during Europe’s scramble for Africa, Moroccans peacefully marched into the former Spanish colony of Western Sahara and claimed its entirety as an integral part of the Kingdom of Morocco.
Historically, the Moroccans were right. Most Moroccan dynasties — including the current one — originated in the Sahara. In the context of the Cold War, however, the Soviet Union, Cuba, and Algeria promoted the Polisario Front, an Algeria-based terrorist group that branded itself the leaders of the self-styled Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.
While the U.S. does not recognize SADR, it does not recognize Morocco’s full suzerainty over the region, either. In 1991, the United Nations sought a referendum among the Western Sahara’s Sahrawi, a move that Algeria has consistently obstructed. The State Department’s position has been to mediate and to promote a just, sustainable solution.
That is just what Morocco did, putting forward an autonomy plan in close consultation with American diplomats.
It is a plan that works: Sahrawi have embraced it, and even former members of the Polisario have sought to return and reintegrate. Indeed, the pattern of Polisario defections to Morocco has so worried the group that they have restricted its members’ movements. Algeria and the Polisario prevent families from traveling together, in effect holding wives and children hostage. For Algeria, maintaining the Polisario is both a diplomatic wedge against Morocco and a financial boon. In years past, the Algerian military has embezzled much of the international aid destined for its Sahrawi refugee camps.
Instead of supporting our ally, both the Obama and Trump administrations punished Morocco for its flexibility and practicality.
National security advisors Susan Rice and John Bolton found common cause in promoting the Polisario at the expense of Morocco. For Rice, the issue was ideological. Kerry Kennedy, a self-professed human rights activist, was a friend and whispered narratives — often false — to Rice, which the national security advisor embraced. In 2013, Rice’s unilateral intervention against U.S. government policy and consensus on Morocco blindsided both the Pentagon and State Department, leading to the worst crisis in bilateral U.S.-Morocco ties and a suspension of African Lion exercises.
Bolton’s affinity for the Polisario position is more curious but may be the result of his relationship with former Secretary of State Jim Baker, whose son does business in the Algerian energy sector.
Rice and Bolton aside, a hard line against the Polisario Front is in the U.S.’s national interest.
The Polisario Front has long been a criminal enterprise, profiting from smuggling drugs and humans across the Sahara. The group has also reportedly rented its network to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, which continues to destabilize countries across the Sahel. In 2018, Morocco broke diplomatic relations with Iran (for the second time) after Moroccan security determined Iranian agents were training and working with the Polisario, perhaps to the benefit of West Africa’s Hezbollah cells.
It is against this backdrop that the Trump administration’s continuance of Obama policy undercutting Morocco and giving legitimacy to a Marxist, Cold War relic is curious. The position of the State Department appears to be on auto-drive — compromise for the sake of compromise’s sake — with little sense of Morocco’s historical case or U.S. national security interests.
Instead, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo should support Morocco in the same spirit that Morocco has historically backed the U.S. The State Department and White House should declare clearly and succinctly that the U.S. supports Morocco’s sovereignty over all territory, which it now controls.
If Trump and Pompeo are serious about countering both radical Islamist terrorism and Iranian influence, it is time to support Morocco — rather than provide a lifeline to terrorists.
Michael Rubin (@Mrubin1971) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner‘s Beltway Confidential blog. He is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Pentagon official.
