The decision by the South African court to order the seizure of the ship "Cherry Blossom" carrying a cargo of phosphate from Phosboucraa is "counterproductive", "ideologically motivated" act, which carries incalculable risks "encouraging piracy, "writes US expert Michael Rubin, in an analysis published by the influential US think-tank American Enterprise Institute (AEI).
"South Africa's obviously ideological position and its legal system threatens to create a dangerous precedent in international law, seeks to reward those who want to spread terror and actually promote piracy," said M Rubin, lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School for Civil-Military Relations, and a distinguished member of the AEI, in analysis entitled "Why does South Africa embrace piracy and reward terror?" .
Michael Rubin develops, in this sense, that "Pretoria proposes to engage in a business that is ill-informed and counterproductive in many respects", recalling that not less than 100 pc of the profits of Phosboucraa are reinvested for the benefit of the local populations.
In addition, he said, the exploitation of Phosboucraa "is carried out in strict compliance with the legal framework defined by the United Nations and international law relating to natural resources".
It would be wise to note, says Michael Rubin, that South Africa is by no means motivated by any defense of international law or Sahrawis who, moreover, enjoy total freedom in their country, Morocco, But rather by "the reactivation of populism and Marxism which have produced only ruins and chaos for the countries of the region."
In the aftermath of the UN Security Council's adoption of resolution 2351 reiterating the call to the parties for a settlement of the Sahara issue "without preconditions and in good faith", polisario addresses a Request to a South African judge who ordered the seizure of the cargo transported by "Cherry Blossom", observes the author of the analysis.
Rubin said that the African Union had reaffirmed that the United Nations remained the only framework for the resolution of the Sahara conflict, demonstrating the extent of the error of judgment made by South Africa.
The OCP Group, in a statement released on Wednesday, pointed out that in deciding to refer the case of the "Cherry Blossom" ship to the merits, the South African court makes a highly political decision and commits a serious abuse of power, "Serious political interference".
OCP and its subsidiary Phosboucraa deny to the South African court any legitimacy to pronounce on the merits of a case followed at the highest international level, the same source added.
-News on Western Sahara issue/ Corcas-