Full text of the interview:
 
 
 Q / Where did the first round of negotiations stop and where will the second round in next August start?

A / negotiations halted at self-determination, its meaning, its philosophy and we did not go into depth as part of the whole. Of course, as you know, Morocco has clear justifications and concepts and in conformity with international law relating to self-determination. So we are not scared to raise this issue and we are ready to discuss it from all aspects. But what I can say is that we did not discuss a specific point. Every party talked about its principles and its  project. We extensively talked about autonomy plan and everything revolving around it such as self-determination and respect of international law and international legality and respect of crietria relating on the seriousness of autonomy. Of course, we underlined that the Sahara issue is unique with particular nature and cannot be compared to other issues whether relating to historical legitimacy or the ties between Moroccans and the Sahara and the old rights. This is why it should have special treatment. We have talked about other examples but the Sahara issue is special. Therefore, we have to find a specific solution. Polisario Front is a totalitarian, political and military movement and is not familiar with discussions that end with reconciliation. we hope the negotiations will help them learn compromise and consensus.

Q / technically how were the meetings conducted were interventions distributed? And who spoke more?

A / time was supervised and every party spoke according to its capacity. I believe that every party spoke enough and the Moroccan delegation spoke extensively on the aspects which we wanted to stress in this session.

Q / What role played by Algeria during negotiations? Did you notice any pressure or consultation between Polisario and Algeria in the first sessions?

A / of course, as you know, Algeria participates in the negotiations like Mauritania, but Algeria says something and does the opposite. Everyone knows what are the links between Polisario and Algeria, at least those related to hosting Polisario and assisting it politically and diplomatically. I believe that the role of Algeria was apparently cooperative but had not changed in substance.

Q / What role played by international powers, especially the United States and France during the negotiations?

A / did not have any role in negotiations because they were based on resolution 1754. We did not need this role at this level, especially in the presence of the Personal Envoy of the UN Secretary-General to the Sahara, Peter van Walsum. In any case, everybody was aware of the problem complexity. Referendum and voting are not solution. Parties must agree and waive the tops of their claims. 

Q / were there moments of tension that witnessed strong nerves during negotiations? , And what are the points that generated such a tension?

A / no doubt, when Morocco defended its positions seriously created tension and we felt they were not in comfortable position.

Q / Strategically, can Morocco bet in the second round on divisions in Polisario delegation and the outbreak of a dispute between its elements? 

A / No, this is something else, divisions do not concern the delegation. Divisions in the Polisario Front relate to Polisario as a whole not the delegation. If Polisario leadership continues, and I stress that there is a difference between the leadership and the Front regarding intransigence and non-realism and sticking to the impossible, this will have negative repercussions on the situation in the camps and among those whose who were supporting Polisario. Many people in the camps under Polisario want a decent solution and hope that the Polisario delegation will reach an agreement with Morocco.
However, the hardening of Polisario leadership position relating to a referendum in which independence is an option is not possible because independence can not be the subject of handling without identifying voters. We showed them that this is impossible because of historical reasons and because of the distribution of Sahrawis over various States and therefore identity cannot be determined. We must move our positions, and we moved our positions and waved from rigid positions, we have recognized our mistakes in handling this issue in the past and the present. We are now ready to move forward by constructive and creative solutions to the problem like the one we submitted. of course, this solution is open to enable Polisario negotiate its content, but does not give it the possibility to bargain its essence, particularly with regard to sovereignty.

News and events concerning Western Sahara issue / Corcas