A dispassionate [Fr] explanation of the conflict over Western Sahara, by Bernard Lugan a contemporary French historian.
Via Truth & Eyes.
Hisham Almiraat
A Moroccan blogger's rambling on culture and politics
A dispassionate [Fr] explanation of the conflict over Western Sahara, by Bernard Lugan a contemporary French historian.
Via Truth & Eyes.
Hisham Almiraat 
I am following the ongoing situation in Morocco. I am afraid this happens. I hope and pray they can solve it in peaceful manner.
Dispassionate, my ass! More like a propaganda piece from a very selective vantage point.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Lugan
@raisonable Can’t you be as reasonable as you claim you are and just recognize the facts!
@C. Levy:
In what world is Algerian jealousy of Morocco a fact? To me, that passage alone disqualifies the video as loaded junk.
The Sahara is not the only region of Morocco that refuses to submit to the Makhzen. A good chunk of the northern population is republican.
An explanation which doesn’t include a peep about Morocco’s categorical refusal to hold a referendum that may lead to independence (i.e: the international consensus) is heavily biased.
I don’t claim to be reasonable anymore than Hisham claims to be “a smasher”! It’s a name. Get over it!
Pingback: [Video] Occupied Western Sahara: A Dispassionate Explanation « the Mirror | المرآة « Yahyasheikho786's Blog
@C. Levy & le raisonnable:
I wish I had a better reference than Lugan and I wish he didn’t use that word “jalousie” but let’s face it: the guy might be controversial but this doesn’t mean he’s wrong on the particular point he’s making. I mean let’s put aside the messenger here and focus a bit more on the message. Can you, le raisonable, disprove the fact Algeria and Mauritania didn’t exist before France created them? Can you disprove the fact Moroccan sultans, as it is well documented, extended their constituencies beyond Western Sahara’s confines to reach places as remote as Timbuktu? Can you just dodge those as mere propaganda?
I have to agree with you though that since Hassan II subscribed to the idea of a referendum he should have delivered on his promise. As far as I’m concerned the whole idea for a referendum was an enormous political blunder on the part of the late king. Now, Morocco is not Sudan. The price of the improbable separation you’re wishing for is too high a price for the monarchy and the people to pay. It would mean the end of the monarchy and the balkanization of Morocco. This explains the national consensus in Morocco around this question. Whilst in Algeria, the position over the conflict is left for generals and their hyperbolic, intemperate rhetoric that honestly is light years away from the Algerian people’s most pressing worries.
@Hisham:
> I wish I had a better reference than Lugan
And I wish you didn’t try to portray the video as objective.
> and I wish he didn’t use that word “jalousie”
And I wish you didn’t use the word “dispassionate”.
> Can you, le raisonable, disprove the fact Algeria and Mauritania didn’t exist before France created them?
I’m not about to attempt proving a negative. Besides, why should it matter? Unless the central authority is legitimate (in the sense of a liberal democracy that respects the most fundamental civil rights) I would rather support a people’s right to break from under tyrannical rule, than try to rationalize said rule by shady “historical ties”.
> Can you disprove the fact Moroccan sultans, as it is well documented, extended their constituencies beyond Western Sahara’s confines to reach places as remote as Timbuktu? Can you just dodge those as mere propaganda?
No. But again, it doesn’t matter one bit. The Moroccan sultans used to roam the place to crack heads in the same way any mafia would do, looting and pillaging, to scare people into paying a tax that they then used to live in luxury and raise an army to go crack more heads.
Disregarding that is the propaganda portion.
> I have to agree with you though that since Hassan II subscribed to the idea of a referendum he should have delivered on his promise.
Hallelujah!
> As far as I’m concerned the whole idea for a referendum was an enormous political blunder on the part of the late king.
I disagree. He managed to deadlock a situation that proved crucial in maintaining the Moroccans in a state of mental siege. It was also a spectacular way to silence any anti-monarchy dissent.
He simply borrowed a trick from Machiavelli’s book.
> Now, Morocco is not Sudan.
And the RASD is not Morocco. What’s your point? Is it state-the-obvious day?
> The price of the improbable separation you’re wishing for is too high a price for the monarchy and the people to pay.
The probability of the separation is immaterial and, most importantly, has absolutely no effect on the discussion we’re having. Don’t try to amalgamate what is and what ought to be to bamboozle me.
> It would mean the end of the monarchy and the balkanization of Morocco.
That’s one possibility. I won’t be shedding any tears over the loss of power of a hereditary political system.
Balkanization? Moroccans of all regions would greatly benefit from a decentralized authority. The only ones who stand to lose anything are the Sahrawis who will lose their privileged status and end up under yet another Arab and Islamic country…and this time with a Marxist touch.
> This explains the national consensus in Morocco around this question.
Oh…you know better than that! The “consensus” is mainly held by constant propaganda and severe censorship.
> Whilst in Algeria, the position over the conflict is left for generals and their hyperbolic, intemperate rhetoric that honestly is light years away from the Algerian people’s most pressing worries.
True in a sense. The Algerian people’s most pressing worry is to eradicate every whiff of secularism and Amazigh culture. And bash the Jews. And the West. They love bashing the West.
Just like every other Arab country out there…
Hisham, tu fais comment avec la personnalité douteuse de Lugan ? as-tu fait une recherche sur cet homme ? moi j’ai trouvé ta référence nauséabonde en consultant ce lien :
http://hippocampe.lyon3.free.fr/Lugan/20051201.htm
the guy might be controversial but this doesn’t mean he’s wrong on the particular point he’s making
Qu’est ce qui nous prouve le contraire ? qu’est ce qui nous prouve qu’il dit vrai ? surtout qu’il a été déjà contesté dans la communauté des historiens :
Selon Catherine Coquery-Vidrovitch, professeur à l’université Paris-VII, Bernard Lugan « multiplie les ouvrages les plus tendancieux sur l’histoire de l’Afrique » et « vise à présenter la colonisation française comme un bienfait de l’humanité »
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Lugan
@référence raciste
En effet. Si Hisham nous avait présenté la vidéo comme le point de vue de Lugan, ce serait cool. Mais comme il essaie de la présenter comme objective et “dispassionate”, je me suis permis de la descendre.
Pingback: Western Sahara: My Dispassionate Viewpoint « the Mirror | المرآة
Thank you @le raisonnable and @référence_raciste for your comments. You can find my answer here.