The code included in UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's report over the difficulty of resolving the Western Sahara conflict in the near future means that the United Nations must multiply its efforts to bring together the points of view of the opposed parties, and to the same extent call on the parties to be realistic and reasonable in the cooperation required of them with the UN. Indeed, unless a real breakthrough in stances occurs, it will be difficult to achieve any progress in a settlement that has been marking time. Yet the current divergence in stances reflects two contrasting views regarding the nature and content of the solution being sought. Will it be the recognition of the current reality, within a democracy that would allow the inhabitants concerned a greater extent of powers in managing their local affairs, or will it be radical, reaching the maps of the region and not knowing the boundaries before which to stop? Moreover, it appears that UN Envoy Christopher Ross's formula of urging the parties to oppose each other in informal negotiations has not exceeded exposing shady areas regarding the extent which any negotiations could reach, as long as the solution remains contingent on agreement over a consensual formulation acceptable to everyone. The root of the Western Sahara problem might very well be the fact that it is classified under regional conflicts that require consensual solutions, in addition to being a gathering of numerous parties that have yet to discover the most beneficial way of melting away their disagreements in a regional plan that would liberate the region of the residues of retrogression and of the absence of trust. The time of settlement may not yet have come, in light of the parties continuing to live with their crises. Yet this does not negate the reality of the conflict's impact on several tracks, whether at the level of the widening chasm between the two neighboring countries Morocco and Algeria to the point of complete rupture, at that of the continuing tragedy of the refugees of Sahrawi origin in the Tindouf camps, or at that of obstructing the development of the Maghreb at a high cost in the balance of relations between Europe and the Maghreb. The characterization concluded by Ban Ki-moon regarding the parties continuing to cling to their stances means nothing more than the accurate medical diagnosis of an ailing political reality. Thus, if it represents a difficult gateway to reaching the core of the problem, it nonetheless requires shared political management to pull out the painful tooth, not to cover it with tranquilizers. Perhaps through showing concern regarding the situation of refugees in the Tindouf camps and the problems of human rights in the region, it in fact puts its finger where the bleeding wound lies, if not in the vision of an increasingly distant consensual political solution, then through addressing the humanitarian situation which requires humanitarian solutions, and in which there is no place for giving the advantage to this or that side. Ban Ki-moon's concern, the soundness of which is unquestionable, parallels what Envoy Christopher Ross had previously expressed at the end of his visit to the region when he called on Algeria in particular to cooperate with the United Nations in humanitarian and security issues. Indeed, the Western Sahara issue has persisted for a long time, not just because of the existing disagreements between the Polisario and Morocco over sovereignty on the province, but also as a result of Sahrawi refugees in the Tindouf camps remaining in a dire situation. Even when the United Nations shaped the formula of mutual visits between the inhabitants to build an atmosphere of trust, the effect of such humanitarian measures has remained limited. Yet this is the first time the UN Secretary-General's report addresses the situation in refugee camps, which means that there is a trend towards getting hold of the humanitarian threads of the issue. None of the approaches that have been tried to this day in dealing with the issue of the Western Sahara have helped put an end to the problem. Indeed, Morocco and the Polisario have waged a war that lasted around a decade and a half and ended with ratifying the ceasefire that consecrated a true reality on the ground, yet without resolving the problem, and diplomatic efforts sponsored by the UN have been ongoing for two decades and have not settled on a final and permanent view to close the chapter of the conflict. It is thus sound to believe that the humanitarian formula to reopen this sensitive issue may help bring together remote divergences. Indeed, in the end, it would be difficult for any party to deny the humanitarian efforts engaged in by the UN.
