In its expected resolution concerning the Sahara, the Security Council will stick to suppositions such as the extension of the term of the “Minurso” delegation and the support of the direct negotiations option in addition to some condiments such as wishes to commit to good intentions and to relinquish pre-conditions. However, the historical context of the international dealing with the issue of the Sahara seems different this time. The variables surrounding the reality and the future of the North African region are now heading to a different direction, which is closer to coming up with internal bets rather than to proceed with brandishing the external challenges. The issue of the Sahara is unlikely to maintain the same momentum especially in light of the increased international pressure against its inventor and the primary supporter of the Polisario Front, the Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi. The current variables seem to be more effective than all the other events, including the collapse of the eastern camp, and the establishment of a regional Maghreb bloc that did not account for the existence of the Polisario within the Maghreb structure. The reason for that is that the capitals of the North African area have been forced to come up with a new agenda to the rhythm of the stormy revolutions. And as Rabat took the side of the international alliance opposing the dying Gaddafi regime, Algeria opted for brandishing the dangers of the inter-continental terrorism. This terrorism can reportedly corner the West, and therefore, an international war against it is legitimate. In other words, there is an ongoing race of a different type, which is taking the Libyan crisis as a pretext in order to isolate one's self in this or that category. The sides concerned with the Sahara dispute can no longer abide by the rules of the old dispute. On the one hand, the different rounds that included wars, peace, and negotiations, have sucked up the energy of the different sides, especially Morocco and Algeria, through battles that now seem marginal when compared to the need for the consolidation of stability and security, and the consolidation of democratic and modern features. On the other hand the priorities of the international community, mainly the European Union and the United States, with respect to the demarcation of new balances in Northern Africa, now have new directions that are directly connected to the dismantling of the former regimes and that relate to selecting the methods aiming at overcoming the fierce storms. Therefore, the question is no more related to whether the region is capable of assimilating the formation of a new entity that is not based on the constants of sovereignty neither legally nor politically. The major question now relates to the chance of survival of the current regimes, and to the extent of the matching between the expected changes and the major project that consists of consolidating development, democracy and the preservation of the Western countries' interests. It would perhaps be a useful thing to start by studying the circumstances and the horizons of the international resolution that is placing restrictions on Libya in order to come up with conclusions regarding the possible outcomes of the expected resolution to be taken by the Security Council concerning the Sahara. And in spite of the major difference in the content of the resolutions, they do however meet at a compulsory dimension. When it comes to the Sahara issue, this dimension consists of coming up with a political, consensual solution that would be accepted by all parties. But such a resolution is logically based on the idea of finding a viable and sustainable solution. And when the American Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, states that the plan suggested by Morocco for self rule is credible and serious, and that it is supported by the current and former American Administration, then this is considered to be an indication to that the Moroccans are leaning towards negotiations regardless of the required time and effort. This regional development could have an effect on several levels. On the bilateral level, any Moroccan-Algerian agreement would lead to solving the current problematic situation. Even if the issue of the Sahara is not solved, such an agreement would at least help to push its repercussions away from the path of the relationships of the two neighboring countries. This in itself is an encouraging development. As to the regional level, such a dialogue, if carried out with good intentions, is likely to stir the efforts at activating the Maghreb Union starting from new bases. The sure thing in all this is that the changes might push for relinquishing the logic of political disputes and replacing it with the spirit of solidarity so that new hopes could perhaps surface out amidst the thick, dusty storm.
