It took the European parliament more than a quarter of a century to discover that the coastal fishing agreement signed with Morocco suffers from economic, political, and environmental gaps. Instead of lamenting the over-exploitation of fish, one should rather say that the European fishing companies are the ones that are taking sea products from the regional waters in abundance and without abiding by the requirements of biological respite. If the European parliament is now satisfied because it has uncovered the different flaws of this agreement, then the Moroccans have the right to also feel content because they are now free to control their own marine wealth. The loss of no less than 40 million Euros per year will have no effect as long as the agreement originally consisted of shifting the cooperation between Morocco and Spain to a wider space encompassing the European Union. People may forget that the early version of the agreement was made based on a shy demand filed by Rabat back then in order to join the European club. But what is certain is that the agreement's suspension came a short while after the Europeans were granted the privilege of the advanced position of a partner that was bound to feel some frustration because a partnership must either be complete and with multiple interests or it must cease to exist. It is understood that responding to the demands of the environmentalists – who now constitute a powerful movement in Europe – has served to re-evaluate the politics of supply and demand in the fishing sector. Thus, making a connection between this purely economic file and the developments of the Sahara issue is somehow unfair. This file had been discussed prior to the signing of the agreement and continued to be under discussion as the agreement entered in force. In addition, it became one of the jurisdictions of the United Nations, the efforts of which are supposed to be supported by the European Parliament through the consolidation of the political solution in order to maintain legitimacy, security, stability and peace. This is not about a difference in estimates between what Morocco is losing and what the European Union is gaining as a result of the extension of the agreement. This goes beyond that and concerns a re-evaluation of the problems resulting from an un-equal partnership. At a time when Morocco was hoping that the European markets will open their doors for its agricultural products because it was being subjected to unfair terms through the coastal fishing agreement, it was clear that this partnership had not found its right framework yet. Despite the advanced situation achieved by Rabat, this agreement still suffers from a kind of superiority: indeed, the Europeans are discharging their goods in the southern markets; however, they are denying that same right to the people of the opposing bank of the Mediterranean except through terms imposed by the strongest party. Undoubtedly, the current crisis will have a negative effect on Spain, since it is the number one beneficiary from this agreement. Spain's relationship with Morocco witnessed waves of high and low tide where all the available means were used. After the access of the conservative Popular Party to power, a general belief prevailed that Rabat and Madrid can overcome their differences. However, the suspension of the agreement is not helping to create the adequate atmosphere. Thus, it was only natural that Spanish voices would rise in order to oppose the European position. However, these voices might shift to the opposite direction. There are proofs to that, every time that the fishing agreement is caught between the political waves, the Moroccan agricultural products crossing to the Spanish lands pay a double price. Indeed, the war of the fish becomes the war of tomatoes, oranges and textile. The reason for this turmoil, which is always coupled with the political changes in Morocco or in some European countries that are close to it, is that the Europeans are not pushing in the direction of a definitive settlement of the issue of the Sahara. Indeed, they do benefit more from the persistence of this issue especially as they exert pressure and as they control the regional balance in North Africa. They are speaking with more than one language. On the one hand, they are adopting the calls for increasing the security cooperation with the countries of the region under the slogan of confronting illegal emigration, drug dealing, and war against terrorism. And on the other hand, they are opposing those parties who are eager to build mutual relationships of trust where superiority is non-existent. One justification tends to make a connection between the European positions and the economic and financial crises that the European countries are going through whereby these countries are striving to save money for the darker days. But the crisis of the coastal fishing is not new and it has broken on several instances during times of abundance. Perhaps the problem with Morocco is that it has been abiding by some of the orders that it used to receive. It is now time for Morocco to realize that some of its problems are not due to the others. Indeed, Morocco has knowingly made some mistakes in the files pertaining to the commitments to Human Rights. This was aggravated by the fact that the regional atmosphere is still clouded with a kind of misunderstanding. Those who remember the first crisis that broke on the backdrop of the fishing file must remember that this had taken place during the early days of the rotation government. Who knows, the current crisis might have some connection to the birth of the Islamists' cabinet. This could be just a supposition.
