The 'Western Sahara' Intergroup: Between the Defense of Interests and Possible External Interference in the European Parliament.
The European Parliament is not only a legislative body but also embodies the democratic values of the European Union. It is crucial to shield it from external influences that could undermine these principles. Article 35 of its rules specifies the boundaries for Intergroups—working groups focused on specific issues—to ensure they are not exploited or manipulated by outside interests.
One of the most controversial Intergroups is the "Western Sahara" group, which appears to be strongly influenced by the Algerian military regime. This issue has historical roots dating back to the Cold War when Morocco brought the conflict before the UN in 1963. Although the matter has since been under UN management, Algeria has leveraged it as a tool to strengthen its regional influence.
The activities of the "Western Sahara" Intergroup have raised concerns about potential violations of the European Parliament's internal rules. Algeria’s influence appears to drive the group’s actions, aligning them with specific regional interests. This has led some MEPs, including former Intergroup members, to question its practices and express concerns about the blurring of lines between the Parliament’s official activities and the agendas of external actors.
Supporting regional movements raises an important question: if the European Parliament gets involved in a specific case, should it also extend its support to similar movements elsewhere, such as the Kabyles or Tuaregs? This inconsistency in its approach creates doubts about whether the Intergroup is selectively choosing its causes or deliberately omitting other equally relevant cases.
Additionally, there are concerns about whether the Intergroup is using European democratic values to pursue political objectives that diverge from universal democratic principles. Has it become an unregistered lobby within the European Parliament? Why does it continue to be renewed while other significant geopolitical issues, like peace in the Middle East, the situation in Ukraine, or the influence of external actors in the Maghreb, do not receive the same level of attention?
During the last legislative term, under the presidency of Austrian socialist Andreas Schieder, the Intergroup engaged in activities that necessitate greater transparency and scrutiny. The resignation of Joachim Schuster in 2020, prompted by the deteriorating situation in the Tinduf camps and the failure to uphold the ceasefire by certain actors, underscores the need for a thorough investigation into the functioning of the Intergroup.
Another major concern is the potential connection of regional actors with antidemocratic and terrorist networks in the Sahel. Reports suggest links to organizations like Hezbollah and Iran, which pose significant security risks for the EU. If these connections to terrorist activities are confirmed, the region could threaten both regional and European stability.
Similarly, the activities of the Intergroup have raised suspicions about its alignment with the operating norms in the European Parliament. Organizing meetings and trips to sensitive areas without an official mandate has generated confusion regarding the Parliament's stance on foreign policy. This raises the question of whether the Intergroup is inadvertently promoting the interests of third countries instead of those of the European Union and its citizens.
In this context, it is legitimate to reflect on the need for greater transparency in the activities of the Intergroups in Parliament. Is it reasonable for an Intergroup to focus exclusively on a specific regional issue when there are other conflicts and minorities that also require attention? Regional stability is crucial for the EU, making it essential to assess the impact of these groups on relations with strategic partners like Morocco.
In light of these concerns, a review of the functioning of the "Western Sahara" Intergroup seems necessary, particularly regarding the frequent trips to the Tinduf camps, where the population has been living under difficult conditions for decades. Reports from OLAF have confirmed that humanitarian aid intended for these camps has been diverted to local markets, highlighting the urgency of correcting irregularities in the management of this conflict.
