Talk:Human rights in Western Sahara

Changes

Section: Human rights in the Polisario controlled refugee camps

• Title of the section changed to make visible we talk about Polisario. We also say the Moroccan controled part of WS.
• “main article|Human rights in Algeria” removed. This is clearly an article about the human right in the Western Sahara conflict and not in the context of an Algerian article.
• Though the Algerian government is a main actor in the conflict and responsible for what happens in Tindouf and the Algerian military was directly involved in the crimes of Polisario
• . “On the contrary, the camps are sometimes presented as a model for running refugee camps democratically” is highly disputed.:

1. Indepth reports such as done by France Libertés and ESISC contredicts this.
2. Mohammed Abdelaziz is president of Polisario and of the so-called “sadr” since 30 years! What an example for democracy!
3. The other contrediction comes from Amnesty just in the paragraph after.

• The information of CLAIHR is to be tkane with high caution. With re to the Moroccan POWs this is what it states: “The prisoners informed us that they are generally well-treated and that they receive adequate food and water.” [1]
• Their quote shortened
• This an example of how such organisations can be blind as Frances Libertés criticises.
• This sectio will be checked on relevance and accuracy.
• Polisario denies it is communist but it was founded on a left wing communist ideology and was mainly supported by communist countries in the former communist bloc led by the Soviet Union (Algeria, Libya, Cuba etc...)
• Quote form the UNHR on sahrawi children in Cuba too long – Shortened

wikima 21:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I reverted most of this for rather obvious reasons.

• As for the claim that Polisario is or has been Communist, this is plainly bullshit. They were left-wing and described themselves as Socialist (in the sense of Arab Socialism, then the ideology à la mode in the Arab world) from 1973, but gradually abandoned that, and there has to the best of my knowledge not been any reference to any kind of Socialism in a Polisario document for over 15 years.
• The Cuba claims is a mainstay of Moroccan rhetoric, and the quotes from the UN that disputes that thesis is obviously very relevant to this debate. The Moroccan claims are presented, the Polisario claims are presented, and the UN's investigations should be quoted in whatever length needed to adress the claims by both parties. This edit seems mainly intended to remove material that the editor deems unsupportive of his viewpoint.
• That the camps are "sometimes presented" as models for running refugee camps is a fact, not a value judgment of these assertions. It is obviously in the encyclopedia's interest to register the political rhetoric of both parties. But the assertions of either side should of course not presented as facts either, but then they're not here -- on the contrary, the Moroccan view ("concentration camps") is equally clearly given, with the same kind of neutral tone ("this is what these people say, that is what the others say").
• About the reference to the Algeria human rights section, I seem to recall that was originally inserted by you (Wikima) or at your request. I left it in for now, but don't care either way. Remove it if you like. Arre 22:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Section Moroccans POWs held by Polisario

• Title changed from POWs to Moroccan Prisoners of War held by Polisario

1. Many users are not familiar with the abbreviation and/or non English native speakers.
2. As the article beginns with reports on Morocco it must be made ligible where is deals with polisario

• Polisario held parts of WS is POV. Polisario claims to control these parts of WS. Whether this is true is being disputed on the relative talk.
• "hotly contested by Polisario" removed as indrect POVs (by way of quote).

1. Irrelevant as it would be quite surprising if Polsiario agreed with the report
2. Morocco also hotly contest much of the accusations, do you make the effort to mention? Of course no!

• "unilateral" (releases ...) removed as inaccurate. Morocco is not accused of detaining POWs
• Feel free to correct or refine the language

wikima 20:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• Addendum: The relation between cease-fire and the POWs topic to be clarified.
• Obviousely Polisario had broken agreements

wikima 20:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment on this: Morocco is indeed accused of holding POWs, by Polisario and many supporters. True or false, the accusation exists. As for "unilateral", that signifies simply that the releases were not carried out as a result of negotiations, but precisely as a result of a unilateral decision. Personally, I think that it is "obvious" that both Morocco and Polisario has broken various agreements, but please source whatever you want to prove by that. Arre 22:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Arre,

• Your reasons are not obvious to me.
• "Bullshit" is not the kind of terminology I use in my talks. Please avoid next time - Thanks.
• I have explained all my changes one by one. Do the same if you want to change and not just write two lines and drop away whole efforts of others.
• I will not repeat what I wrote above and maintain unless you discuss, but react to your last comments.

• Polisario was a left wing organisation. Socialist ideology? Probably, but then we are talking about socialism in the third world in the seventies which was ready for the armed fight to install the dictatorship of the Proletariat and not the social-democracy or social-liberalism of the 90s.
• The whole Eastern Bloc was socialist, even the Soviet-Union was socialist. Communism was considered to be the latest utopia.
• The left wing in Morocco especially at universities (where polisario first members and founders evolved) was radical (extreme gauche) and based on Marxist-Leninist ideology. If this is what you mean, happy to use this term for Polisario’s ideological roots.
• Some rests of these movements remain such as the Nahj party, one of the last Marxist-Leninist political parties in the world.
• All countries that directly and mainly supported Polisario (Algeria, Cuba, Libya etc...) belonged to the Soviet-Union led communist bloc.
• Cuba, a great partner of Polisario is still - next to North Corea - one of the surviving communist countries. Or do you prefer "socialist" for them? Or may be "mad"?
• The purpose here is not to explain the ideological origins of Polisario but to show why Polisario's ties to Cuba are so strong.

• You now think that "Morocco and Polisario have broken various agreements". I am impresed by this progress towards a more balanced view.
• I am sorry though, Polisario commited war crimes and crimes against humanity.

• Algeria human rights section: This is one of those things that need to be linked in two or many worlds in the same time.
• The article on Human rights in Algeria is almost empty (since in this country like in the tindouf camps very thing is just paradise). I will link it as "See also link"

• General remark: I am trying to summarise the article taking exactly your example as best practice.
• If you insist to quote whole sections of reports that suit your pro-polisarian position, so no problem. I will then balance the article by quoting whole sections of other reports.
• We will get then back to the situation you corrected yourself with a much uglier article and which we want to avoid now.
• Meanwhile I will revert to my changes.
• And, please discuss yours

Thanks - wikima 18:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

This is simply absurd. You call it a "minor change" to remove whole chunks of text and rewriting? I now reverted to the original, and we shall have to do this part by part. I don't disagree with all of your edits -- far from it -- but others are so grossly POV it's beyond belief. Describing Polisario as a "communist" organization probably made both El Ouali and Karl Marx turn in their graves... and quoting Ali Salem Tamek and Aminatou Haidar (both repeatedly detained and tortured, and both former Amnesty International prisoners of conscience) as examples of the liberty enjoyed by Sahrawis to criticize the government borders on propagandist self-parody.

Propose changes here on talk, one unit/chapter at the time, and we do them part by part. I will do the same, and there won't be a revert war. That's what was done before, and it worked fine. Arre 21:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

• Just beginn by youself and propose your changes before playing your game of injecting polisarian POV nicely
• I am describing the current situation and delivering sources.
• Aminatou Haidar travels with a Moroccan passeport on Polisario sponsorship
• She gave the interview I sourced to a Moroccan magazine (Le journal hebdomadaire)
• Mothing happened to both of them
• In the same time Telquel published an interview with the Spokesman of Chat Achahid
• Do you want to ignore this?? This is the absurd.
• I didn't call my changes minor but stated above that I followed your example of shortening ans summarysing instead of quoting whole reports.
• If you don't like your idea any more, well, we can quote reports. And witnesses as well as there are lots of former Polisarians who told much to the world. Unless you know better than them on Polisario and the issue.

Cheers - wikima 21:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Systematic bias: misrepresenting the proportions of int'l criticism

• Aminatou Haidar, whom I have met personally, certainly doesn't consider herself "free" in the occupied territories. She has been imprisoned several times, tortured, and lives under continual threat. The reason she can carry out oppositional activities now, is that she is in exile. She is dearly afraid of what will happen when she sets foot on Moroccan or Sahrawi soil again -- just last year, Ali Salem Tamek was arrested immediately on arrival at the airport.
• That a single Moroccan newspaper, on the extreme oppositional fringe of that country's politics (for which it has been repeatedely harrassed and fined huge sums of money), has had the guts to challenge authority yet again by publishing an interview with her, hardly changes this fact. Syrian and Burmese dissidents also manage to give interviews from time to time, and get away with it: that is not proof of the liberal attitude of their governments.
• Tel Quel, the other newspaper you cite, belongs to the same category of ultra-oppositional and repeatedly attacked newspapers as Le Journal Hebdomadaire. I direct you for info on the situation of both newspapers -- whose staff I respect and admire for their courage -- to Reporters Without Borders.
• As for the United Nations' Cuba reports, they could certainly be summarized or quoted more effectively. But the reason for their being there at all is that they refute the Moroccan government's allegations of fraud and repression in the framework of the UNHCR programme point by point: if the paragraph is to be shortened, this needs to be clear. It is not just a vague "counter argument" or a "counter report", it is the systematic rebuttal of every single accusation made by Morocco, in a report made at the kingdom's own request.
• What you are doing is taking two reports by two local/national institutes (France Libertes, a Socialist French HR org; and ESISC, a until recently unknown Belgian outfit that Reporters Without Borders describes as a "fake NGO" working for pay to benefit the Moroccan government), and trying to juxtapose that with the multitude -- hundreds, thousands of pages -- of material gathered by the world's top human rights organizations, such as Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, the World Org Against Torture, the UN, the Red Cross, Freedom House, and others. By quoting these two sole reports at length, you are trying to give the impression of parity in criticism of the both parties, which is not only to cheat readers of Wikipedia seeking a fair overview of international commentary on the issue, but also to severely misrepresent documented facts.
• For comparison, if an article about, say, Libya, would give as much space to the hecatombs of material amassed by international human rights organization criticising Muammar al-Qadhafi's goverment, and to two virtually unknown documents on the Libyan oppposition (one of whose credibility is in severe dispute, i.e. ESISC), that would be immediately recognized as a systematic bias to the article.
• In summary, I have no hope of convincing you on this issue, since you apparently only have one goal with your activities on Wikipedia -- i.e. promoting the Moroccan version of events in Western Sahara -- but I hope that other, neutral editors will see what is going on, and put a stop to it.

Best regards, and in the somewhat strained hope of still being able to do this without a revert war, or requesting mediation, Arre 22:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC).

Responses

• "Aminatou Haidar, ...": It is part of the propaganda war. I would be very surprised to hear Aminatou saying she is free to travel and give inflamatory speeches against Morocco. It is an insult to Aminatou's career to say she is carrying opposition because she is in exile: she has been an opponent since the eighties, and inside Morocco. And don't worry, nothing will happen to her when she comes back, even though she wil try to get imprisoned to prove the points she made during her trips. Ali Salem Tamek is a worrior(he is often dressed in military uniform ), and has been vocal about the re-start of war, and was teleguiding the riots, and he did not deny it, on the contrary, Abdelaziz officially declares him the official spokesman of the Sahrawi "human righs" activists.
• "That a single Moroccan newspaper, ...": Le journal hebdomadaire, Assahifa, Telquel, Aljarida alokhra(Now Nichane) are all very critic to the Moroccan policy in general and on the Sahara in particular. There is no publication like le journal hebdomadaire in all the arab world, in its critic to the state. No Arab leader is treated like Mohamed VI is criticized in the JH. Robert Menard, when in a visit to Morocco this year, said the level of freedom of the press in Morocco can't be compared by any North African country. No condamnation has been executed against the cited newspapers, and no journalist was imprisonned. Correct me if I am wrong. None of them had the fate of your follow countryman Ben chico.
• "As for the United Nations' Cuba reports,...": Can you Arre give me one reason why the young kids are sent by the thousands to Cuba instead of the very near Spain?. Don't tell me by chance.
• "...two local/national institutes (France Libertes, a Socialist French HR org;": it used to be one the first and biggest supporters of Polisario before it found out the about he crimes commited by it. Now it seems it is no more important!!
• "... and ESISC, ... that Reporters Without Borders describes as a "fake NGO" " RSF does not say it is fake, because it is a real ONG that has done reports and studies on different fields for different organisms. It is Aboubaker Jamai who said it is fake, and payed by the Moroccan gvt, but failed to prove it in court. The witnesses he tried to get to support him (a Spanish and an Algerian researcher) all let him down in court. Read again your referenced article.
• "For comparison, ..." Arre, I like your way of discussing, but please, don't let that style be contaminated by koavf's virus: the funny and non-sense comparisions to whatever comes to the mind: Mother Theresa, China, etc.
• "In summary, I have no hope of convincing you on this issue, ...": Bravo, here you talked correctly. It is not about convincing each other. I am a Moroccan, and have members of my family living in Dakhla for more that 20 years, and you are an Algerian activist working to give the Algerian official position and the Polisarian version on the Sahara. None of us will change his mind. BUT, it is about giving an article that is balanced and giving both views, and letting the reader decide himself not deciding on his behalf.
• "...but I hope that other, neutral editors will see what is going on, and put a stop to it." It is not in your interest that NEUTRAL editors get to know what has been injected by you and koavf here. I hope they will.

--A Jalil 22:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

propaganda / false informations

I've removed a picture of a so-disapeared person named "FATIMA LAHMAD" until a reliable source is given.--Yusuf ibn Tashfin (talk) 10:10, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

March 2022

1) When countries violate international law, condemnations usually follow (as was the case when the US "recognized" Morocco's "sovereignty" over the illegally occupied territory of WS). To date, it remains the only country to formally do so. 2) The source cited by the IP is a joke (just look at the Moroccan propaganda outlets cited in it, Moroccoworldnews.com, diplomatie.ma, etc.). 3) Treating the positions of the United Nations, the African Union, the international court of justice, the European court of justice, etc., as equal to those of a country that violate internal law would create a false balance. M.Bitton (talk) 14:28, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

"LGBT rights in the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect LGBT rights in the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17 § LGBT rights in the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic until a consensus is reached. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:21, 17 February 2024 (UTC)