Atlas of Morocco Under Review

Regala, Rachid and Mohammed Refass (no date) Atlas de l’Afrique: Maroc. Paris: Les Editions J. A., 88 p.

Review by Dr. Viban Ngo.

Atlases of countries are those countries in microcosm. If these are national atlases they enforce their political identities. They are like flags and national anthems of those countries fluttering in the wind. A look at those national atlases in public libraries and depositories tells us that some small nation states exaggerate the messages portrayed by their atlases. In this way they are propagandistic. You may find some of the newly independent nation states in South America and Africa producing far voluminous national atlases than those of say the USA, Brazil, Canada, India and China that are countries of continental sizes. That is where I would make the contentious statement that maps lie in order to tell the truth. That is a different sort of cartographic lie. However, if those sheets of thematic and topographic maps or charts incorporated parts or entire regions of other countries other than those that do not belong to them, it is interpreted as pilfering before the eye of the world. Under this scenario, it is imperative that the United Nations Organization (UNO), which is the apparent ombudsman of the world, intervene and right the wronged. Sadly this is never the case and those who complain amicably end up taking up arms to trumpet their grievances to the world. Often, it is late. In a truly democratic and civilized society it should not be so.

The above statement was stirred by my examination of a no-dated modern atlas of Morocco by Jeune Afrique. It has incorporated Western Sahara that was in the days of Spanish colonial occupation not part and parcel of the present day Morocco. In consequence, the following barrage of questions is posed: Why can Morocco not cross over and chase the Spaniards and Portuguese from the Islands of Madeira, Azores, and Canary that once upon a time were politically part and parcel of the continent of Africa and geographically are still? They were once peopled by the Berbers and dark skinned Africans. What of the Spanish enclaves that are still like pistols in the heart of Morocco? Is it because there is a feeling that they would be trespassing in the national territories of bigger and powerful nations? From the point of view of propinquity, if the Arab Sahrawi Republic (former Western Sahara) is not politically independent, it should go to Mauritania and that would form a tidy union of countries with cultural affinities. This should not be the case as the Arab Sahrawi Republic is got the basis of a nation state and do not want to be associated with Morocco. Also there are historical reasons. Spain the former colonial master that is playing the game of naivety should intervene to tell Morocco where Western Sahara rightly belongs. Bigger Western nations should restrain intervening to broker peace only where minerals are involved. Fairness should be the name of the game for peace.

The feeling as enshrined by the founding fathers of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) is that the colonial boundaries have to be sacrosanct. But should this clause be waivered in special cases where people were forcefully bandied together or separated by the colonialists? Those who are not comfortable with any union particularly were they are treated as second class citizens among their invaders as the unholy union of Sahrawi Republic with Morocco have the right to ask for a referendum as the recent case of South Sudan Republic to determine their future. It is their human right and should be respected as in the international law.

Having highlighted this point, it should be known that Africa was the original home of man on earth. By insinuation, if anyone is not welcomed in any part of the world he/she may have the right to come and settle in Africa just as the Arab, Indians; Europeans did in the 14^th century and in the 1000BC and hitherto still do. However, if people came as returnees, they should not have the feeling that they first landed in region ‘A’ as some Caucasians wanted to capitalize on this point so as to covet the lands of native Africans in Southern Africa. They should not act as warlords and enslavers as the Arab Sudan was doing to the newly independent Republic of South Sudan and Darfur where fold-blooded dark skinned Africans dominate. They dare not institute apartheid or any other form of segregation to put them on the economic and political vantage positions vis-à-vis the others as is often the case where Africans and Caucasians or Arabs abut or live together.

The fact is that Africa has been Balkanized and each country carved out at the Berlin Conference of 1884-85 belongs to a group of peoples and their independence and rights should be respected by others countries no matter their sizes, population, and political inclinations, economic and military force. If we have to allow bigger nations to crush or assimilate smaller ones as was the case of European colonialism in the past on grounds of intellectual, economic superiority, no one will ever be safe and no one will ever live amicably with their neighbors. The perceptible backwardness of Africa and its sparse population of certain parts should not be capitalized on by other regions of Africa or any country outside Africa to re-colonize or blatantly exploit them.

On this note we are thinking if Sahrawi our cardinal concern being colonized by Morocco and the Southern Cameroons also colonized by Cameroon Republic. These newly colonized countries are suffering from successive colonialism, the Europeans and now that of other Africans who are purporting to replace the departed Europeans. If this were the accepted norms, smaller nation states in Africa will not only fear the idea of African Union forming a United States of Africa but will dread that idea and it will never be tabled, debated and accepted. Botswana with its small population will not want to be re-colonized by The Republic of South Africa or Nigeria coveting Togo because it is not as big as Nigeria. If assimilation of smaller countries by bigger ones were accepted, the economy of Africa will be that of the pre-Boxer Revolution of China and the burgeoning economy of Africa will plummet. At the present, Africa is the last continent in terms of global economic development for reasons we need not discuss here. The rest of the world knows the importance of Africa sitting shoulder to shoulder on the economic bandwagon of the rest of the world. It is for this reason that a drawback of Africa in the economic domain drags the entire world along with it. This cannot be accepted now and even in the future.

In 1964 when members of the newly formed defunct O.A.U., now known as the African Union (AU) were signing a declaration to respect the colonial boundaries, Somalia and Morocco under the father of the present King Mohammed VI declined. They were laying claims on their neighboring lands. Somalia wasted time and resources waging wars with her neighbors under a brutal dictator called Major General Siyhaad Barre. When Barre who was then a demigod fell, the entire nation stumbled chaotically and is now the sick man of Africa. If this amorphous banana state is not torn by wars, Islamic religious fundamentalists, war lords and ragtag desperadoes called sea pirates, and famine that is taking its told, they are shooting one another in spurious internecine wars. There is no glimmer of hope in sight if Westerners, most of them abuse as pagans do not come to their rescue. Their reasoning is dazzled by Islamic fanaticism that is sinking them with our restrain in an abyss of quick sand.

I was surprised the other day when I stumbled on an atlas of Morocco published by Jeune Afrique Edition, Paris. This Atlas has included the former Rio d’Oro, Western Sahara various known now as the Sahrawi Republic to the south of Morocco and west of Mauritania as part and parcel of Morocco. I was shocked and could not believe what I was seeing. This contemporary atlas explained why Morocco would not sign the 1964 OAU accord on the recognition of the colonial boundaries. Well, this sort of publication is good money for the Arab journalists who run Jeune Afrique Edition. But is that the truth? It is nothing but a propaganda atlas. The Nazi did publish theirs including Alsace-Lorraine we all know that they were part and parcel of France and that is why everyone who was for peace was against what the Germans did. Alsace-Lorraine is now part of France. Only another Third World War could change the political boundary maps of that region. Although both France and Germany belong to the European Economic Community (EEC) with one currency when it comes to nationalism, one dare not tamper with Alsace Lorraine and many more beyond the scope of this treatise.

The question is why does Morocco opt to sit on the Pandora box? Did Ethiopia succeed after sitting on Eretria for donkey years? Did the Mahdist State now known as Sudan Republic remained with its grip on South Sudan? In all these cases, the bigger belligerent states ignore the pleas of smaller ones and the smaller ones eventually won with heavy loses of lives. Then why can man not learn that a stitch on time save he garment?

All freedom loving people know that Western Sahara had never been part of Morocco and will never end up being there unless Westerners blindly back them. If they have to do this, it should be known that there is room too for smaller nations and the UNO charter provides a clause for smaller nations to exist side by side giants. If that were not the case smaller nations would not have existed and the world would have been a living hell. We need not dwell on the reasons why the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) collapsed. History had shown that nations build on false foundation do crumble with the slightest thrust. If you want evidence, ask yourselves where the Balkan states are today that were forcibly under the former Yugoslavia. Do ask yourself why on July 9, 2011 a new country called the Republic of South Sudan aka Equatoria Republic was born from The Sudan.

No stone will be allowed to abut or lye on another even in the impoverished Africa. Colonial Khadafy who is being pushed aside was helping the Polisarians, the Moroccan autocratic regime of Mahoumed VI will be glad that the devil that had been helping them is falling and feel that without the tacit support of the Libyans; Western Sahara will be assimilated to be part and parcel of Morocco. The Moroccans will be wrong. The only accepted way for Morocco as that of Cameroon Republic that is sitting tight on Ambazonia, the former British Cameroons is to allow Western Sahara to achieve its political independence and then to suggest a loose economic union. You will see that Western Europe is more united now than before. It is a proof that any union for economic and peaceful purposes could be successful. You will recall that Napoleon Bonaparte and other past Western rulers had been attempting to use force to unite Europe but history and the example of the EEC has demonstrated that this could be done by peace without a single drop of human blood lost. Why can Morocco and Cameroon Republic learn from this? We are told that some have the backing of the former colonial masters and France is one of them. Is this still true and could France exonerate itself?

If this is true, France should not go about bulling other nations for they have bigger minority problems in their home that cannot be solved even if they were to use all the nuclear weapons in their bunkers and unleash on those who want their independence. In the south west we have the Basque whose territory crosses over to Spain. Also, they should not forget the interminable problem of Brittany that feel that they are different and have a different culture from France proper. That is not the end. There is also Corsica the home of Napoleon Bonaparte, the Italian Man who became French. Given opportunity, they would like to have their political independence away from France. France always plays it down but it is a serious problem that is similar to Northern Ireland in Great Britain.

Why are we reminding France? It is necessary for them to be careful not to set precedent on things they cannot stomach. The unity of the entire France is owed to the entire world that rallied to fight against the might of Adolf Hitler and his war machinery that in 1940, marched all the way right to Paris and set up the puppet Vichy regime. If there were no farsighted men as Winston Churchill, France could hitherto been occupied by Germany. If the original plan of Germany could have materialized, Great Britain could have been defeated by Germany. They should know that there were Scots who were ready to side with the Germans as they wanted to revert to their independence they had known until taken away from them in 1707 AD. Also, England could not have even done it had Japan not made the error of attacking the American navy at Pearl Harbor. The coming in of the American with stronger fire power tipped the war balance and Germany was eventually defeated. Also the defeat of Germany was attributed to the fact that they, like Napoleon before them decided to attack Russia in the heart of winter when fighting was absolutely impossible under sub zero temperatures.

Morocco and Algeria were the original homes of the Berbers. The Arabs were the new comers who came under the Turks. The Turkish Empire collapsed and the Arabs felt that it was their turn. If questioned, the Arabs in the Barbary States would tell you that their frontier passed on the coastal water of Western Africa. Will they be right? Every one can come and claim where they want and the world can never be pacific. We have to adjust and try to come together as the EEC is trying to do and peace could prevail. If the Basque, Euskal Herria as the Basque want to call them, Brittany and Corsica, Catalonia, Galacia in Spain are bent on having their political independence there is nothing that will stop them. Is this a call for those who sit on others for spurious and economic exploitation reason know that their dominance is ephemeral? The maps could be employed as propagandistic tools but the reality is in the heart of men whose territories are occupied and where they want to be can not be changed overnight by inveigling. Did the mighty Indonesia change that of East Timor? The Germans of the Third Reich drew megalomaniac map of Mitteleuropa (Middle Europe) as that of the present day Cameroon Republic including The Southern Cameroons and Morocco including The Sahrawi Democratic Republic. Where are those megalomaniac maps of the Germans today? The Kaiser regime in 1917 also had one of Mitelafrika (Middle Africa) indicating their gargantuan strives to have all of black Africa for themselves from the tropic of Cancer to that of Capricorn. That was on the assumption that they won the First World War. Were those maps not short-lived? Could reality in the hearts of men who are dominated and downtrodden be easily pushed as scum under the carpet of injustice? It is good to publish a national atlas but it portrays ignoramuses when it blatantly publishes false information. The call is for the Moroccan Jeune Afrique Atlas to be updated with nothing else but facts after a Saharwi referendum and the date of publication included.

Dr. Viban Ngo.