The proposed evolution of the UN mission and the Polisario Front’s reaction highlight a broader challenge: turning renewed diplomatic momentum into a negotiated settlement, effective humanitarian protection and a future of freely chosen options for the populations of Tindouf.
The reported US initiative to revise the mandate of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) could mark an important turning point in international efforts to resolve the Western Sahara dispute. Beyond the mission’s structure and operational arrangements, the debate raises a fundamental question: can the United Nations move from managing a protracted conflict towards creating the conditions for a durable political settlement?
According to reports on the preliminary US-circulated draft, the proposed changes include placing negotiations within an autonomy-centred framework under Moroccan sovereignty, reconsidering MINURSO’s designation and institutional role, reducing its uniformed personnel and registering the population in the Tindouf camps. These remain proposals, not provisions of an adopted Security Council resolution; their final form will depend on the Council’s deliberations.
Nevertheless, the initiative signals a possible reassessment of arrangements established in 1991, which have not produced the anticipated political outcome.
The Polisario’s reaction: pressure or strategic dilemma?
In a letter dated 22 October 2026 to the President of the Security Council, the Polisario Front rejected the draft as a basis for deliberations and warned that it might disengage from the peace process unless substantial changes were made.
The reaction reflects more than opposition to an institutional reform. It seeks to preserve the negotiating parameters that have underpinned the Polisario’s position for decades, particularly its insistence on a referendum that includes independence as an option.
By invoking Security Council Resolution 690 (1991), self-determination and the International Court of Justice’s 1975 advisory opinion, the Polisario also challenges the legal and institutional legitimacy of the proposed changes.
These arguments merit consideration. However, neither the original referendum framework nor the ICJ opinion, which did not determine
sovereignty over Western Sahara in favour of either party, should be treated as resolving every question concerning the form of a future political settlement.
The central challenge remains reconciling international law with a workable, negotiated and durable outcome.
The threat of withdrawal therefore exposes a strategic dilemma. By refusing to participate, the Polisario risks losing the opportunity to influence the terms and guarantees of a settlement. By remaining engaged, it may have to negotiate within parameters less favourable to its longstanding position.
The outcome, however, will not be determined by the American initiative alone. The Security Council retains responsibility for deciding the mandate, while the success of any revised framework will ultimately depend on meaningful political engagement and implementation.
For Morocco, the diplomatic momentum presents an opportunity to demonstrate that its autonomy proposal can provide a credible institutional framework, with clearly defined powers, guarantees and mechanisms for implementation.
Tindouf: the limits of humanitarian management
The debate over MINURSO cannot be separated from the situation of the populations living in the Tindouf camps, where displacement has persisted for more than half a century.
The humanitarian work of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and its partners remains indispensable. Their assistance has helped sustain vulnerable populations and must not be weakened by political developments.
Yet humanitarian assistance, however essential, cannot by itself resolve the political and
practical conditions that perpetuate prolonged displacement. When a situation initially regarded as temporary continues across generations, emergency management risks becoming a permanent institutional arrangement.
The joint US–French statement of 15 October 2026, delivered during the 77th session of UNHCR’s Executive Committee, brings renewed attention to this challenge. Its significance lies in encouraging practical prospects for addressing prolonged displacement following Security Council Resolution 2797.
The statement does not replace the established international refugee framework, create new rights by itself or offer an alternative to the political negotiations. Rather, it reinforces the need to connect humanitarian protection with the pursuit of durable solutions.
The proposed “Go and See Visits”, advanced by the UN Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy,
could be a useful step. Properly organised, voluntary visits would enable interested individuals to assess conditions in areas of potential return and make informed decisions based on reliable information and direct experience.
Such initiatives must remain safe, dignified and voluntary. No political settlement can justify coercion, reduced humanitarian assistance or pressure on displaced people to accept a particular future.
Algeria’s political responsibility
Algeria, a party to the refugees convention (1951) has a role that is central to any serious assessment of the prospects for resolving the crisis. The camps are located on its territory, and its political influence and support for the Polisario make its contribution to the diplomatic process consequential.
Security Council Resolution 2797 (2025), by including Algeria among the parties involved in consultations under UN auspices, reinforces the importance of its participation in the search for a definitive settlement.
This political designation, though not a judicial finding of liability or an automatic proof of international legal responsibility for prolonged displacement, does not discard the need to examine Algeria’s actual role.
Its influence should be assessed against its willingness to facilitate compromise, cooperate with humanitarian mechanisms and help create conditions for a durable solution. Its territorial sovereignty also entails responsibilities concerning the protection of people present on its territory.
Freedom of movement, access to independent information, respect for fundamental rights and the ability to express preferences without intimidation deserve particular attention.
The reported proposal to register the camp population makes these questions especially relevant. Registration, if adopted, should be impartial, protective of personal data and designed to improve humanitarian planning and individual protection—not to instrumentalise the population for political purposes.
A rigorous approach must distinguish political responsibility from international legal liability. The latter requires evidence of an applicable legal obligation, a breach and the conditions necessary to attribute that breach to the state concerned.
The political test is nevertheless clear: Algeria must demonstrate that its influence contributes to overcoming the status quo rather than perpetuating it. This does not require prior acceptance of Morocco’s position; it requires constructive participation in good faith.
Three conditions for credible progress
The renewed diplomatic momentum will have little meaning unless it produces measurable results. Three conditions are essential.
First, a credible political process. Any revision of MINURSO’s mandate should serve a coherent strategy for substantive negotiations, supported by clear objectives, identifiable milestones and periodic assessments. The autonomy proposal under Moroccan sovereignty should be examined in practical terms, including institutional arrangements, powers, guarantees and implementation mechanisms.
The participation of the Polisario, Algeria and Mauritania will remain important to a negotiated outcome and regional stability.
Second, uninterrupted humanitarian protection. UNHCR and its partners must continue providing assistance while ensuring access to reliable information, civil documentation, family unity and the freedom to make individual choices.
Any population-registration exercise must include appropriate safeguards. Humanitarian protection is an obligation in its own right, not a reward for political cooperation, and must remain effective before, during and after negotiations.
Third, tangible prospects for a freely chosen future. Voluntary repatriation, local integration and resettlement in a third country remain the three principal durable solutions recognised by the international refugee framework. Their applicability depends on individual circumstances, legal and practical conditions, and informed consent. They must not be imposed as a collective political settlement.
The international community should therefore support practical programmes offering confidential information, individual consultations, access to documentation and coordination among UNHCR, relevant authorities and other partners.
Progress should be assessed through transparent indicators without reducing people to numerical targets.
Morocco, for its part, should clarify the practical guarantees and institutional arrangements associated with its autonomy proposal. Algeria’s cooperation will be important in facilitating humanitarian access and informed choices, while the United Nations must preserve the independence of its protection activities.
From managing the conflict to resolving it
The proposed evolution of MINURSO and the renewed focus on Tindouf reveal a common challenge for multilateralism: how to adapt international instruments when decades of institutional continuity have failed to deliver a definitive settlement.
Reform alone will not resolve the dispute, just as a new resolution cannot guarantee implementation. But maintaining existing arrangements indefinitely is not necessarily a guarantee of neutrality or effectiveness.
Any institutional change must remain consistent with applicable international law, protect the populations concerned and advance a credible political process.
The responsibilities are collective but differentiated. The United Nations must sustain protection and facilitate negotiations. Morocco must demonstrate the viability of its autonomy proposal. The Polisario must decide whether continued participation offers a better prospect than disengagement. Algeria must translate its political influence into constructive engagement, while Mauritania has a role to play in supporting regional stability.
Ultimately, the credibility of the international response will depend not on declarations alone, but on demonstrable progress towards a negotiated settlement, uninterrupted humanitarian protection and genuine opportunities for the populations of Tindouf to determine their future.
Humanitarian assistance must never be abandoned, but neither can it substitute for political responsibility. The objective is not to replace humanitarian action with political pressure, nor to use the humanitarian question as an alternative to negotiations. It is to ensure that political progress, humanitarian protection and durable solutions reinforce one another.
The ultimate test of multilateralism is whether it can move beyond managing the consequences of an unresolved conflict and help create the conditions for its peaceful and sustainable resolution.
