A wave of anger has swept through the Polisario Front following a lengthy post published by European Parliament member Rima Hassan on her official Instagram account, in which she addressed the issue of the Moroccan Sahara with a neutral tone and a historical reading that differed from the separatist rhetoric long promoted by the Front—and previously defended by Hassan herself.
The European MP of Palestinian origin, affiliated with the left-wing France Insoumise party, wrote in her post that the Sahara issue is essentially the result of a regional dispute between Morocco and Algeria. This statement provoked the ire of the Polisario, which insists on framing the matter in international forums as a “decolonization issue.”
Hassan—who had been among the most prominent European figures advocating the separatist thesis espoused by the Polisario—went on at length about the region’s history, acknowledging that it had been part of the Kingdom of Morocco as well as under the authority of the Almoravid dynasty in earlier periods, thereby reinforcing the historical ties between the Sahara and Morocco.
The European lawmaker also spoke about Morocco’s Green March of 1975, describing it as a “peaceful, unarmed march,” a characterization that angered the Polisario, which promotes a very different narrative, claiming that Morocco launched the march to colonize the Sahara.
Hassan further recalled the period during which the Sahara was partitioned between Morocco and Mauritania, before the Polisario rejected the arrangement and engaged in armed conflict with both countries. This ultimately led to Nouakchott’s withdrawal and Morocco’s completion of its sovereignty over the southern provinces.
What further inflamed Polisario supporters was Hassan’s position regarding attempts by the separatist group and its allies to link the Sahara issue with the Palestinian cause. She called for an end to such comparisons, citing the profound differences between the two situations.
This interpretation, deemed by many observers as “neutral and realistic,” infuriated Polisario loyalists, who saw in the European MP’s words a “dangerous retreat” from her previous stances, particularly given that she had long been used as a pressure card within European institutions to advance the separatist agenda.
Figures affiliated with the separatist group quickly lashed out at Hassan through Polisario-linked media outlets and social networks, accusing her of bias toward Morocco and of “echoing its official narrative,” despite the fact that her post clearly presented historical facts and well-documented realities.
Some even went so far as to question the MP’s motives, linking her stance to what they described as “increasing Moroccan pressure within the European Union.” Among the harshest critics was Abdeslam Omar Lahsen, head of the so-called “Association of Families of Sahrawi Prisoners and Disappeared,” who described her words as if they had been “dictated by a Moroccan intelligence officer.”
Conversely, Hassan’s post received wide engagement from her followers in both Europe and Morocco. Many viewed her recent positions as reflecting a growing awareness within European institutions about the true nature of the conflict and its historical and political context.
Observers also noted that Hassan’s statements reveal the beginning of the erosion of the Polisario’s narrative in the European arena, especially amid shifting geopolitical dynamics that have led several major powers—including the United States, Spain, and Germany—to describe Morocco’s autonomy initiative as “serious and credible.”
Moreover, her acknowledgment of the Sahara’s historical ties to Morocco, and her references to its roots within the Almoravid dynasty and the Kingdom of Morocco, represent a major blow to the separatist discourse that seeks to deny any historical connection between the Sahara and Morocco’s territorial integrity.
