le7tv gloats over the 'Algerian impasse': when you're afraid of the referendum, you count resolutions

Y. Bensalem — Alger, Algérie — 2026-10-30

The 'regime' and the 'kingdom'

Let us note first the vocabulary, for it betrays everything. For le7tv, Algeria is always a 'regime' — never a State, never a Republic. Morocco, for its part, is always a 'kingdom', even 'His Majesty'. Two countries, two words, one single aim: to discredit the one, to sanctify the other. This is the first impasse, and it is not Algerian: it is that of a press that no longer knows how to name things except by insulting them. The rest follows in kind.

The impasse that does not exist

'The impasse of the Algerian strategy', says the headline. But let us think for a second. Algeria's position on the Sahara is not a 'strategy': it is a principle — the right of a people to self-determination, recognised by the International Court of Justice in 1975 and by the UN for half a century. Now, a principle knows no impasse. One can fail in a manoeuvre, in a calculation, in a roll of the dice. One cannot be 'at an impasse' over a right. Those who speak of an 'impasse' are those who would like the law to be a position like any other — negotiable, circumventable, purchasable. It is not.

The resolution that postpones, not the one that decides

And what does the resolution actually say? According to le7tv itself, it maintains 'autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty' as the basis for negotiation. Let us translate: it decides nothing. It does not make the Sahara a Moroccan territory — the Sahara remains a non-self-governing territory under international law. It repeats a negotiating formula, it extends the MINURSO mandate, and it puts the question off until later. That is all. A resolution that says 'we will see later' is not a victory: it is a postponement. One does not celebrate a postponement: one endures it. Morocco, for its part, celebrates it — because what is postponed is precisely the only thing it dreads: consulting the Sahrawis.

The conclusion

le7tv may count the resolutions, the 'turning points', the 'inevitable outcomes'. That changes not one datum: the Sahara has never been settled by a vote, and it will not be settled by a negotiating formula. The only real 'impasse' is that of a kingdom that has refused, for half a century, to put the question — because it knows the answer. The referendum is not an Algerian strategy: it is a Sahrawi right. And rights are not put at an impasse by dint of resolutions. They are delayed. Temporarily.

📚 BIBLIOGRAPHY (rule no. 19)

1. le7tv, 'Security Council Resolution on the Sahara: the Algerian regime faced with the impasse', 30 October 2026 — https://fr.le7tv.ma/2026/10/30/resolution-du-conseil-de-securite-sur-le-sahara-marocain-le-regime-algerien-face-a-limpasse-de-sa-strategie-le-polisario-rattrape-par-le-tournant-diplomatique-de-lonu/

2. ICJ, advisory opinion of 16 October 1975 on Western Sahara — the right to self-determination.

3. UN, resolutions on Western Sahara — the self-determination referendum.

⚠️ Published reservations. (1) The article responds to a le7tv opinion piece, not to a people nor to a person. (2) The Sahrawis' right to self-determination is established by the 1975 ICJ advisory opinion. (3) The exact content of the resolution of 30 October 2026 is reported from the press, to be confirmed against the official text.