Resolution 34/37 and the Legal Definition of Occupation
In international diplomacy, words carry the weight of law. For the conflict in Western Sahara, the most fiercely contested word is "Occupation." While modern Security Council texts often sanitize their language to appease geopolitical allies, the foundational legal definition of Morocco's presence was cemented in the late 1970s by the UN General Assembly (UNGA). Through Resolutions 34/37 (1979) and 35/19 (1980), the international community stripped away the diplomatic ambiguity and explicitly categorized Morocco not as a sovereign or an administrator, but as a hostile occupying power. Understanding these two resolutions is essential for grasping the bedrock of international law regarding Western Sahara.
The Turning Point: Resolution 34/37 (1979)
The Historical Context: Mauritania's Withdrawal
To understand the severity of Resolution 34/37, one must look at the events of August 1979. Originally, Morocco and Mauritania had split Western Sahara between them. However, suffering military defeats, Mauritania signed a peace agreement with the Polisario Front in Algiers, formally renouncing all territorial claims to Western Sahara and withdrawing its troops.
The Moroccan Response: Instead of allowing the Sahrawi people to reclaim this newly evacuated southern territory (Río de Oro), King Hassan II immediately ordered the Moroccan military to advance and annex it.
The UN's Condemnation (The "O-Word")
On November 21, 1979, the UN General Assembly responded to this aggressive expansion by passing Resolution 34/37. This document is a cornerstone of Sahrawi legal defense because it refused to mince words.
The Text: In operative paragraph 5, the Assembly stated that it: "Deeply deplores the aggravation of the situation resulting from the continued occupation of Western Sahara by Morocco and the extension of that occupation to the territory recently evacuated by Mauritania."
The Ultimatum: Paragraph 6 went further, explicitly urging Morocco to "terminate the occupation of the Territory of Western Sahara."
Reinforcing the Mandate: Resolution 35/19 (1980)
A year later, faced with Morocco's refusal to withdraw, the General Assembly passed Resolution 35/19 on November 11, 1980.
The 1980 resolution served to legally lock in the definition established the previous year. It declared that the Assembly was "deeply concerned at the aggravation of the situation deriving from the continued occupation of Western Sahara by Morocco."
Why this matters: By repeating the terminology in consecutive sessions, the UNGA established a consistent legal precedent. The military takeover of Western Sahara was officially codified in the UN registry as an illegal occupation, preventing any future legal argument that the international community had tacitly consented to the annexation.
Recognition of the Polisario Front
Both resolutions also cemented the political legitimacy of the Sahrawi resistance. They formally recommended that the Polisario Front, as the "representative of the people of Western Sahara," must participate fully in any search for a definitive political solution. This elevated the Polisario from a rebel group to an internationally recognized national liberation movement.
The Legal Consequences of the "Occupation" Label
Classifying a military presence as an "occupation" is not just a diplomatic insult; it triggers a specific set of international laws under the Law of Armed Conflict (IHL).
Invoking the Fourth Geneva Convention
By defining Morocco as an Occupying Power, Resolutions 34/37 and 35/19 implicitly activated the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949), which governs the protection of civilians in times of war. Under these rules, an Occupying Power is strictly prohibited from:
Population Transfer (Article 49): Moving its own civilian population into the occupied territory (the exact strategy Morocco employed with the Green March and subsequent settler subsidies).
Pillage (Article 33): The exploitation or theft of natural resources (such as phosphates and fisheries) for the benefit of the occupier's domestic economy.
Annexation: Sovereignty cannot be acquired through military occupation. The land remains fundamentally separate from the occupying state until the indigenous population exercises self-determination.
Further Resources and Academic References
UN General Assembly Resolution 34/37 (1979) — The foundational text explicitly condemning the occupation. UN Digital Library.
UN General Assembly Resolution 35/19 (1980) — The follow-up resolution reinforcing the "occupation" status. Refworld.
"The Western Sahara Question and International Law" — Academic analysis of how UNGA resolutions shape customary international law regarding territorial acquisition. OAPEN Library.
The Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) — The legal framework activated by the recognition of military occupation. ICRC.
Frequently Asked Questions
If the UNGA called it an occupation, why hasn't Morocco faced sanctions?
The General Assembly is the democratic voice of the UN, but it lacks enforcement power. Only the Security Council can authorize sanctions or military intervention (under Chapter VII of the UN Charter). Because Morocco's allies (notably France and the US) hold veto power in the Security Council, the UNGA's legal classification has never been backed by punitive action.
Does Morocco recognize these resolutions?
No. Morocco routinely rejects UNGA resolutions regarding Western Sahara, arguing that the issue should only be handled by the Security Council, where the language has historically been much softer and the word "occupation" is strategically avoided.
Are these resolutions still valid today?
Yes. UN General Assembly resolutions do not "expire." While the diplomatic focus has shifted to the Security Council-led MINURSO process, Resolutions 34/37 and 35/19 remain the definitive legal stance of the General Assembly regarding the nature of Morocco's presence in the territory.