that is the biggest pile of steaming BS I have ever heard. Morocco is in control of all of the Sahara west of the buffer area. People in the Sahara have moroccan ID cards, vote for Moroccan elections (they just voted for locals where they participated more than other parts of Morocco). Edit: another factor is this is near Ouarzazate, no where near the (Moroccan) Western Sahara.

That's the de facto situation, whereas I was referring to the de jure one. Ouarzazate is nowhere near Western Sahara, but I was just clarifying the parent comment.

even then, there is no more involvement of Spain for almost 40 years.

The UN's Committee of Decolonization disagrees: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_list_of_Non-Sel....

Of course, that's only the most egregious controversy on that list, as you'd see if you scroll up a bit on that page to read the Criticism section.

I don't see where that conflicts with the previous claim. In particular, it's telling that the Manhasset negotiations didn't involve a Spanish delegation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhasset_negotiations

I don't think the situation in WS is quite that simple: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14115273

it is, I am talking about the actual situation not PLANS. Morocco DOES control everything west of the buffer zones and the population in there DOES have Moroccan national ID cards and they DO vote.

Edit: from the article "Western Sahara fell under Spanish rule in 1884". Because history started in 1884. Western Sahara was for Many centuries part of Morocco, it was not a country by modern standards, but local tribes did recognise reign of the Moroccan kings. there was never a "western Sahara kingdom"

Mohammed Abdelaziz, the long time leader (talk about democracy) of the Polisario camps in Algeria, was born in Marrakech, Morocco, and studied at Mohammed V University in Rabat.

No only that. Apparently, Sahrawi people don't have much interest in being part of Morocco. I guess that that counts too.