A synchronic vision of Western Sahara doesn’t allow for the actual problematics of the conflict to be identified.
Without a intertemporal vision, it is difficult for the present not to be interpreted in an arbitrary manner.
It is for this reason that some countries are trying to hide their subversive claims.
Western Sahara is not lacking a past, and the existence of the concept of the occupation is a tangible proof of it.
This history has by the way suffered many wounds on account of the opportunism of some.
The various conflicts during the period of the last centuries have caused shiftings upon the concept of the border lines as such.
This situation derives also from the human topology, because geometry is of little importance in the desert.
Consequently some took advantage of the situation, in order to say that the coloniazation borders can not be questioned, as their mere existence it itself is directly dependent on the colonization as such.
As far as the State is concerned, isn’t that in itself a mere refusal of coloniazation?
Therefore, to what avail is such an insistence regarding the border line demarcations;
The reason is quite simple.
Prior the demarcations, some countries had no substance, whereas others obtain an historic past, which isn’t at all determined by the colonial period.
As a result we reach a paradox, since those who at every opportunity talk about decolonization, even out of context, they also are the most eager supporters of the colonial borders.
However, we are aware that they have been imposed, on one hand due to the simplicity within the desert, and on the other, due to the natural sources.
Consequently, a return to the previous colonization past, adds value to the history of some countries, whereas on the other hand it highlights the absence of some others.