by Alif Daoud
As being Morocco defender by proxy in the Fish agreement, the PSOE of Spain gave up his right to remain silent. It agreed to plead guilty to a single count of conspiracy to commit robbery. It also agreed to cooperate fully with the French government in this regard, and it is undisputed that it did so, over the period of the five elapsing years.
In return for its guilty plea and cooperation, the PSOE made several promises, the most significant of which is that it agreed to donate some more "money" in favour of the Saharawi refugees.
Trinidad Jimenez and her boss Zapatero saw, in a trade-off legality with a void ab initio agreement, the maximum sentence for Morocco. It was the maximum sentence that could have been imposed even if Spain had constantly invoked its right to remain silent. The PSOE had refused to cooperate with UN legal statement, and had insisted on imposing on the EU community and in particular the Spanish people a dirty brokerage.
The renewal of the Fish agreement has uncovered that the Spanish political life is the direct result of ineffective representation by the Cortes, who repeatedly failed to act while the government violated the country's most basic commitments and went on in its bias error fundamental miscarriage of its abandoned former colony .
In a hostile take-over of the Spanish people willing and given such ineffective representation, the PSOE ran roughshod over International Community valuable rights bargained for in the UN Charter.
It is undisputed that the actions of the Spanish government infringe international law; however, the involvement of socialist party and its sister parties in an unethical behaviour such as this one is a further matter to be explored. The complicity of the PSOE in covering up the human rights violations in Western Sahara is of particular relevance in light of the conclusion of this agreement.
Politically motivated pillage has taken on increasing importance in recent years as the illegal exploitation of the natural resources of Western Sahara has emerged as a primary means of financing the dictatorship in Morocco. But Saharawi and popular European efforts to hold disreputable political actors responsible for this crimes or other nasty activities have been frustrated, frequently because of difficulties put by both French and Spanish governments.
Genocide and crimes against humanity are international crimes in which companies can be involved. The Fish agreement with Morocco will fuel an armed conflict. The EU pillage of the natural resources of Western Sahara will finance a regime in a war status, the worse is that it comes from stolen resources. The EU companies involved in this issue should review this business as soon as possible.
The EU fish agreement with Morocco reveals the vital role of the private sector in the exploitation of natural resources and the continuation of the hostilities. A number of European countries have been involved and have fuelled the Western Sahara conflict directly, trading arms for natural resources, which are used to purchase weapons. Countries and companies trading minerals, which are considered to be "the engine of the conflict in Western Sahara".
--------------Este texto expresa la opinion del autor y no de los moderadores del foro.