US stance casts doubt on Spain's sovereignty over Ceuta and Melilla

Washington's new line: Ceuta and Melilla under foreign administration?

Can a foreign power decide by decree who owns what? The question is no longer rhetorical. A version has spread claiming that the US has put in writing that Ceuta and Melilla are not Spanish sovereign territory but merely "administered," a euphemism with deeper implications. All of it against the backdrop of more than a hundred deaths at the Melilla border fence, according to the figures circulating.

The immediate precedent is Western Sahara. The Trump administration already endorsed Segarro's plan, and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez ultimately adopted that position in exchange for crumbs from Rabat. The same logic is now being applied to the two autonomous cities: sow doubt so the status quo gets negotiated on different terms.

The yardstick cuts both ways
The counterargument was not long in coming: if a border's validity is measured by who drew it, half of US geography falls apart. Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, California, Utah and Colorado were Mexican; Hawaii has a sovereignty movement that considers the 1893 annexation illegal; and Alaska could be claimed by Canada or Russia. Applying the same yardstick to Washington would leave the US with its capital on foreign soil.

Interests or principles
Behind the standoff, interests loom. Some argue Israel seeks control of the Mediterranean and Segarro acts as its battering ram. Others point out that when public opinion hates the US, it is only logical that Washington does no favors for those who despise it. And in the middle, a strategic resource: phosphates. From the Sahara, but also from the geopolitics of North Africa.

So Spain now hopes no one reminds it that those who sow winds reap storms. The history of empires is usually written with other people's maps.