" 

  
 Reply to both Wikima and Daryou: 
 * There is no doubt on whether Polisario is supported by Algeria or not if you check the article, or the Polisario article (I personally wrote several sentences on Algerian support). The phrase ""the Algerian backed Polisario"" used consistently, as a permanent epithet, is however to adopt a well-known formula of Moroccan government language, like writing ""the so-called 'polisario'"". 
 * The conflict is between Morocco and Polisario. Polisario was created in 1971-73 (first as the ""embryonic movement"" but formally founded 10 May 1973), and was then completely without Algerian backing. That came later, in mid-1975; El-Ouali was actually briefly arrested by the Algerians when he tried to gain support from them before the Moroccan invasion. Polisario asked ALL surrounding governments incl. Morocco for support, approximately 1972 (only Libya answered by sending a crate of rifles and their best wishes...). It was a completely self-created movement. That is undeniable even if you would want to argue it was not representative of Sahrawi opinion. 
 * All this means that there was and would have been a Moroccan-Polisario conflict anyway, even if Algeria hadn't gotten involved on Polisario's side. That Algerian support has strenghtened Polisario considerably does not change the fundamentals of the conflict. Also, as you can see in any United Nations report, Morocco itself has only negotiated with Polisario on the issue, and all agreements have been between Morocco and Polisario/SADR. True, Algeria is regularly consulted by the UN when drawing up peace plans. But so is Spain, Mauritania and other nations. It has no say in negotiations, and explitly refuses to negotiate on behalf of Polisario. In this respect, Polisario's role is similar to De Gaulle's Free French. An exile movement, they were dependent on foreign support to manage their part in the war, but that doesn't mean they were not a real party to it.  "