Editor’s Note: Dr. Leila Hanafi is a Moroccan-American international development lawyer with the World Bank Group and an adjunct professor at George Washington University Law School. She is the founder of ARPA International Law Group and has served in senior legal and advisory roles with the United Nations and other international organizations, including as a staff attorney with the American Bar Association’s World Justice Project. She previously served as the Middle East and North Africa focal point for International Criminal Court coalition coordination and as a Legal Commissioner in Morocco’s National Inter-Governmental Commission for Policy Dialogue. Dr. Hanafi is a graduate of George Washington University Law School, Georgetown University, and American University in Washington, DC.
By Hafed Al-Ghwell, Senior Fellow and Director, North Africa Program
Morocco’s role as a founding member of the Peace Council was formally established through the signing of the Council’s Charter at the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 22, 2026. Acting by order of His Majesty King Mohammed VI, King of Morocco and President of the Al-Quds Committee, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, African Cooperation and Moroccans Abroad, Nasser Bourita, signed the Charter on behalf of the Kingdom during a ceremony presided over by President Donald J. Trump. The signature followed King Mohammed VI’s prior decision to join the initiative as a founding participant, reflecting a deliberate legal commitment rather than an episodic diplomatic gesture.
Founding Membership and Institutional Implications
Membership in the Peace Council has been intentionally limited, signaling an expectation that participants will carry implementation responsibility, not merely symbolic affiliation. The invitation extended to King Mohammed VI reflects an assessment grounded in Morocco’s demonstrated capacity to contribute to stability through lawful, institutional engagement across regions directly affected by fragility from the Middle East to the Sahel and the Mediterranean.
Morocco’s expanding role as a legal standard-setter from Africa to the Middle East as a function of its sustained engagement with international law, and its participation in the new Peace Council, including deepened institutional ties with the United States, are developments that can further elevate its role in support of global peace and stability.
Morocco’s cross-regional legal credibility is most immediately visible in the Middle East, where mediation efforts are often undermined by polarization, contested legal status, and institutional fragility. Morocco’s stewardship of the Al-Quds Committee under the Organization of Islamic Cooperation exemplifies an approach to mediation grounded in legal status, institutional guardianship, and continuity of process, rather than rhetorical escalation. Through the Bayt Mal Al-Quds Agency, Morocco has pursued legally grounded interventions, supporting education, healthcare, housing, and cultural heritage preservation, anchored in international legal principles governing holy sites and civilian protection.
This emphasis on law as process, rather than diplomacy, has enabled Morocco to maintain credibility across deeply divided actors while preserving channels for engagement. For peace initiatives operating in legally and politically sensitive environments, this Moroccan model of restraint and institutional continuity remains increasingly rare and increasingly valuable.
Across North Africa and the Sahel, peace initiatives frequently falter not during negotiations but at the implementation stage, where commitments confront weak courts, politicized institutions, and fragmented administrative authority. In such contexts, legal credibility is not aspirational; it is operational. Agreements endure only where domestic legal systems can absorb and execute international obligations.
Legal Credibility as a Regional Stabilizer
Morocco’s relevance to emerging peace architectures lies in its sustained emphasis on legal continuity, institutional authority, and respect for international law. Unlike many states in the region where political transitions repeatedly disrupt legal commitments, Morocco has preserved a degree of administrative and judicial stability that allows international agreements to be implemented across political cycles. This capacity is particularly salient for peace mechanisms seeking traction in the Sahel, where the gap between political commitments and legal execution remains a persistent fault line.
Morocco’s mediation record further illustrates this legal positioning. In Libya, Morocco hosted the 2015 Skhirat Agreement, facilitating UN-backed negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) in a neutral legal setting that emphasized procedure, consent, and institutional legitimacy. While Libya’s political trajectory remains fragile, the Skhirat process demonstrated Morocco’s capacity to support mediation grounded in international law rather than unilateral leverage. This approach is also evident in Morocco’s handling of the Sahara dispute, where sustained UN-facilitated negotiations culminated in renewed international backing for Morocco’s Autonomy Plan as a credible framework for a negotiated political solution. Morocco’s posture throughout these negotiations has been characterized by legal continuity, engagement with UN mechanisms, and acceptance of international mediation as the appropriate forum for dispute resolution.
Beyond formal mediation, Morocco’s legal value add lies in its ability to translate international legal standards into operating institutional practice across West and Central Africa and the Mediterranean. In countries such as Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire, Mali, and Niger, Moroccan financial and development actors operate under regulatory and compliance frameworks aligned with international norms, reinforcing contract enforceability, corporate governance, and supervisory discipline in fragile legal environments. This form of legal interoperability helps reduce institutional fragmentation and supports the implementation of peace efforts where weak rule-of-law systems often undermine post-conflict recovery.
For the Middle East, African Sahel and Maghreb, and the Mediterranean, regions where conflict dynamics are increasingly transnational and legally complex, durable peace initiatives require more than alignment or declaratory diplomacy. They require partners with demonstrated respect for international law, mediation grounded in institutional process, and cross-regional legal legitimacy. Morocco’s record from Africa to the Middle East illustrates why legal positioning, rather than political symbolism, may prove decisive in shaping the next generation of peace architectures. The emergence of the Peace Council also raises questions about its interaction with existing multilateral frameworks, including the United Nations and regional organizations active in these regions. Whether the Council complements or fragments existing mediation architectures will depend on its legal coherence and respect for established international obligations. In this respect, founding members like Morocco with records of restraint, continuity, and mediation through process are structurally significant.
Morocco: An International Legal Anchor
By Leila Hanafi
Middle East & North Africa
Morocco is increasingly shaping international peace efforts not through grandstanding, but through law, institutions, and follow-through. Morocco’s credibility stems from sustained respect for international legal processes, administrative continuity, and an ability to implement agreements where others falter.
Editor’s Note: Dr. Leila Hanafi is a Moroccan-American international development lawyer with the World Bank Group and an adjunct professor at George Washington University Law School. She is the founder of ARPA International Law Group and has served in senior legal and advisory roles with the United Nations and other international organizations, including as a staff attorney with the American Bar Association’s World Justice Project. She previously served as the Middle East and North Africa focal point for International Criminal Court coalition coordination and as a Legal Commissioner in Morocco’s National Inter-Governmental Commission for Policy Dialogue. Dr. Hanafi is a graduate of George Washington University Law School, Georgetown University, and American University in Washington, DC.
By Hafed Al-Ghwell, Senior Fellow and Director, North Africa Program
Morocco’s role as a founding member of the Peace Council was formally established through the signing of the Council’s Charter at the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 22, 2026. Acting by order of His Majesty King Mohammed VI, King of Morocco and President of the Al-Quds Committee, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, African Cooperation and Moroccans Abroad, Nasser Bourita, signed the Charter on behalf of the Kingdom during a ceremony presided over by President Donald J. Trump. The signature followed King Mohammed VI’s prior decision to join the initiative as a founding participant, reflecting a deliberate legal commitment rather than an episodic diplomatic gesture.
Founding Membership and Institutional Implications
Membership in the Peace Council has been intentionally limited, signaling an expectation that participants will carry implementation responsibility, not merely symbolic affiliation. The invitation extended to King Mohammed VI reflects an assessment grounded in Morocco’s demonstrated capacity to contribute to stability through lawful, institutional engagement across regions directly affected by fragility from the Middle East to the Sahel and the Mediterranean.
Morocco’s expanding role as a legal standard-setter from Africa to the Middle East as a function of its sustained engagement with international law, and its participation in the new Peace Council, including deepened institutional ties with the United States, are developments that can further elevate its role in support of global peace and stability.
Morocco’s cross-regional legal credibility is most immediately visible in the Middle East, where mediation efforts are often undermined by polarization, contested legal status, and institutional fragility. Morocco’s stewardship of the Al-Quds Committee under the Organization of Islamic Cooperation exemplifies an approach to mediation grounded in legal status, institutional guardianship, and continuity of process, rather than rhetorical escalation. Through the Bayt Mal Al-Quds Agency, Morocco has pursued legally grounded interventions, supporting education, healthcare, housing, and cultural heritage preservation, anchored in international legal principles governing holy sites and civilian protection.
This emphasis on law as process, rather than diplomacy, has enabled Morocco to maintain credibility across deeply divided actors while preserving channels for engagement. For peace initiatives operating in legally and politically sensitive environments, this Moroccan model of restraint and institutional continuity remains increasingly rare and increasingly valuable.
Across North Africa and the Sahel, peace initiatives frequently falter not during negotiations but at the implementation stage, where commitments confront weak courts, politicized institutions, and fragmented administrative authority. In such contexts, legal credibility is not aspirational; it is operational. Agreements endure only where domestic legal systems can absorb and execute international obligations.
Legal Credibility as a Regional Stabilizer
Morocco’s relevance to emerging peace architectures lies in its sustained emphasis on legal continuity, institutional authority, and respect for international law. Unlike many states in the region where political transitions repeatedly disrupt legal commitments, Morocco has preserved a degree of administrative and judicial stability that allows international agreements to be implemented across political cycles. This capacity is particularly salient for peace mechanisms seeking traction in the Sahel, where the gap between political commitments and legal execution remains a persistent fault line.
Morocco’s mediation record further illustrates this legal positioning. In Libya, Morocco hosted the 2015 Skhirat Agreement, facilitating UN-backed negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) in a neutral legal setting that emphasized procedure, consent, and institutional legitimacy. While Libya’s political trajectory remains fragile, the Skhirat process demonstrated Morocco’s capacity to support mediation grounded in international law rather than unilateral leverage. This approach is also evident in Morocco’s handling of the Sahara dispute, where sustained UN-facilitated negotiations culminated in renewed international backing for Morocco’s Autonomy Plan as a credible framework for a negotiated political solution. Morocco’s posture throughout these negotiations has been characterized by legal continuity, engagement with UN mechanisms, and acceptance of international mediation as the appropriate forum for dispute resolution.
Beyond formal mediation, Morocco’s legal value add lies in its ability to translate international legal standards into operating institutional practice across West and Central Africa and the Mediterranean. In countries such as Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire, Mali, and Niger, Moroccan financial and development actors operate under regulatory and compliance frameworks aligned with international norms, reinforcing contract enforceability, corporate governance, and supervisory discipline in fragile legal environments. This form of legal interoperability helps reduce institutional fragmentation and supports the implementation of peace efforts where weak rule-of-law systems often undermine post-conflict recovery.
For the Middle East, African Sahel and Maghreb, and the Mediterranean, regions where conflict dynamics are increasingly transnational and legally complex, durable peace initiatives require more than alignment or declaratory diplomacy. They require partners with demonstrated respect for international law, mediation grounded in institutional process, and cross-regional legal legitimacy. Morocco’s record from Africa to the Middle East illustrates why legal positioning, rather than political symbolism, may prove decisive in shaping the next generation of peace architectures. The emergence of the Peace Council also raises questions about its interaction with existing multilateral frameworks, including the United Nations and regional organizations active in these regions. Whether the Council complements or fragments existing mediation architectures will depend on its legal coherence and respect for established international obligations. In this respect, founding members like Morocco with records of restraint, continuity, and mediation through process are structurally significant.
Recent & Related