Morocco's Middle Ground Methods: A Balancing act in Domestic Legitimacy and Foreign Policy in the Abraham Accords Era
Noor BelghitiIE University
Edited by Toby Tilley, IE University
Abstract
December 2020 marked a decisive moment in Arab-Israeli diplomacy. Morocco normalized relations with Israel through the Abraham Accords mediated by Trump's administration. The Accords collided with domestic pro-Palestinian sentiment, national identity narratives, and the country's role as chair of the Al-Quds Committee, which made normalization politically sensitive. The paper makes the case that Morocco has chosen a purposeful middle-ground approach that enables it to pursue foreign benefits while maintaining internal legitimacy, drawing on ideas from two-level games, hedging theory, and neoclassical realism.
1.1 The 2020 Abraham Accords In December 2020, a decisive moment in contemporary Moroccan foreign policy and Arab-Israeli diplomacy was marked. The Abraham Accords, brokered by the U.S https://ipr.blogs.ie.edu/ Methods: A Balancing and Foreign Policy in diplomacy. Morocco normalized relations with Israel administration. The Accords collided with domestic the country’s role as chair of the Al-Quds Committee, which case that Morocco has chosen a purposeful middle-ground maintaining internal legitimacy, drawing on ideas from In order to further its Atlantic strategy, draw in investment, on a global scale. At the national level, it upholds discursive acceptable dissent, and presents normalization as a practical rather than a change in culture. The analysis explores the the Western Sahara as the guiding lens of Moroccan 2023–2025 Israel–Palestine conflict. The latter exposed the succeeded in sustainably maintaining this middle ground, disagreements Nevertheless, the vitality of this position U.S politics, and the kingdom’s ability to maintain some agenda. Sahara, Palestine under Trump’s administration, formally normalized its relations between Rabat and Tel-Aviv, in exchange for Washington’s recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. This historic diplomatic concession was an unprecedented victory for the kingdom, on what the monarchy describes as a ‘first national cause’ for the nation.
The official proclamation included a described statement on Morocco’s autonomy plan by the U.S., as “serious, credible, and realistic”. For Morocco, the accords not only represented a solution for an issue of territory and identity that shaped its foreign relations for decades, but also recalibrated its sovereign strategy, linking its most sensitive territorial and domestic claim to a major diplomatic bargain. Such a diplomatic breakthrough was not realized in a vacuum. Relations between Morocco and Israel are deeply rooted in history, well before the public normalization of ties. Over one million Israelis have Moroccan origins, and the kingdom maintains a constitutionally recognized Jewish community. Under King Hassan II’s rule from 1961 until 1999, Rabat discreetly cultivated contact with Israeli intelligence and political officials, and a combination of quiet mediation and secret visits led to the Oslo Accords in 1993. Using Israeli channels, Morocco aimed to secure support for its position in Western Sahara and counter domestic insurgencies. Motivated exchanges regarding economic, political, and security-related guarantees existed for decades, ranging from radar systems acquired from third parties in 2019 to the purchase of Israeli tanks in the 1970s. In this sense, the Abraham Accords did not inaugurate a new relationship, but rather formalized diplomatic exchanges and expanded an already-functioning strategic partnership. The publicization of these ties exposed a central tension that defines the Moroccan case. On an international plane, the accords promised strategic diplomatic benefits - this is reflected through iron-clad relations with the United States, the kingdom’s longest standing diplomatic partner, being the first country in the world to recognize the U.S in 1777, formalized through the 1786 Treaty of Friendship and Peace. The Accords also opened corridors for defence cooperation with Israel, enhanced Rabat’s Atlantic strategy, and bolstered Morocco’s position as a stable international hub connecting Europe, Africa and the Middle East. Normalization also brought Morocco into line with Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and other Arab nations moving toward practical security cooperation. Conversely, the Abraham Accords symbolically and domestically collided with deeply ingrained cultural and political sensibilities. Traditionally, despite its prominent Jewish community, Moroccan civil society has voiced loud solidarity with the Palestinian cause. Filling the streets of Casablanca and Rabat, mass demonstrations by the population have erupted during major escalations in Gaza since the eruption of the Second Intifada in 2000. Chairing the Al-Quds Committee, King Mohammed VI’s position binds Morocco to the defense of Jerusalem’s Islamic and Arab Character. This represents a dual responsibility embedded in institutional structure and religion, the baseline foundations of the country’s external messaging and sovereign identity. Evidently, the normalization of relations with Tel-Aviv was met with overwhelming criticism across the Arab and Maghrebi diaspora. Thus emerges the core question this article will attempt to answer: To what extent has foreign policy and sovereign identity been reshaped in Morocco following its participation in the Abraham Accords? Morocco has pursued the strategic gains offered by the accords, particularly the U.S’ recognition of Western Sahara in
domestic legitimacy, religious authority and Arab-Islamic solidarity in a highly politically polarized climate. Rabat’s implementation of a middle-ground strategy has been carefully calibrated, prioritizing external interests via formal normalization. Simultaneously, through symbolic alignment with Palestine, the kingdom manages internal dissent. Hence, the kingdom displays a narrative embedded in symbolism, as it frames its normalization efforts as a pragmatic choice rather than a shift in ideology. Morocco’s foreign policy is carefully calibrated, and can be effectively explained through the lenses of neoclassical realism, hedging theory, and two-level games. Each of these facets reveal the method in which Morocco maximizes external gains while limiting and minimizing identity based and political costs. This article aims to fill a gap by integrating the analysis of the Sahara question, the Dynamics of the Abraham Accords, identity politics, and domestic public opinion. Furthermore, it expands on the application of hedging theory applied to Middle Eastern and North African politics. Moreover, Morocco's experience provides a greater insight into how a state can navigate competing identity commitments and incentives relating to security, in an ideologically and politically fragmented regional frame. 1.2 Structure and Methodology Employing explanatory and qualitative research design methods, this study is grounded in triangulation using multiple academic sources. It extensively draws upon analytical reports from the Policy Center for the New South, which includes works by Belhaj and Lyammouri, along with historical excerpts from Roberts’ 1999 analysis of Sultan Sidi Mohammed’s diplomacy, and Wegner’s 1982 assessment of the strategic relations between Morocco and the U.S. Likewise, this article encompasses geographic and political examinations from Morocco’s New Geopolitics, Foreign Policy, and the UK Parliament’s 2025 insights on the Abraham Accords. It also includes discourse analysis of communications from the Al-Quds Committee, royal speeches, and protest slogans circulating the Moroccan public. These materials aid in mapping out the links between domestic identity narratives, strategic calculations and systemic pressures. This section laid the foundations of the kingdom’s management of dual spheres of pressure, and the ensuing background section will elaborate on the foundations of Morocco's national identity, historical ties, and diplomatic posture that distinguishes the country from others in the Arabo-Maghrebi plane. The analysis section will examine how Morocco, since 2020, has applied the hedging theory, two-level games, and neoclassical realism to execute its external, regional, and domestic strategies.
2.1 Morocco’s Hybrid Identity Morocco's foreign policy is based on a multifaceted national identity, placing the kingdom on the intersection of several geopolitical, religious, and cultural spheres. Morocco is a unique blend of Arab, Amazigh, African, Mediterranean, and Atlantic facets, which the monarchy actively cultivates as a means of navigating a disjointed regional order, and as a source of diplomatic flexibility. Morocco's hybrid identity enables it to project influence in West Africa, maintain strong institutional ties to the United States and Europe, and claim membership in both the Arab and Islamic worlds. The monarchy’s religious authority is the centerpiece of Morocco’s multi-faceted identity. The King’s title as “Commander of the Faithful” (Amir al-Mu’minin) gives him custodianship over Morocco’s Muslim and Jewish communities. The Al-Quds Committee, chaired by the king, is one of the many institutions that operationalize Morocco's external legitimacy. His chairmanship is not only a rule of leadership but symbolic. Thus, Morocco's foreign policy is a demonstration of religious guardianship while also being a geopolitical enterprise. This is particularly relevant in regards to Jerusalem's Islamic and Arab characteristics - since the kingdom recognizes its Jewish community constitutionally, the pluralistic profile of the kingdom is thus reinforced. This makes Morocco even more able to engage with Israel diplomatically while avoiding accusations of engagement motivated by civilizational rupture. The greatest pillar of Morocco's political model is its stable constitutional monarchy - by leveraging historical continuity, its multi-layered identity, and relative stability, it presents itself as a credible moderator between ideological divides. This is mainly prominent as it bridges the gaps between Washington and West Africa, and the gulf regions and Brussels. Additionally, this versatility is evidence that Morocco is willing and able to integrate the Abraham Accords while in parallel insisting on maintaining strong institutional support for Palestine. Therefore, Morocco's foreign policy cannot be interpreted simply through a traditional, binary lens. On the contrary, diplomatic tradition has layered identities, and pragmatic flexibility has become encompassed in its international posture. 2.2 Western Sahara: The Standpoint of Foreign Policy The issue regarding Western Sahara has fundamentally shaped Morocco's foreign policy, and was termed by the monarchy as ‘the first national cause’. The region is a core component of Moroccan regime legitimacy, international alignment, and nation building, much more than a mere territorial claim. In their policy brief, Lyammouri and Ammari establish that the Sahara is a “prism through which Morocco perceives its international environment.” (Ammari & Lyammouri, 2025) As such, the region acts as a diplomatic filter that is used to evaluate diplomatic partnerships. Evidently, the Abraham Accords play a significant role in the question of the Western Sahara's sovereign identity, and Morocco views the United States’ December 2020 proclamation as an unprecedented geopolitical victory. The proclamation highlights the US’ support for the recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over the entire Western Sahara in addition to its endorsement of the country's autonomy plan. Recognizing that the plan is “serious, credible, and realistic,” this support has been far from ephemeral, as reaffirmed in 2025 by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who explicitly endorsed Morocco’s autonomy plan. Hence, this continued recognition indicates continuity throughout political cycles, further reaffirming what Rabat views as strategic placement of its territorial claim over the region. Morocco's relations with Europe, Africa and the Gulf is also strongly shaped by the Sahara - Belhaj demonstrates how foreign parties' positions on the Sahara increasingly dictate the degree of their collaboration with Rabat, particularly in a shattered global order characterized by opposing "imperial bargains" and diminishing multilateralism. Partners who support the autonomy plan or create consulates in Laâyoune and Dakhla are eligible for further political, economic, and security cooperation. Those that support the Polisario Front or abstain are subject to diplomatic standstill or recalibration. The Sahara also acts as a stabilizing force for national legitimacy. The monarchy has attempted to characterize the dispute by existentially linking it to national unity and post-colonial sovereignty, helping render the issue non-negotiable in domestic politics. This makes clear Morocco's readiness to undertake a dangerous foreign policy move such as normalization with Israel, as no prior diplomatic agreement could equal the strategic benefit the Accords produced in the Sahara dossier. Understanding Morocco's engagement in the Abraham Accords involves comprehending that Western Sahara is the foundation of Morocco's foreign policy, rather than just one of many concerns. This trajectory was further consolidated on 30 October 2025, when the United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution expressly supporting Morocco's autonomy plan-the first time the Council formally endorsed the framework in a vote. The result was to elevate the salience of Morocco's diplomatic gains beyond bilateral U.S. support and reinforce Rabat's perception that international momentum is shifting in favor of its sovereignty claims. The fact that this resolution passed amidst heightened regional polarization within the UN demonstrated that support for the autonomy plan reaches well inside the highest arena of global governance. It also reflected a growing consensus among major powers that the autonomy initiative represents the most realistic and stability-oriented basis for resolving the conflict. In so doing, it served as both diplomatic reinforcement and strategic validation for Morocco. 2.3 Historical Background of Morocco–U.S.–Israel Relations The Abraham Accords established formal diplomatic ties between Morocco and Israel, but the relationship's roots date back many years. Due to the existence of one of the biggest Jewish populations in the Arab world and the migration of over a million Moroccan Jews to Israel throughout the 20th century, Morocco and Israel have close historical links, and a clear demographic connection that still acts as a bridge for politics and culture. A unique yet significant foundation for post-normalization collaboration was created by Morocco's 2011 Constitution, which explicitly acknowledged the Jewish aspect of the country’s national identity. Morocco had a complex and long-standing relationship with both the United States and Israel when it entered the accords in 2020. Normalization transformed existing alliances into a formal diplomatic framework connected to vital territorial and security goals, rather than forging new ones. It is necessary to comprehend this historical continuity in order to comprehend Morocco's conception of normalization as a practical continuation of its strategic trajectory, rather than an ideological shift.
3.1 Theoretical Framework: Hedging, Two-Level Games, and Neoclassical Realism In order to understand Morocco's foreign policy post-2020, we must consider the framework that encapsulates domestic identity constraints and structural pressures. Focusing on three primary international relations lenses - two-level games, hedging theory and neoclassical realism, this analytical section will explain how Morocco works through the competing imperatives generated by the Abraham accords. Starting off, the concept of two-level games, offered by Robert Putnam, gives the first essential insight. Two-level games allow simultaneous negotiation at the external level and internal level. These two stage levels are necessary to fall within a “win-set” that will satisfy both arenas. In terms of Moroccan foreign policy, the Abraham Accords represent a level-1 negotiation with the United States and Israel. It offers highly valuable strategic gains, including formal recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, strengthened partnership with Washington, and intensified security cooperation. However, gains originating from this external level come with constraints from an internal level - as previously mentioned, even before the accords, Morocco public opinion has been increasingly and overwhelmingly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Additionally, as chairman of the Al-Quds Committee, the monarchy's religious authority requires a visible and strong commitment to Palestinian rights. Therefore, Morocco's foreign policy since 2020 has to be understood as a negotiation between internal legitimacy and the external incentives. Secondly, the hedging theory was widely described through strategy from Southeast Asian countries towards China and the United States. It refers to the pursuit of security and economic cooperation with one set of partners, while at the same time maintaining alternative alignment, a pattern of behaviour exhibited precisely by Morocco This theory allows us to closely interpret Morocco’s refusal to fully bandwagon with Israel and the United States. So, while deepening security and intelligence cooperation with Israel, and also securing a robust partnership with the U.S. for its Atlantic strategy, Rabat has maintained active ties with the Gulf monarchies, the European Union, and the African Union. It continues to issue strong statements on behalf of the Palestinian cause via its support of humanitarian corridors, further emphasizing the importance of a two-state solution. Therefore, Morocco's foreign policy mixes diplomatic alignment with autonomy, allowing Rabat to benefit from the advantages of normalization without seeming to abandon its historical commitments. Additionally, neoclassical realism acts as the bridge in the international and domestic planes, as it highlights how systemic pressures are filtered through state level factors, which include regime interests, national identity narratives, and leadership priorities. The country's priorities shape its interpretation and response to regional and global developments, considering that these priorities include religious legitimacy, regime stability, and territorial integrity. The country is further encouraged to deepen connections with the United States and Israel as a result of systemic forces, which include great power competitions, the Algerian Morocco rivalry, shifting Middle Eastern coalitions, and instability in the Sahel region of Africa. However, deeply rooted in Palestinian solidarity, the domestic imperatives and the monarchy's religious authority constrained the level of which this cooperation can take place, particularly as a result of Morocco’s pluralistic identity. As a result, the middle ground strategy integrated by Morocco is not only tactical, but it also reflects the monarchies' need to strategically integrate internal sources of legitimacy with systemic incentives. These three theoretical perspectives offer a coherent explanation for Morocco's posture, reflecting its position as a strategic hedge, executed within the limits of domestic identity politics and its calibration to maximize a benefit while avoiding political rupture and internal unrest. 3.2 External Strategy: Consolidating National Objectives and Securing Diplomatic Victories Morocco, via the accords, was provided with a rare strategic opportunity - at the external level, the country was able to develop its interest regarding the Western Sahara. Following reaffirmations of support for its autonomy plan in 2025, this external entrenchment represents a significant diplomatic win in Morocco post-independence. Normalization has also deepened the country’s diplomatic exchange with the United States, particularly regarding concerns over regional security. Morocco underwent an expansion of formal defense agreements, cybersecurity frameworks and access to advanced technologies, all due to its cooperation with Israel and its defense sectors. Despite these patterns being well-established during the Hassan II era, the accords further exemplified these benefits. Equally important, Morocco’s trans-Atlantic strategy has strengthened exponentially. With the future incentive to affirm itself as a central hub connecting Africa, Europe and the Atlantic basin, the country's credibility, gained and bolstered through US recognition, brands the country as a rule-abiding actor that is dependable and capable of supporting projects both in Africa and across the Atlantic. Over the recent years, Morocco has strategically implemented large-scale infrastructure projects, with its industrial agenda including the Dakhla Atlantic Port, the Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline, and an expansion of Port Tangier-Med. In this sense, normalization exceeds its label as a foreign policy decision and represents a structural investment in Morocco’s geopolitical repositioning in the long-term. Hence, at an external level 1, Morocco’s strategic environment has become exponentially reinforced through its participation in the Abraham Accords. Securing territorial recognition, upgrading security partnerships, and the enhancement of the kingdom’s role within emerging Atlantic and Middle Eastern coalitions all serve as evidence for the benefits reaped by Morocco from the accords. 3.3 Domestic Strategy: Identity Politics, Dissent, and Legitimacy From an external perspective, normalization can appear as a beneficial and pragmatic approach, however, internally, this approach was met with plenty of political sensitivity. Deep solidarity with Palestine and its people has always been expressed by Moroccan society – its people have historically filled squares in Rabat, Tangier and Casablanca, particularly during major escalations in Gaza. Regional escalations following the attacks on October 7th intensified these sentiments in Morocco, producing some of the largest pro-Palestinian demonstrations since the Second Intifada. Domestic political actors such as the PJD (Justice and Development Party) a conservative, Islamic-Democratic political party, has publicly praised the Hamas attacks, labeling them as ‘a legitimate reaction’ and positioning themselves against normalization and invoking moral arguments deeply rooted in national and religious identity. The rising domestic climate made the monarchy employ a strategy of discursive hedging, with the aim to balance public support for Palestine while pragmatically working through normalization efforts. Simultaneously, King Muhammed VI has continued to invoke his prominent role as the chair of the Al Quds Committee, internally affirming Morocco's commitment to the protection of Jerusalem, as well as the two state solution. Morocco has also taken visible humanitarian steps, demonstrated through the securing of authorizations to deliver eight convoys to Gaza, while also issuing statements condemning the violence on both sides. In doing so, the regime is able to maintain moral and religious legitimacy without reversing previous efforts of normalization. The palace also manages dissatisfaction through calibrated constraints. This means that while authorities tolerate large-scale pro-Palestinian protests, they restrict actors who attempt to label the Abraham Accords as a betrayal of the national foundation, or when these actors challenge the monarchy directly. This method of regulated tolerance in part maintains an open space for civic conversation, while also protecting the kingdom's strategic diplomatic commitments - a method which reflects the logic of two-level games. The monarchy balances its position as an Islamic actor by demonstrating its solidarity towards Palestine, but also works to protect the external gains of normalization from domestic dynamics. Morocco's blend of Amazigh, African, Islamic, Jewish, and Arab heritage complicates the domestic landscape, and as a result, the monarchy is required to frame this normalization as a continuation of Morocco's pluralistic tradition, rather than an ideological shift. A framing like this one softens societal resistance, positioning normalization within Morocco's historical narrative. 3.4 Regional Strategy: Navigating Algerian Rivalry and Middle Eastern Divides As indicated by the Foreign Policy articles, Morocco's regional environment is incredibly polarized. The states within the Abraham Accords (UAE, Bahrain and Morocco) have faced rising public opposition towards normalization since the Gaza crisis, yet none of them have renounced formal relations with Israel. Therefore, it is imperative for Morocco to maintain normalization while managing the expectations of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. The intense rivalry with Algeria further complicates this environment for Morocco, the former a country that has always formed itself as a defender of the Palestinian cause, as well as an opponent of normalization. The Polisario Front receives consistent Algerian support, and the country frequently weaponizes the conflict in Palestine to criticize Morocco on international and regional platforms. This argument is countered by Morocco through the emphasis of the alleged links between Algeria, Polisario, and Iran. This resonates with Israel and the United Nations by raising concerns of security. However, it remains controversial domestically, and this narrative highlights how Morocco has used regional tensions to justify its Western facing alignments. At the same time, the kingdom’s normalization strengthens its running among gulf monarchies - Morocco is viewed as a stable partner that is capable of bridging North Africa, the Gulf, and the Atlantic, a vision observed by the UAE and Bahrain. Morocco is embedded within a network of states that pursue pragmatic security cooperation with Israel while simultaneously managing domestic sensitivities. Overall, the regional strategy undertaken by Morocco reflects its external and domestic strategies. Its aim is to hedge between contradictory pressures while maintaining solidarity with Palestine within regional forms, all the while sustaining the strategic gains that are secure through normalization with Israel.
The following policy recommendations are a reflection of the analysis, which demonstrates how Morocco's post-2020 foreign policy is shaped by a balancing act between constraints of internal legitimacy and external strategic victories. The recommendations offer ways in which Morocco can sustainably support its middle ground strategy. It would require constant recalibration due to evolving regional dynamics, shifts in public opinion and the contested status of the Western Sahara. The primary aims of the following policies prioritize domestic and regional credibility, and uphold the benefits they have resulted from normalization. 4.1 Reframe Normalisation as Issue-Linked and Conditional Morocco should continue to emphasize the conditional nature of the normalization, rather than an ideological motivation. Lyammouri and Ammari emphasize this in their policy brief, stating that “the Western Sahara is the prism through which Morocco assessed all external partnerships, including the Abraham Accords (Ammari & Lyammouri).” Therefore, Morocco should be more explicit in the articulation of this caveat. It must be articulated that normalization is:
over the Western Sahara;
partnership with the United States;
for Palestine, its people, and the Islamic diaspora as a whole. Framing the narrative as ideological realignment will appease internal dissents and discredit claims of betrayal from opposing parties and regional rivals. By doing so, Morocco can better link the accords to direct national interests. 4.2 Institutionalise Communication on the Sahara and the Accords Morocco's international diplomacy is shaped by decreasing multilateralism and global fragmentation. In order to sustainably navigate this diplomatic environment, Morocco should push for greater transparency surrounding the status of the Sahara and the accords. This would be done through domestic communication mechanisms, such as:
Sahara;
its endorsements;
Center for the New South. Establishing accessible and transparent points of information will build national cohesion and counter the perception that normalization was motivated by ideology, at the expense of Palestine and the suffering of its people. Having a more informed public will strengthen Morocco's win-set domestically within the framework of the two-level game. 4.3 Diversify Partnerships to Avoid Overdependence The kingdom’s new geopolitical standing places itself at the intersection of Atlantic, Mediterranean, and African networks, and as such Morocco should focus on the diversification of partnerships with the following countries and blocs to avoid an over-reliance on the US-Israel axis:
NMGP pipeline, ECOWAS)
Diversifying its diplomatic portfolio will strengthen Morocco's hedging strategy. It would further provide alternative avenues in the case of rising regional tensions or shifting US domestic politics.
The Abraham Accords were signed in 2020 and included Morocco's participation, and while it was a defining moment in the kingdom's contemporary foreign policy, it should not be mistaken as a departure from its historical diplomatic trajectory. This movement towards normalization reaffirmed the monarchy's long-standing practice of navigating multiple and conflicting geopolitical spheres, and this article presents substantial evidence that Morocco has adopted a calibrated middle ground strategy. In doing so, they have leveraged normalization to advance the national priority of asserting sovereignty over the Western Sahara, all the while sustaining strong, symbolic, and institutional support for Palestine. The integration of neoclassical realism, hedging theory, and two-level games reveal why the strategy has been viable hitherto now. Systemically, these accords have provided Morocco with unparalleled diplomatic advantage, deepened security cooperation and bolstered Atlantic ambitions. Domestically, however, the monarchy must continue to preserve its legitimacy as ‘commander of the faithful’ while maintaining social cohesion and continuing to respond to deeply ingrained pro-Palestinian sentiments. Thus, Moroccan strategy can not be perceived as reactive or opportunistic, but rather as a structured response to the pressures and incentives that are embedded in the domestic and international environment. Nevertheless, the sustainability of this middle ground posture is not guaranteed. The Israel-Hamas conflict in 2023 exposed the fragility of public opinion across the region, and has also limited the “win-sets” available to Moroccan policymakers and fueled narratives from Algeria that frame normalization as incompatible with regional solidarity. Additionally, the evolution of the Palestinian question and shifts in U.S domestic politics will continue to pressure Morocco’s foreign policy equilibrium. Overall, despite these changes, the approach of the kingdom offers broader insights to how medium sized states navigate a fragmented international system. Morocco is a great example of how strategic gains can be extracted from multipolarity without abandoning commitments of identity or regional responsibilities. The level of success of this approach ultimately depends on the country's ability to diversify external partnerships, maintain domestic legitimacy, and sustain a diplomatic posture that is pragmatic and principled. If that continues to be the case, Morocco can continue to survive as a bridge between regions, political visions, and identities within an increasingly polarized Middle East and North Africa.