The Attack on Ceuta: Regime Change in Slapstick Style
The young guys are back home in Morocco. Who stands to gain from this dirty game?
60,000 young guys stormed the Spanish exclave of Ceuta, located on African soil, for a few days. And just as quickly as these young men managed to spread fear and terror throughout the municipality of Ceuta, with its 84,000 residents, they were just as swiftly and unspectacularly returned to Morocco by Spanish forces at no cost. A nightmare that lasted a total of four days.
The tabloid press immediately exploited the shocking images to once again stoke archaic fears of dark-skinned men with bared fangs who are pouring into Europe “by the millions” from Africa and will stand at our doorsteps as unbridled savages <1>. And we will then have to hand over our refrigerators, SUVs, and women to them, defenseless. These blatantly racist associations were, however, quickly overtaken by reality: namely, that we were merely witnessing an amateurish regime-change maneuver. It could no longer be concealed that the Moroccan authorities themselves had transported the young men to the borders with Ceuta, and that Moroccan border officials actively assisted in the raid on the Spanish enclave of Ceuta <2>. Whether Moroccan King Mohammed VI had previously granted amnesty to thousands of prisoners specifically for this purpose has not yet been confirmed. Nor is it relevant.
Why “regime-change maneuvers”? Well, European media outlets close to the Israeli government were conspicuously quick—a bit too quick—to latch onto alleged mistakes by the Spanish government under Socialist Pedro Sánchez. The same goes for the Italian government under Giorgia Meloni. Spain’s border security measures were far too lax. Furthermore, a court ruling in Spain encouraged young people seeking to migrate to cross the water to Ceuta in order to automatically obtain the right to stay.
Such criticism may be legitimate. But when, at the same time, the Moroccan government’s criminal aggression—manifested in the systematic, mass influx of young men into the city of Ceuta—is completely ignored, then something is amiss here. This certainly gives rise to suspicions of a certain degree of sympathy for or complicity with the Moroccan government’s actions.
There was also a certain pseudo-anti-colonialist line of reasoning: what business does Spain still have on African soil with its exclaves of Ceuta and Melilla? Good question. But to what extent does letting 60,000 young men storm and vandalize a city actually solve the problem? These young men don’t even want to settle permanently in Ceuta or Melilla anyway. They want to keep moving on to Europe. And you can’t blame them for that. After all, the incompetent Moroccan government is doing absolutely nothing to offer future prospects to the rapidly growing Generation Z <3>. Anti-colonialism: in this case, it misses the point! Let’s talk instead about issues that are out in the open. Let’s talk about geopolitics.
• Morocco has particularly close ties to NATO. Although Morocco is not a member of NATO, it is de facto integrated into the alliance—albeit without voting rights—and serves as a U.S. watchdog in Africa through the Individually Tailored Partnership Program (ITPP). “Individually tailored” means joint military exercises with NATO (“African Lion”) and interoperability. This means that Morocco’s military equipment is procured in such a way that its weapons and ammunition can operate seamlessly with NATO equipment—in other words, using the same weapons and ammunition as NATO whenever possible.
Moroccan King Mohammed VI is treated with particular deference by Germany. A few years ago, then-German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock visited Morocco. During that visit, agreements were signed for the supply of hydrogen to Germany. In return, the German government recognized the Western Sahara region as an integral and legitimate part of Moroccan territory. Until then, not a single state had recognized Morocco’s annexation of Western Sahara as legitimate. On the contrary, the UN’s position is clear: Western Sahara is a sovereign, independent state. The background: In the mid-1970s, Western Sahara was freed from colonial rule by Spain. Morocco immediately appropriated the northern half of Western Sahara. At that time, Mauritania annexed the southern half. Mauritania has since long since ceded its portion to Morocco. And now Ms. Baerbock came along and told the Moroccan king: “You may keep this territory, even if the international community says otherwise!”
Morocco has closer ties to Israel than almost any other African country. Israeli intelligence agencies are helping Mohammed VI cement his power for the long term, despite the protests against him. Mohammed is deeply indebted to the Mossad.
In addition, Morocco is a member of the so-called Abraham Accords. This is an alliance between the United States, Israel, and Arab monarchies. The biblical patriarch Abraham is the namesake. This is because the religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all trace their origins to the patriarch Abraham. The aim is to sugarcoat, conceptually, the paradoxical, unnatural alliance between U.S. imperialism, Israel’s claim to great-power status, and the Islamic sheikhdoms. Morocco is actually geographically far removed from the Muslim sheikhdoms and does not belong to the Orient, but rather to the Maghreb. This could indicate that the Abraham Accords are fueled by far more ambitious geopolitical aspirations than simply bringing the Near and Middle East under Israeli-U.S. control.
The Actuarium portal draws attention to an insightful opinion piece in the Israeli online publication Ynet <4>. This article appeared in late April of this year <5>. It is neither a government statement nor a leaked position paper from an influential think tank. However, the article allows ideas from influential circles to trickle down to educated readers, who can then pass these views on to their friends. It serves, so to speak, as an initial introduction to positions that take some getting used to—and are sometimes extreme.
The Ynet opinion piece says: „The pieces have been assembling for months. In March 2026, Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute, writing through the Middle East Forum, called on the Trump administration to formally recognize Ceuta and Melilla as occupied Moroccan territory, branding Spain ‚a colonial power running colonies across the Strait of Gibraltar.‘ Days later, Representative Mario Díaz-Balart, chairman of the House Subcommittee on National Security and one of Marco Rubio’s closest congressional confidants, declared publicly that the enclaves ‚are not in the geographic territory of Spain‘ but rather in Moroccan territory, and that their fate should be ‚established, negotiated, and discussed between friends and allies.‘ This was not the fringe speaking. This was the architecture of a coordinated strategic repositioning.“
And in the same opinion piece: „The Abraham Accords transformed Morocco from a quiet interlocutor with Israel into a formal military partner. In January 2026, Israel and Morocco signed a joint military work plan for the year during the third meeting of their Joint Military Committee in Tel Aviv, which the IDF described as deepening cooperation with a ‚key partner for regional stability.‘ The two countries had already concluded a security cooperation agreement in 2021. This bilateral architecture gives Israel something it has rarely possessed in North African politics: direct strategic stake in Rabat’s regional success.“
But as is well known, the Americans have a bone to pick with Spain. It all started when Trump, at the beginning of his second term, mistakenly classified Spain as a “BRICS country.” Then Sánchez refused to comply with Washington’s order to raise Spain’s defense budget to two percent of gross domestic product. Outrageous—to spend that money on education, social services, infrastructure, and healthcare instead! Sánchez then dared to describe Israel’s actions in the Gaza Strip as genocide. Furthermore, Sánchez recognized the State of Palestine and supported the Sumud flotilla, which was intended to deliver food and medicine to the Gaza Strip.
It stands to reason that U.S. President Trump thought Spain was “terrible” and would have loved to kick Spain out of NATO. But given everything that’s been said, it stands to reason that both the Trump and Netanyahu regimes have a strong interest in getting rid of that spoilsport, Sánchez, as quickly as possible.
The Ynet article also suggests that a guaranteed passage through the Strait of Gibraltar for NATO and Israel could be made safer if Sanchez were no longer in power in Spain.
Finally, it should be noted that Spain’s Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, hosted the Global Progressive Mobilization just this past spring <6>. An international alliance of progressive governments, parties, nongovernmental organizations, and interest groups has just been formed with the aim of offering an alternative to the neo-feudal Trumpist International. Neo-feudal Trumpist International <7>? Largely unnoticed by the public, an international movement has taken shape that has now taken over nearly all governments in Latin America. A power cartel falsely labeled “conservative” <8>. An alliance of far-right oligarchs such as Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and Marc Andreessen—to name just a few—who seek to undermine sovereign national governments. So that global corporations can then rule unhindered by democratic oversight. The political mouthpieces of this power grab are the so-called “conservative” parties of the world, which are united, among other places, in the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), and whose political ringleader is Donald Trump.
Political heavyweights such as Pedro Sánchez, Brazil’s President Lula, and Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum are attempting to counter this political tsunami with a democratic network. They have been joined by politicians from BRICS countries. It’s only too understandable that Trump and his allies want to get rid of Pedro Sánchez through regime-change maneuvers.
That was quite a digression. But all of this is necessary to explain what’s happening in Ceuta.
The “regime change” adventure in Ceuta has now turned out to be a complete fiasco. One might laugh it off, were it not for the fact that, due to the cynical calculations of certain circles, 72 young men drowned miserably in the waters.
We should no longer allow ourselves to be misled by the fear-mongering media, only to accept even more military buildup and even more “security” technology out of sheer fear.
Let’s think ahead. A mass exodus from Africa to our shores can only be prevented if we reduce—and ultimately eliminate—the stark disparity in prosperity between Africa on the one side, and Europa plus North America on the other side. By helping Africa build meaningful infrastructure. Not by profiting from the genocide of people in the Congo or Sudan for cheap oil or cheap cell phones. Not by having Africans talked into buying ever-new weapons from merchants of death. Let’s finally begin a genuine partnership.
Then, snarling, dark-skinned men will never stand at our doorstep.
Sources and remarks
<1>
<2>
<3>
<4>
<5> https://www.ynetnews.com/opinions-analysis/article/bki11ns9tzx
<6> https://globalprogressivemobilisation.org/en
<7> Hermann Ploppa: Der Neue Feudalismus – Privatisierung, Blackrock, Plattformkapitalismus. Marburg 2025. Please order here: liepsenverlag@gmail.com
<8> “Conservative” is derived from the Latin verb “conservare,” which means “to preserve.” However, the circles that call themselves “neoconservative” do not want to preserve anything; rather, they want to tear everything down in order to impose a new feudal order at the level of platform capitalism.
Thank you Hermann.
Blessings from Australia.