In 2007, after years of stalemate, Morocco and Frente Polisario both presented proposals for the future of Western Sahara to the United Nations. Matters such as the quest for a referendum, the management of Western Sahara’s natural resources and territorial autonomy as a possible option formed part of those proposals. Since then, perceptions of the need for a ‘compromise’ have been expressed regularly, especially in diplomatic circles, and violence has reappeared on the ground. Such violence and weak political support have made the operation of the UN Mission for a Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) increasingly problematic. The proposal put forward by Morocco revolves around the notion of territorial autonomy. However, territorial autonomy remains an open concept in international law while it has important connotations in comparative constitutional theory. Where do we stand today as regards the 2007 proposals? How are understandings and regulations of self-determination and decolonisation as core elements of law and international relations affected? How is the concept of compromise to be understood?