Thanks to the constitutional amendment voted last November 12th, Abdelaziz Bouteflika is about to accede, for the third consecutive time since 1999, to the position of President of the Republic of Algeria. Let us take stock of his presidency.
Bouteflika was elected for the first time in 1999, promising to re-establish peace in the country. At that time, peace was the main desire of Algerians, a return to peace after the terrible cycle of civil war of the Nineties that caused about 150.000 deaths. It was mainly with this objective in mind that he was elected the first time. The second mandate was won thanks to his promise to revive the economy, to modernise it and solve the problem of jobs for the young. With regards to the first issue, one can observe that Algeria is no longer in the same situation. There are no longer thousands of deaths every week, although Algeria continues to be the theatre of various terrorist actions. In this sense one can certainly not state that peace has been totally restored, but it is undeniable that this is no longer the same sombre situation experienced during the Nineties. As far as modernisation of the economy is concerned, a problem that in my opinion should be solved by addressing the issue of the interests of secret groups, this objective has not yet been achieved.
Ever since the country became independent, the Algerian political system has been defined as that of the presidential alliance. What role does the army play in post-independence Algerian political life?
The role played by the army has changed in the course of the years. Between 1962 and 1965, when Ben Bella was President, the army stayed on the sidelines of political life in spite of the fact that it had permission from Ben Bella himself to accede to power. Later, following the 1965 military coup and Boumedienne’s presidency, the army imposed itself on the country’s political stage, systematically occupying all areas. When Chadli Benjedid was President from 1979 to 1992, the army continued to play an important role, while beginning in 1979-1980, there was also the desire to reorganise the structure of the single party, the FLN (National Liberation Front ). This framework however collapsed in October 1988 and the army forcefully returned to the political stage, especially after 1992, during the war against Islamic extremists. When Bouteflika was elected the army played a far less visible role than in the past.
Bouteflika’s opponents continue to wave the spectre of ‘Oujda’s clan’. Is this clan still powerful in Algerian political life?
The expression ‘Oujda clan’ can be used for personalities active during the Seventies, during the Boumedienne presidency. Most of the political personalities in that clan have since died. Furthermore, French journalists between the Sixties and Seventies coined the expression ‘Oujda clan’. There are today perhaps one or two men left who belonged to Boumedienne’s clan, and anyway they are extremely old. This expression is now old-fashioned and dates back almost half a century. Nowadays the real centres of power are elsewhere.
Relations between Algeria and France have always been tense. During the last years of Chirac’s presidency, the National Assembly approved a law in which there was an article emphasising the positive role played by colonisation. After vehement protests in Algeria and in France the offending article was removed. Ever since he was elected, Sarkozy has tried to normalise relations between France and Algeria. Do you think he has succeeded?
Franco-Algerian relations are very difficult and remain so, because they continue to clash with the issue of remembrance. In 2003 there were the conditions for a thaw in these relations and in 2004 a Treaty of Friendship between Algeria and France was almost signed. But since 2005 relations deteriorated significantly due to issues linked to memories that remain at the centre of controversies involving the rewriting of parts of official history. Algeria demands repentance and public apologies, while France, with Sarkozy, wished to implement policies involving the “gradual” acknowledgement of the mistakes of colonialism, a policy in small steps. This framework includes the acknowledgement of the 1945 Setif massacre (against the French army, which in retaliation massacred between 15.000 and 50.000 Algerians, editor’s note) or the handing over of the map of anti-personnel mines (in 2007 the French Army’s Chief of Staff handed over to his Algerian counterpart a detailed map of the locations in which the French had placed thousands of anti-personnel mines between 1956 and 1959, editor’s note). But for the moment France has not made any ‘global’ gestures.
Have you seen the film “The Battle of Algiers” directed by Gillo Pontecorvo?
Why do you think this film, released in 1965, was not shown in France until 2004?
Of course I have seen it. Contrary to myth, the film was never censured by the French state. The film was not distributed to theatres because distributors rejected it. This ‘ban’ came from certain circles of French society, especially former paratroopers and Algerian veterans (the pieds noirs) who stopped the film from being screened thanks to powerful organisational tactics. Every time a distributor wanted to screen the film he was obliged to interrupt it because of strong opposition and threats made against the managers of the movie theatres. This is why the film was never screen in its entirety in France until 2004. Contrary to what people believe, it was not the French state that forbade its screening, but a part of French civil society. It is obvious that the battle to show the film lasted far too long.
The amnesty laws dated 1964 and 1966 in practice prevented the victims and their descendents from any legal action against those who committed violence between 1954 and 1962 (the French Army or the FLN).
This is true. And other amnesties also followed, For example, in 1968, in 1974 and 1982. The objective was specifically to prevent the acts of violence committed during the war of Algeria to be debated in a court of law.
However, in spite of the impossibility to obtain penal sanctions, the daily newspaper Le Monde managed to prove (with evidence provided by the famous dagger with the three initials) that the current leader of the Front National, Jean-Marie Le Pen, was guilty of having tortured FLN prisoners in the courtyard of a prison in Algiers. Do you thinks there is a need for these laws to be amended to achieve real historical reconciliation?
This is a strictly political issue and hence the question should be posed to French politicians.
After independence about 800,000 pieds noirs and Sephardic Jews who lived in Algeria were ‘expatriated’. Does this mark the end of a cosmopolitan Algeria?
Algeria cosmopolitan? There was a great deal of segregation even before 1962. One thing we can regret is that after independence in 1962 there has been far less ‘multiculturalism’ in Algerian society.
Translated by Francesca Simmons