The revolt of Algeria in 1954, and the French attempt to repress it, are worth examining in some detail. For one, the revolt itself entwined the nightmares that evolved in the first half of the 20th century: in the fascist states, Lenin's Russia, and the Palestine wars. And when they merged they gave the world the modern terrorist movement in the form we are fighting it now, in al Qaida especially. Also, the French response offers some instructive counter-examples.
Others have noticed this, too, of course. Now the Rand organization has republished a timely analysis of the Algerian War [PDF alert] by David Galula, who deliberately sought a leadership position on the French side during the rebellion, the better to understand the tactical challenges.
Insurgent and terrorist movements as diverse as al Fatah, the African National Congress, the Provisional Irish Republican Army, and the Tamil Tigers, for example, have cited the Algerian struggle’s influence on the strategies and tactics that they later adopted. Among the officer corps of most countries’ standing armies, however, counterinsurgency -- at least until very recently -- was disdained as a “lesser included contingency” unworthy of contemplation, much less serious study.See if any of this sounds familiar:
- “In my zone, as everywhere in Algeria, the order was to ‘pacify.’ But exactly how? The sad truth was that, in spite of all our past experience, we had no single, official doctrine for counterinsurgency warfare.”
- “‘Ordinary banditry,’ said a highranking government official in Algiers.... By the time the insurrection was finally recognized for what it was, only drastic political and military action would have reversed the tide, and slowly in any case....”
- “The rebels realized that they could achieve the greatest psychological effect on the French and on world opinion at the cheapest price by stepping up terrorism in the main cities, notably in Algiers, which served as headquarters to most French and foreign correspondents and thus acted as a natural amplifier. A grenade or a bomb in a café there would produce far more noise than an obscure ambush against French soldiers in the Ouarsenis Mountains.”
- "Our forces were vastly superior to the rebels. Then why couldn’t we finish with them quickly? Because they managed to mobilize the population through terror and persuasion.... It was therefore imperative that we isolate the rebels from the population and that we gain the support of the population. This implied that under no circumstances could we afford to antagonize the population even if we had to take risks for ourselves in sparing it.”
- “If we distinguish between people and rebels, then we have a chance. One cannot catch a fly with vinegar. My rules are this: outwardly treat every civilian as a friend; inwardly you must consider him as a rebel ally until you have positive proof to the contrary.”
- “Reflecting on who might be our potential allies in the population, I thought that the Kabyle women, given their subjugated condition, would naturally be on our side if we emancipated them.”
- “While the insurgent does not hesitate to use terror, the counterinsurgent has to engage in police work.... The police work was not to my liking, but it was vital and therefore I accepted it.”
- “Then, five top leaders of the rebellion, including Ben Bella, had been neatly caught during a flight from Rabat to Tunis. Their capture, I admit, had little effect on the direction of the rebellion, because the movement was too loosely organized to crumble under such a blow.”
- “If there was a field in which we were definitely and infinitely more stupid than our opponents, it was propaganda.”
- “The borders with Morocco and Tunisia would easily have required 100,000 men to control with reasonable effectiveness, given their length and the local terrain. In order to save personnel, it was decided to build an artificial fence, a project which was completed along both borders by the spring of 1958.”
- “Throughout the war our prisoner camps were open for unannounced inspection by the International Red Cross, the reports of which were made public.... In the best camps, efforts were made to sift the tough prisoners from the soft; where it was not done, the camps became schools for rebel cadres.”
The FLN in Algeria polished the model of 20th century state power in the hands of rotten-hearted leaders. Islamists later would take that model in hand, and, under a coat of green paint, attempt to pass it off as the new Caliphate.
[Hat tip: Marc at American Future, who passed this along privately]








Algerian lessons
French colonisation (1830-1962)
Algeria was annexed to France despite intense popular resistance. Resettlement programmes were implemented by the French government using land-owning incentives to draw French citizens to the new colony. The French introduced a wide variety of measures to destroy Algeria identity, imposing European-style culture, education, industries and government institutions on the country. The colonials exploited the country's agricultural resources for the benefit of France. The concept of French Algeria became ingrained in the French collective mind.
This period of early French influence over the country saw a huge drop in Algeria's native population, as it fell from around 4 million in 1830 to only 2.5 million in 1890.
The French colonials looked upon the Muslim populace as an inferior underclass that had to be tightly controlled. Muslims were not allowed to hold public meetings, bear arms or leave their districts or villages without government permission. Although they were officially French subjects they could not become French citizens unless they renounced Islam and converted to Christianity. It was a brutal, racist regime which alienated the vast majority of Algerians. The French attempt at acculturating an Algerian elite backfired badly. Those few schooled in French academies and infused with French values suffered the inherent racism of their French overlords and became the nucleus of the Algerian nationalist movement.
[ ... snip ... ]
[ This is the beginning of a summary article on Algerian history from the website www.arab.net. While anonymously authored, it is © 2002. I've removed the remainder of poster "Algerian lessons" cut-and-paste to make this into a fair-use extract. The article in its entirety can be read by clicking here.
Commenters: please provide links, limit cutting-and-pasting, and respect others' copyrights. --Marshal Festus, June 2, 2006 03:41 PM ]
#1 meshs pretty well with what I have read on the topic; A Savage War of Peace, Wolves in the City, and various Legion histories. France hangs its head in shame over Algeria.
There is a line in the end of Callimachus' piece:
"Algeria was the first modern terrorist thugocracy, a nation born of a cowardly father -- European lack of will"
If you mean lack of will to do the right thing; give the Algerian people their due and let them run their own country before they had to fight for that right, then you're correct.
But I wonder if you mean otherwise.
The #1 tactic against insurgents is self government.
The French were stuck with the colonialism model.
The US (other than the war with Spain and its aftermath) was never stuck with this model.
In fact it was a point of friction between the Brits and Americans in WW2. The Brits finally wized up. Thus India is belatedly becoming part of the Anglosphere after the resentment over colonialism has subsided.
1954? The year French pants were kicked in Dien Bien Phu?
1956? The year English and French were evicted from Egypt by the now world's big fishes the USSR and America?
First, put things in their context: Argerians fought for something they knew it was simply a matter of time to obtain.
Second, a defeat may trascend far far away.