ALGERIAN PATRIOTS - ENGLISH

The sixty‑day window that some outlets attributed to U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff closed without a “breakthrough” or any discernible political shift. No agreement, no formal talks, no pressure, no leverage—nothing. That outcome alone undercuts the narrative that framed this window as a “historic opportunity” or a “pressure card” aimed at Algeria. It also invites a broader reading anchored in the structural logic of power in North Africa, the Sahel, and the Mediterranean. 1) Algerian Decision‑Making Sovereignty and the Limits of the Diplomatic “Ultimatum” Algeria’s external posture is rooted in sovereign decision‑making and a renewed non‑alignment: it does not bend to convenience “timelines” or conditional injunctions. This is precisely why no official U.S. position ever established a binding deadline, brandished sanctions, or conditioned energy/economic files on a “response” to the initiative. In practice, the ultimatum is a low‑yield instrument against an actor for whom the political cos...

Youssef Hindi’s reflection on political Islam hinges on a governing idea: that Islam is, by its very nature, a continuous political project oriented toward the production of a specific historical order, and that contemporary Islamisms are merely late expressions of an original matrix. Persuasive as this proposition may be in its internal coherence and historical sweep, it nonetheless runs up against major conceptual aporias. It essentialises Islam, flattens the complexity of the political in Muslim societies, and retroactively projects modern ideological categories onto heterogeneous historical configurations. This article offers an analytical refutation of that thesis. We show that it rests on: an essentialist, unitary conception of Islam; a methodological conflation of the normative and the descriptive; a structural anachronism in reading premodern periods; a failure to recognise the fundamentally contextual character of modern Islamisms; an ideological narrative logic rather than a ...

A recent official letter from Morocco to UNESCO has reignited a simmering cultural dispute between Rabat and Algiers . In its correspondence, the Moroccan government denounces what it calls “inappropriate remarks” — including expressions such as “sons of Bousbir” and “Kingdom of Marrakech” — allegedly voiced by Algerian civil society during the evaluation of Morocco’s bid to inscribe the “Moroccan” Caftan on UNESCO’s Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage. Rabat accuses these actors of “political manipulation” and urges the organization to safeguard the integrity of its assessment process. Yet behind this diplomatic exchange lies a far deeper controversy: the origins of the Caftan and the legitimacy of Morocco’s claim to register it as part of its national heritage. Algerian civil society, highly active in heritage advocacy, views Rabat’s move as a blatant act of cultural appropriation — particularly since the Caftan was already recognized in 2012 by UNESCO as an ele...

Sometimes a project is so vast, so audacious, so gloriously out of proportion that it feels more like a legend than an engineering plan. The Nigeria–Morocco gas pipeline—recently dissected by the American consultancy North Africa Risk Consulting (NARCO) —is a textbook example. NARCO didn’t pull any punches, branding it a “pharaonic,” “useless,” and outright “white elephant” venture. In plain terms: colossal in cost, endless in scope, and almost certain to defy logic. TSGP vs. GAA: Logic Meets Imagination On one side stands Algeria’s Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline (TSGP) —a focused, pragmatic project involving just three countries: Nigeria, Niger, and Algeria . Most of the infrastructure is already in place, and aside from the Niger segment, the route is relatively straightforward. On the other side, Morocco champions the Atlantic Africa Pipeline (GAA) —an ambitious line stretching across 11 coastal nations , winding north to Morocco before crossing into Europe. A marathon pipeline riddled ...

For years, Algeria ’s official discourse—both presidential and governmental—has upheld a clear and consistent position: the dispute is not with the Moroccan people , but with the regime that governs them . This principle sustains a deliberate distinction between societies and state apparatuses, in line with an Algerian diplomatic doctrine that favors solidarity among peoples and opposition to expansionist state policies , rather than to civil societies themselves. Yet the evolution of Moroccan social discourse —especially on social media and within certain opinion segments—today poses a significant analytical challenge: a substantial portion of hostile rhetoric directed at Algeria —insults, identity-based attacks, and talk of the “Eastern Sahara”—does not emanate from Moroccan officials, but from sizeable segments of Moroccan society itself. This reality compels a reassessment of the geopolitical wisdom of indefinitely maintaining the “people vs. regime” distinction in the Moroccan...

Rapid developments in the Maghreb reveal a major strategic shift in Morocco’s behavior —a shift that can only be interpreted through a deliberate logic of pressure, provocation, and the maximal expansion of its maneuvering space. This approach—marked by a posture of escalation, defiance, and a break with regional balances—dangerously brings the region closer to the specter of armed confrontation . While some persist in wrapping the crisis in a rigid diplomatic discourse , political and operational data indicate that a solution will not emerge before the moment of explosion; at best, it will be imposed by the consequences of conflict. 1. Morocco’s Transformation: From Defensive to Strategic Offensive Since 2020, Rabat has adopted an unprecedented offensive posture in regional history, structured around three main axes: Expanding external alliances , notably through security and military normalization with Israel , including sensitive arms contracts that have created an artificial...