In New York, where the halls of the United Nations become a stage on which words weigh as heavily as gold, two North African figures stand out, representing starkly different approaches to diplomacy: Omar Hilale, Morocco’s permanent representative, and Amar Bendjama, Algeria’s ambassador and permanent representative. The contrast between them goes far beyond personal rivalry; it reflects a profound divergence in the philosophy of statecraft and the role of a nation on the global stage.
The Diplomacy of Noise: Omar Hilale
For more than a decade, Omar Hilale built his presence on a loud and confrontational style. He became known for fiery statements targeting Algeria in particular, striving to keep the Western Sahara issue in the international spotlight. In both the General Assembly and the Security Council, he did not hesitate to issue provocative statements: criticizing the African Union, challenging resolutions supporting self-determination, and opposing Algerian mediation efforts in Libya and the Sahel.
Yet this strategy—based on rapid reactions and calculated provocation—failed to offer a constructive vision. It often seemed aimed at filling media space rather than proposing lasting solutions. Over time, the effectiveness of this approach has waned, and Hilale’s influence in the UN arena has gradually diminished.
The Diplomacy of Argument and Calm: Amar Bendjama
In stark contrast, Amar Bendjama, appointed Algeria’s permanent representative in 2023, exemplifies a measured and principled diplomacy. With extensive experience in political affairs and a deep understanding of multilateral mechanisms, he has restored Algeria’s voice as a credible and respected actor.
From his very first interventions, Bendjama left a clear mark: a resolute defense of Palestinian rights during emergency Security Council sessions, calls for structural reform of the United Nations to give greater representation to developing nations, and active support for peace processes in Libya and Mali.
His interventions, combining legal precision with moral consistency, have earned wide recognition, even from European diplomats traditionally cautious about Algeria. In October 2024, his speech advocating full UN membership for Palestine was met with notable acclaim, articulating both international legal principles and ethical responsibility.
Two Visions of Sovereignty
This contrast goes beyond individual personalities and reflects two fundamentally different approaches to sovereignty:
- Algeria, through Bendjama, emphasizes adherence to international law, non-alignment, and principled consistency, upholding independence of decision-making and support for just liberation causes.
- Morocco, through Hilale, relies on performative diplomacy and opportunistic alliances, dominated by the imperative of controlling the Western Sahara narrative.
A Shift in Influence
Today, the relative quiet of Omar Hilale in the face of Amar Bendjama’s ascendancy is not incidental—it signifies a deeper shift. Algeria’s diplomacy, calm, methodical, and principled, is gaining ground in areas once dominated by Morocco’s louder presence.
In Security Council sessions, Bendjama’s statements are routinely cited in draft resolutions and resonate widely, while Hilale’s interventions struggle to leave a lasting impact. This evolution demonstrates a broader truth: international credibility is built not on noise, but on principled coherence and sustained commitment.
By Belgacem Merbah
.Assalamualikum..Dear compatriot Belkacem it seems to me that you have reversed the photos between our representative at the UN because the subtitle does not correspond to the photo and that of the Zionized Moroccan narco monarchy..I wish you good luck and thank you for your work 🙏🇩🇿
ReplyDelete