Response from Belgacem Merbah to Tahar Ben Jelloun’s Recent Position Regarding Boualem Sansal

When Historical Ignorance Becomes a Geopolitical Weapon

Tahar Ben Jelloun’s recent intervention in Le Figaro purports to offer a literary testimony; in reality, it is a discursive strategy meticulously aligned with the geopolitical imperatives of the makhzen.

By exploiting the singular case of Boualem Sansal, Ben Jelloun claims to shed light on Algeria’s political history; yet what he truly reveals is this: the unwavering determination of the Moroccan literary lobby to instrumentalize memory and literature in order to weaken Algeria and serve the interests of the royal palace.

This analysis is framed within a perspective that asserts Algeria’s national sovereignty—both historical and contemporary—and categorically rejects the Moroccan and Franco-colonial narratives that Ben Jelloun reproduces without nuance.

1. A Voice Undermined by Silence on Moroccan Repression

Let us state the obvious: Tahar Ben Jelloun is not a neutral observer of the Maghreb.

While Algeria stood alone against French colonialism and later against the terrorism of the 1990s, Ben Jelloun produced risk-free literature, carefully calibrated never to offend the royal palace or its influential networks in France.

His discourse suffers from a fundamental flaw of legitimacy:

• Total silence on Tazmamart
• No denunciation of the “Years of Lead”
• No critique of Hassan II or the absolute monarchy
• Unwavering adherence to the makhzen’s narrative on Western Sahara

This absence of internal courage invalidates any claim to external moralization.

An author who has never condemned injustice at home cannot credibly claim to denounce injustice elsewhere.

2. Algeria Was Never an Ottoman Province: A Historical Truth Ignored or Distorted

One of the most striking blind spots in Franco-Moroccan rhetoric—echoed implicitly by Ben Jelloun—is the alleged “Ottoman tutelage” over Algeria.

A deliberate confusion designed to diminish the historical depth of the Algerian state.

The facts are unequivocal:

• Ottoman Algeria was neither a colony nor a territory administered from Istanbul.
• The Dey of Algiers exercised sovereignty: levying taxes, waging wars, signing international treaties.
• The regular army, the Regency, the fleet, and diplomacy were autonomous.
• Across the Mediterranean, Algiers was recognized as an independent state—feared and respected.
• The United States signed a Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Algiers in 1795, acknowledging full Algerian sovereignty.

In short: Algeria was a sovereign, structured, and internationally recognized state—long before French colonization and long before Morocco existed as a modern state.

This historical independence is an irrefutable fact that Ben Jelloun, whether through ignorance or strategy, carefully avoids mentioning.

3. The Moroccan Falsehood on Western Algeria: A Political Myth, Not a Historical Fact

The notion that Western Algeria was “under Moroccan authority” is a cornerstone of contemporary Moroccan propaganda.

It rests on perilous methodological conflations:

• Confusing religious suzerainty with political sovereignty
• Transforming tribal alliances into state borders
• Retroactively applying modern concepts to pre-national sociopolitical realities

The historical reality is clear:

• Western Algeria belonged to the Regency of Algiers.
• Borders were fluid, but never Moroccan.
• Tribes were politically tied to Algiers, never to Fez or Marrakesh.
• The few Moroccan incursions into western Algeria were all repelled.

The idea of Morocco’s “historical extension” is not a fact but a post hoc political construct, designed to legitimize other territorial claims—most notably in Western Sahara.

Ben Jelloun does not offer analysis; he perpetuates a political myth.

4. The Instrumentalization of Boualem Sansal: Literature as a Weapon Against Algeria

Turning an individual case—rooted in controversial statements and sensitive geopolitical stakes—into a global symbol of Algeria’s relationship with its intellectuals is a well-known rhetorical device.

This device suffers from two major flaws:

a. Baseless Generalization

Algeria has a long tradition of internal intellectual debate.

It has produced major critical voices who wrote freely, even in the most difficult times.

Isolating a single case as a paradigm is intellectually dishonest.

b. Concealing Moroccan Repression

Morocco—unlike Algeria—criminalizes any direct criticism of the king.

Journalists, activists, and writers are imprisoned for far less.

By presenting his country as a “haven of relative freedom,” Ben Jelloun deliberately inverts reality.

Conclusion: An Attack That Reveals More About Moroccan Strategy Than About Algeria

Ben Jelloun’s text is not a plea for freedom of expression.

It is an attempt:

• to undermine Algeria’s international image,
• to rehabilitate a Moroccan territorial myth,
• to fuel geopolitical rivalry under the guise of Franco-Moroccan realpolitik.

Algeria—a sovereign, ancient, structured state, never subjugated by the Ottoman Empire nor by any regional power—is under no obligation to accept lessons from a writer whose silence on his own country’s abuses nullifies any moral claim.

---

By Belgacem Merbah

---