ALGERIAN PATRIOTS - ENGLISH

The decision by Mali to withdraw its recognition of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) comes within the framework of a broader reshaping of geopolitical equilibria in the Sahel and North Africa. Far from being a mere symbolic diplomatic gesture, this decision reveals a redefinition of strategic alignments, rising tensions with the foundational principles of international law, and a set of internal contradictions likely to affect the coherence of Malian foreign policy. 1. A Break with Africa’s Normative Framework Since the post-independence period, Africa’s political architecture—first embodied by the Organization of African Unity and later by the African Union—has been built upon two fundamental pillars: the inviolability of borders inherited from colonialism and the right of peoples to self-determination . As an entity recognized by the African Union, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic forms part of this historical framework. Any challenge to its recognition therefore doe...

It took just one official post on X — sober, documented, and diplomatic — to expose an embarrassing reality: whenever Algeria is mentioned, some Moroccans would rather deny history than read it . A few days ago, the United States Embassy in Algiers recalled, with evidence in hand, a basic historical fact: the 1795 Treaty of Peace and Amity , signed in Algiers, constitutes one of the oldest chapters in Algerian–American relations. This treaty exists, it is accessible, and it is archived. And yet, instead of a calm debate, a wave of comments emerged seeking to declare as “impossible” what the archives clearly attest. A significant share of the most aggressive reactions — largely stemming from a Moroccan controversy on social media — revolved around a repetitive slogan: “Algeria did not exist in 1795.” In other words: if the fact is inconvenient, deny the fact. If the document contradicts the narrative, accuse the document. This is the logic of rewriting history through incantation and s...

A document from the French intelligence services, dated December 16, 1957, reveals Morocco's expansionist ambitions toward Algeria during the Algerian War of Independence. This document sheds new light on the complex relationship between the two countries and partially contradicts the historical narrative taught in Algeria, which emphasizes Morocco's unconditional support for the Algerian revolution. In the official version of the Algerian War's history, as taught in Algerian schools, Morocco under King Mohammed V is portrayed as a steadfast ally in the struggle for Algerian independence. This narrative highlights the unity of the Moroccan and Algerian peoples in their fight against French colonialism. It is true that the Algerian revolutionaries initially saw their struggle as part of a broader Maghreb liberation movement (Tunisia – Algeria – Morocco). The attack on the Northern Constantine region in August 1955, for example, was carried out in response to the exile of the...

The city of Val‑de‑Reuil is currently facing a serious affair that directly engages the moral and political responsibility of its municipal executive. At the center of the controversy are publicly expressed racist remarks made on the social network X (formerly Twitter) by Lahsaine Aït Baba, deputy mayor to Socialist mayor Marc‑Antoine Jamet, targeting Algerians. The facts admit no ambiguity. The statements were preserved, archived, documented, and widely circulated. This is neither a rumor nor a misinterpretation: the remarks exist, are established, and were fully assumed by their author. An Openly Assumed Racial Insult In one of his messages, Lahsaine Aït Baba referred to Algerians as “kouloughli,” a term heavily burdened with political and historical connotations, long used as a racial slur by certain Moroccan royalist circles as part of an identity‑denigration campaign. This expression is neither neutral nor harmless. It belongs to a rhetoric of stigmatization aimed at essentializin...

The French refusal to align with a logic of long-term military engagement against Iran is neither ambiguous nor hesitant. It is part of a far broader geopolitical context, marked by a profound reconfiguration of power relations, growing uncertainty regarding the American stance, and the rise of systemic risks on a global scale. Three recent elements help to better understand the French position and, more broadly, the European one. 1. Contradictory signals from Washington: a weakened Western alliance For several months, Donald Trump has never concealed his distrust of traditional multilateral alliances. The issue of a U.S. withdrawal from NATO , or at the very least a major strategic disengagement, frequently reappears in his political discourse. This signal is far from trivial: it calls into question the very principle of automatic solidarity that has underpinned Euro‑Atlantic security since 1949. For Europeans, this hypothesis creates a dangerous equation: either align with a short‑te...