www.pomed.org ♦ 1611 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 300 ♦ Washington, DC 20009
“Arab Spring: What about Algeria?” Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies Center for Transatlantic Relations and the Department of Conflict Thursday, February 23rd , 2012, 3:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. Room 500, 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington DC
On Thursday, the Center for Transatlantic Relations and the Department of Conflict of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies hosted a panel discussion about Algeria’s upcoming elections and propsects for revolution. The panel featured Alexis Arieff , analyst in African and Middle East Affairs for the Congressional Research Service, John Entelis researcher for the Middle East Studies Program at Fordham University, Eric Goldstein from Human Rights Watch, and Daniele Moro , visiting scholar at Center for Transatlantic Relations. The discussion was moderated by Daniel Serwer , Senior Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations.
John Entelis assessed the reasons why “an overthrow of the regime” was conceivable. First, there is a mass discontent within the Algerian people, mostly among the youth (around 50 percent of the population is less than 30) and unemployed. The high level of corruption lost the citizens’ confidence in the government. Entelis noted that Algerian policy making was one of the most opaque of North African states. Entelis described Algerians as “disillusioned” and have little expectations from the upcoming parliament elections this May. Entelis said that he expects the voter turnout may be very low, which would harm the legitimacy of the results. Algerians criticize the huge inequalities in the country despite hyrdrocarbon wealth. Entelis then discussed the reason why Algeria has not seen a revolution. Entelis pointed out, that the National Coordination for Change and Democracy (CNCD) did not succeed to impulse a solid uprising dynamic like in Morocco, the 20 February Movement did. Moreover, Algeria has the economic means to provide subsidies or raise salaries to immediately respond to claims and lower contests. Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, does not generate the same hatred that Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi used to. Algerians express discontent against the “system” and the extensive military power, refered as“ Le Pouvoir,” not necessarily Bouteflika. The threat of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is manipulated by the military to legitimize their pressure on Algeria. Entelis concluded by saying that the attention should be on the army movement in the close future. How the young officials in the army understand the role of the army in Algeria? How do they consider the Arab Spring and its impact on Algeria?
Alexis Arieff reminded the audience that in Algeria, the ‘security apparatus’ had a lot of power so does the executive power (the President), while the Parliament is weak. Arieff explained that the Algerian regime responded to the Algerians demands with legal changes. A package of laws was adopted to improve the rights of press freedom and associations for instance.
www.pomed.org ♦ 1611 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 300 ♦ Washington, DC 20009
About the coming legislative elections, the Movement for the Society of Peace (MSP), a moderate Islamist party created in 2003, expects to win enough seats to lead a majority coalition. The MSP has lobbied for the increase of the legislative power. However the MSP has to overcome internal divisions and competition from a competing Islamist party, the Justice and Freedom party. Arieff did not believe in the possibility of a future coalition of these two parties. Genuinely, Arieff was pessimistic about “fixing political apathy” of the citizens, despite the small changes that the regime has recently implemented. Arieff noticed misunderstanding between the regime and the citizens. While, the regime asserts that political demands and economic demands are separate the citizens think the opposite. The citizens’ associate the failure of the government to redistribute as a failure of the system itself.
Eric Goldstein supported Entelis statement that Bouteflika was not considered as the issue, like Ben Ali in Tunisia, but the “system’ was. The army carries out a strong power on the country founding its legitimacy on the duty to maintain stability. Goldstein said that the Algerians were not that enthusiastic by the “Arab Spring” as they remembered an attempt of liberalization of Algeria in 1998, that ends with the control over the country by the army. Goldstein argued that one of the major positive steps regarding human rights was the end of the state of emergency last year after lasting 19 years. He asserted that media can enjoy a certain freedom and accuse leaders for corruption. However, this partial freedom hides a structure of protecting the main Algerian political actors. Goldstein predicted that the regime will change with the leave of Bouteflika in 2015 (next Presidential elections) as he definitely shaped the power and prevails in the Algerian political system. Goldstein concluded with saying that “mini riots” were constant in the country expressing mainly social grievances (demands for housings, jobs etc), a phenomenon that could be witness in other countries such as Morocco and Tunisia and lead those countries for change.
Daniele Moro addressed security issues in Algeria. He points out four areas of concerns, Kabila, in the North of the country, West Sahara, the South around the border with Mali and the border with Libya. The main issues are at the borders with Mali and Libya. In the South the army faces the Touaregs upheaval. At the border with Libya, Algeria tries to control the flow of weapons crossing illegally the border since the fall of Gaddafi fall (20.000 missiles disappeared from Libya in the last months). Those conflicts in the South may discourage foreign investment and inhibit Algeria from exploiting hydrocarbon resources.
During the Q&A, the first question concerned the role of the parliament in Algeria. The parliament can work relatively freely; the matter is on what it can work, which is quite restricted. The speakers were pessimistic about a rise of power of the assembly after the elections as it would need a constitutional change that the security apparatus is not willing to accept. The audience asked about Algerian relations with E.U. Speakers agreed that it was mainly based on the need from E.U. of the Algerian gas, mostly since Libya providing of its natural resources dropped with the last year civil war. Goldstein added that the E.U. and the U.S. could pressure at the margin Algeria to improve the human rights situation and engage with the local civil society. As a conclusion, a democratic move is still possible in Algeria as the country has a history of “democratic culture,” with vivid associations, multiple unions and, a parliament able to debate and decide on some issues.
www.pomed.org ♦ 1611 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 300 ♦ Washington, DC 20009