Wars and Conflicts permalink
Algeria 1954 - 1962
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
hi,
was wondering what people knew about the algerian war of independence. only interested because my grandfather fought out there as a french colonial para between 54 and 57 during his national service. i have read alistair horne's a savage war of peace and another one by paul aussaresses who was responsible for torture out there. I want to know how the war escalated to an all out war on both side with atrocities on both sides being committed. -
Message 2
Posted by ElizaShaw (U10750867) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
There's a brief article on this subject in the current issue of the Â鶹ԼÅÄ History magazine.
One of the points it makes is that although the Algerians are (justifiably!) keen to point out the appalling behaviour of the French troops during the struggle for indepedence, they are less keen to point out that many atrocities are still being committed in their country by themselves on themselves....
It does seem to have been a particularly nasty war, however. A black stain on the French. -
Message 3
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
There was a very good movie about it. A French Para regiment having survived being P O Ws in Veitam, are sent to fight there. Can't for the life of me remember the name of it though.
GF -
Message 4
Posted by ElizaShaw (U10750867) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
Battle of Algiers? Banned in France till l971 apparently.
Three other books, by the way, cited in the History mag, are:
The memory of resistance - french opposition to the algerian war - Marin Evans (Berg l997)
Torture - cancer of Democracy - Pierre Vidal Naquert Penguine l963
The third is your Savage Wwar of Peace! -
Message 5
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
It was a very difficult issue for the French.
Algeria was not a colony but since 1848 had been an integral part of Metropolitan France. It made up 3 of the departements (counties) of the country. The departements of Oran, Algiers and Constantine were considered to be just as much a part of France as were any of the other departements.
In accordance with French state policy all citizens were considered equal regardless of geographical location, race or religion. This contrasts, for example, with the UK where a catholic population is still discriminated against by the sectarian UK constitution. This is despite that fact that Northern Ireland (with a sizeable concentration of catholics) is expected to consider itself as just another part of the metropolitan UK.
No such religious discrimination existed in France. So when some Algerians began campaigning for 'independence' on the basis of geographical, racial and religious differences - it was a fundamental clash of world views. There could be no compromise (on either side).
P.S The 1966 film 'The Battle of Algiers' is not necessarily good history - but it's certainly terrific viewing. Recommended for anyone interested in the Algerian War of Independence. -
Message 6
Posted by Volgadon (U10843893) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
Check out Albert Camus. He was from Oran and wrote a bit about it.
-
Message 7
Posted by ElizaShaw (U10750867) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
There could be no compromise (on either side).
****
Hmm. There's always room for compromise if both sides are willing! (but how often does that happen??????!) -
Message 8
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
No, that wasn't it.
-
Message 9
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
Sounds like "Lost Command", with Anthony Quinn and some other people.
I think the paras get nicknamed "lizards" by the Algerians.
Trike. -
Message 10
Posted by JB (U569100) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
When the Germans occupied France in 1940, they tortured many French officers and security agents.
Some of those French operatives ended up in Algeria and employed some of the techniques they had been so painfully taught by the Nazis on the FLN.
Fast forward again to whne those FLN guerillas are now running Algeria, and guess what they're doing to the FIS rebels? And guess what the Islamists FIS boys are now telling their Al Qaeda friends all about? -
Message 11
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Thursday, 21st February 2008
That's it. Lost Command.
GF -
Message 12
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Saturday, 23rd February 2008
Algeria a part of Metropolitan France? Haha! What is in a name? I mean, in 2008 a French born, French citizen born in metropolitan France of Algerian origin who has graduated has in the best case 5 times less of chances compared to the "Franco-French" graduates, to get a job (AND I TALK ABOUT JUST ANY JOB loosely related to his degree). If we talk about the "right jobs", then the Algerian-French has less than 20 times less chances to get the nice job compared to the Franco-French. I have lived in France and while I have no much special sympathy for Algerians (they are themselves also racist and violent and pseudo-religious and often it is them that they bring their own bad luck) but then at the end of the day I have seen what is going on.
So is there any here to doubt that Algeria back in the 1950s was a colony and was run just like a colony? French had no problem just sweeping 5,000s and 10,000s of people just for protesting.
In Paris in the 1950s, some 10,000 Algerians had taken the streets to protest rather peacefully, then the police closed the streets hunted them down and took as many as 5,000 people and drowned them (with hands... you know... pressing the head into the water) in the waters of Seine... and left the bodies in the river to be carried away from the city.... we are talking about Paris here not any rural area...!!!!! Nobody ever talked about that and it is still difficult for the French to talk about that.
I like the French, I like their country their food but they can be really weird too often. As one english friend of mine was saying "We English on the one hand retain the aristocracy but we do everything to achieve equality, while the French boast about their equality but do everything to impose social inequalities".
For the country that the very same people can sell you De Gaul and May of 68 as "la France" anything can be expected. -
Message 13
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Saturday, 23rd February 2008
Raybans,
I understood from you that you understood French. I proposed already to you to lead you to my French messageboard. There is a "pied noir" overthere, who was in Algeria in that period and is an expert in all this stuff. I spoke already about you and he said he would be happy to answer your questions. We covered already that item and I found an amazing well documented film on "you tube" if I recall it well. As we aren't allowed to put foreign sites on this Â鶹ԼÅÄ board...
Warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 14
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
thanks paul, i'll try and find it.
Raybans13 -
Message 15
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
There could be no compromise (on either side).
****
Hmm. There's always room for compromise if both sides are willing! (but how often does that happen??????!)Â
Compromise was indeed attempted during the reign of Napoleon III. In accordance with imperialist thinking Napoleon had sought to rehabilitate the native Algerians after the humiliation they had experienced following the French conquest in 1830.
This rehabilitation involved demonstrating to the native population that they could look directly to the Emperor as their protector against the worst excesses of the French settlers – the pieds noirs. Napoleon, therefore, had the notion of setting up 2 'estates' in Algeria - a French settler one and a native Algerian one. Both estates would, of course, be subject to the emperor.
This meant that the native Algerians had a position within the French state without being subordinate to, or having to go via, the dubious medium of the pieds noirs. It was a classic example of the policy of divide-and-rule in practice.
In order to constitutionally set the native Algerians apart from the settlers Napoleon stated that, Muslim and other native Algerians, could be regarded as French nationals but not as French citizens.
To 20th an 21st century sensibilities this may seem that the native Algerians were being treated as 'second class citizens'. At the time, however, it was perceived as quite different. By acknowledging and guaranteeing their status as Muslims, Napoleon was granting those native Algerians who were Muslim (the vast majority) an important sense of cultural affirmation. This was greatly welcomed by the Muslim leadership and the general Muslim population.
To be a French national but not a French citizen was, in fact, worn as a badge of pride. The native Algerians could thus maintain their seperate Muslim identity (including aspects of Muslim law) while at the same time fitting in with the reality of being subjects of France. Thus they could also cock a snook at the pieds noirs now that the emperor himself was the native Algerians' new-found benefactor and patron.
And this patronage was considerable. As French nationals they had the right to work in the civil service and migrate to mainland France. Napoleon also made a particular point of patronizing native Algerians regiments, such as the ‘Tirailleurs Algeriennes’, in the French Army.
Needles to say, however, that one generation’s ‘cultural affirmation’ is a later generation’s ‘stifling tradition’. And similarly one generation’s ‘separate estate’ is a later generation’s ‘discriminatory segregation’.
After Napoleon III left the throne, following defeat in 1870, some of the native Algerians (perhaps sensing a changing political wind) launched an abortive uprising against the pieds noirs in 1871. The new regime in Paris (itself in turmoil) was in no position to intervene and, after the uprising was put down, the pieds noirs were now entrenched in the ascendancy. This meant that they could henceforth use the full authority of the Republic, and its ideals, to maintain their position.
Imperialist and royalist distinctions regarding ‘subjects’, ‘nationals’ and ‘citizens’ etc were out of favour and frowned upon. The native Algerians were now to be given (what must have been) a humiliating choice – either be ruled by the French or become French . -
Message 16
Posted by ElizaShaw (U10750867) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
It's interesting to compare the situation in Algeria with that of the British Raj - one similarity might be that it was the whites in both territories who were more 'racist' (in our terms!) than the 'homelanders' ... ie,because it's much easier to be 'egalitatiran' towards the 'natives' when the 'natives' are far away...
But one essential difference must surely be that I doubt many British actually 'emigrated' to India - they worked and lived out there, but they would not consider India 'home'. Whereas, if I understand it correctly, Algeria was 'home' to the white French emigrees.
Presumably Algeria was far more similar to places like Kenya, Rhodesia and South Africa, where British whites emigrated, but had to live 'cheek by jowl' with a population that, unlike the Australian aborigenese or the Canadian Amerindians, were not disposable of! -
Message 17
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
Presumably Algeria was far more similar to places like Kenya, Rhodesia and South AfricaÂ
Yes - the situation in Algeria has been described as a cross between Northern Ireland and Rhodesia. -
Message 18
Posted by ElizaShaw (U10750867) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
So what happened to the 'Algerian whites' (why are they pieds noirs, by the way?!) when Algeria became indepdendent.
Did they all come back to France? -
Message 19
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
A staggering 90% of the pieds noirs (over 1,000,000 people) fled Algeria between 1962 and 1964 and did indeed migrate to European France. To say 'come back to France', however, would be to deny the fact that, as far as they were concerned, they believed that they had been in France all along. By the 1960s the majority of the pieds noirs were at least 3rd generation born in Algeria.
The origin of the term 'pieds noirs' ('black feet') is unclear. I've heard 2 explanations.
1 is that it was a nickname given to the European settlers by the native Algerians because the settlers wore black leather shoes and boots. This distinguished them from the native Algerians who either wore brown sandals or went barefoot.
Another explanation is that it was a nickname given to them by people in European France because the settlers' bodies were European i.e 'white' but their feet were 'black' because they lived in Africa.
I'm not sure if either explanation is correct though. -
Message 20
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
Re: Message 14.
Raybans,
type in Google "Tribune Histoire" and you arrive automatically to the site.
Under the item: Decolonisation and Cold War (1946-1991) I have a thread: "The Algerian War" and "French Algeria" by BRH. Martinez is the "pied noir" expert.
Don't be afraid of the Napoleontic added site and the discussions about the dead mask.
BRH, former laywer at Paris, leading the website is a good guy.
Don't take offence at some Anglophobe remarks, there are Anglophile ones too as me. We had here in the past also many Francophobe posters too...And perhaps still...
.
Good luck and warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 21
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
Re: Message 19.
Vizzer,
will ask it to the expert on the French message board...
Warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 22
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 24th February 2008
Re: Message 14.
Raybans,
about the film on you tube:
Put "algeria history reggane film france" in Google: first window: first entry.
Nik and for all those who understand French, it is an amazing film. The website is also on my thread: "The Algerian war" on Tribune histoire.
Warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 23
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Tuesday, 26th February 2008
many thanks again Paul, anglophobic remarks you say....don't worry about them, i get francophobic jokes about rugby and football all of the time! just so as you know, i'[m not what you'd define as english or for that matter british! my dad is french and from lorraine and that would entail a german surname of Hreben for myself and some grman blood as well as i believe a little czech that found its way in there somewhere along the line!
-
Message 24
Posted by U3280211 (U3280211) ** on Wednesday, 27th February 2008
Re: the two films 'Lost Command' and 'Battle of Algiers' I would have to go with the latter as the better record of the events.
The Para Colonel's speech justifying torture has the ring of truth. Many of the shots are from actual newsreel of the time. One of the FLN plays himself, I recall?
Did the French Paras invent water-boarding? -
Message 25
Posted by Mike Alexander (U1706714) on Wednesday, 27th February 2008
In accordance with French state policy all citizens were considered equal regardless of geographical location, race or religion. Â
I don't know much about this subject, but I did hear a R4 programme recently about the writer Albert Camus, who grew up in Algeria in the 1920s. They gave the distinct impression that, whatever the official line, Arabs definitely *did not* enjoy the same rights as Europeans. -
Message 26
Posted by ElizaShaw (U10750867) on Wednesday, 27th February 2008
I thought the Japs invented water boarding. I'm sure I read an account somewhere of an American POW (a woman)(a la Tenko) who was waterboarded for some misdemeanour (or something!)
-
Message 27
Posted by U3280211 (U3280211) ** on Wednesday, 27th February 2008
The Japanese certainly used water in torture in WW2. I believe their MO was to stick a hose down some unfortunate's oesophagus, fill their stomach with water then hit it or jump on it.
(See, among other sources, Eric Lomax "The Railway Man") This must have been vile indeed, probably fatal, in extreme form.
But 'water-boarding', if I understand it correctly, employs Pavlovian fear responses with much less trauma or risk to life. (see the "Plague Dogs" by Richard Adams). In this technique no one can resist, however brave they are, because the reaction of the victim is beyond voluntary control, the will to survive is a conditioned emotional response and is 'autonomic', outside the capacity for conscious decision-making.
The technique used by the French Paras in Algeria, which would work in less than 20 minutes, was to carry out repeated and rapid simulated drownings. The interrogated victim might be able to resist three or four attempts to force him/her to drown (interposed with brief recovery periods) but the human psyche cannot tolerate further repeated immersions without a full-blown panic attack.
At this point, even the threat of a subsequent immersion will break the resistance of the victim.
It taps primitive survival drives which cannot be over-ridden by ideology or commitment. (see also Michael Herr's "Dispatches" about US forces in Vietnam, which describes a similar partial drowning technique without immersion). -
Message 28
Posted by ElizaShaw (U10750867) on Wednesday, 27th February 2008
Hmm, thinking about it, I'm sure I saw Germans doing this to a prisoner in the film Rome Open City, when two prostitutes were laughing at the resistance fighter being so tortured?
(What vile things humans do....) -
Message 29
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Wednesday, 27th February 2008
True the Japanese used water boarding in WWII, slightly amusing cartoon in the times about water boarding at Guantanamo bay a while back. However the French I believe favoured dunking prisoners in a barrel of water but Paul Aussaresses account of his service in Algeria does give one specific example of how one case turned into a fatality, will post the name of his book when I find it! Despite the use of water boarding, Aussaresses claims that this was a last resort, claiming that a thorough beating then electric shock sufficed to convince most people to talk.
-
Message 30
Posted by U3280211 (U3280211) ** on Thursday, 28th February 2008
Aussaresses claims that this was a last resortÂ
I think that's true, and we would all condemn torture at the philosophical level, but most armies have used it (see Goya's sketches).
The French faced a tough enemy in Algeria. During the cafe-bombing period it sometimes happened that the paras held a suspect who had planted a cafe-bomb (or had just ordered one to be planted) and they had just minutes to find out the target building before the timer detonated the charge.
Water-boarding 'helped' here, because of its rapid effect. It also persuaded cells to identify and betray their members and 'upward' contacts.
How many of us, opposed to the technique 'in theory', would employ it to discover the whereabouts of one of our children, if kidnapped? -
Message 31
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Thursday, 28th February 2008
Very true that the FLN was a tough nut to crack at the point in time where they were using indiscriminate bombings that had no real effect as far as military speak goes, they succeecded in their goal of terrorising people. Prior to this Aussaresses had used good old fashioned intelligence work coupled with a few beatings here and there to aid the works and these produced results. There is one amusing tale from his book to accompany this, a legionairre comes to him asking to be arrested, when asked why he said that seeing as he had no cash for the brothel it was put to him that he paid in hand grenades! Aussaresses said no, handed him a crate of doctored grenades and gave him a 24hr leave pass! later when the grenades got into circulation terrorrists would pull the pin expecting a 5 second delay but were instead gvapourised the minute the pulled the pin.
-
Message 32
Posted by U3280211 (U3280211) ** on Thursday, 28th February 2008
Distribution of 'instant-detonation' grenades must have been a high-risk strategy!
Some parallel here with the South American general who dressed his assault troops in the enemy's uniforms for a sneak night attack.
The surprise worked well, for the first ten minutes, but then things fell apart when the enemy awoke and put their uniforms on. -
Message 33
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Thursday, 28th February 2008
Re: Message 23.
Raybans, yes, you are undoubtly prepared for the French messageboard. Cheers, Paul.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹ԼÅÄ iD
Â鶹ԼÅÄ navigation
Â鶹ԼÅÄ links
Â鶹ԼÅÄ Â© 2014 The Â鶹ԼÅÄ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.