Since Algeria’s foreign minister’s recent visit to the United States speculation is intense about its intentions and results. From the Western Saharan issue and its recent developments to possible armament deals and good ol’ business. Both Mr Medelci and Mrs Clinton remained vague about what they discussed in their micro press conference, half the questions by journalists were answered with the usual diplomatic filler tripe, and the other half was irrelevant to the visit, indicating the media’s usual apathy to the country.
But today Quds Press dropped a bomb and reported that the country has succumbed to the United States’ pressure to have a military base in the country. The formula seems to be holding “temporary” bases where American troops launch fast attacks against AQIM throughout the Sahara, trailing them to their holdouts in neighbouring countries. Supposedly the temporary nature of the bases avoids upsetting the local population. The story is gaining momentum, with Aljazeera throwing their mammoth weight behind it and soon the local opposition press will follow suit.
Such a heavy claim commands careful analysis though. First, the only source of this is Mohamed Larbi Zitout, a disgruntled former Algerian diplomat now in Asylum in Britain. Zitout is a fierce critic of the Algerian government, appearing on multiple news channels Arab and Western. But before going deeper into his background and to avoid any accusations of ad homming the source, we will dig elsewhere first.
Bouteflika’s Algeria has tried to play the cards with everyone and keep passable diplomatic ties with world powers. The country exports a considerable amount of oil to the United States, with Halliburton and other American companies present in the industry. Culturally it is closely tied to France (it pretends this is not true). The country’s recent multi billion construction projects are mainly managed by Chinese and Japanese companies, whose relationships with Algeria are apolitical so far. Most substantially, Algeria imports most of its important Arms from Russia, including advanced aircraft equipment and surface to air missiles. This is why the country is strategically considered in the Russian camp.
A decision to accept American bases would severally upset this balance of powers. The country has tried to keep this balance for as long as possible, never opening up to one direction, habitually pissing everyone off in turn. The Russions in the last scandalous armament deal, when the Algerian military was publicly dissatisfied with the quality of the MiGs they received. France by demanding apologies for the war of independence every few years and refusing to fully endorse Sarkozy’s Mediterranean Union. And lastly, the United States by publicly refusing to hold an American military base when debate about American involvement in the Maghreb intensified following the rise of AQIM.
Paradoxically, AQIM is much less of a threat now than it was perceived to be in 2005/2006. AlQuaeda In the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) has largely failed in implementing its Agenda of exporting its ideology throughout the region, as confirmed by the findings of Jean-Pierre Filiu, the expert on terrorist movements in the region, in a Carnegie Endowment report. AQIM’s predecessors, the various terrorist groups that were fighting the Algerian state, had some support within the population after the coup of 1991. Despite the horrific events of the late 90′s against civilians, this support diminished year by year but never completely went away because of continual frustration at the state. That support seems to have nearly completely dried up inside the country and its neighbours, as AQIM’s global vision and integration of fighters from foreign American wars made Algerians realise that AQIM are not fighting for their cause and that their Agenda is foreign. American bases in the country will give more fuel to AQIM and possibly even reverse its fortunes. AQIM is weaker and is perceived to be weaker by the population, so their presence and current state cannot alone explain Algeria’s possible sudden change of heart.
The country has forever publicly stated that they allow no foreign bases on Algerian soil full stop. The nation draws great pride from its war of Independence and is extremely sensitive to the idea of foreign troops. For a long time it has been a source of differentiation from other Middle Eastern countries, notably the Gulf countries: they have American bases and troops, we don’t, they succumb to foreign powers, we don’t! It also helps that the country has been geographically far from any hot spot. That is, until AQIM’s rise and Algeria’s public refusal to host bases.
Quds Press, Aljazeera and Zitout speculate that the Algerian élite and military officials have a lot to gain from setting up private security companies that help an American military presence – Black Water gained billions in Iraq and other places. A powerful argument for sure, but the lack of history of sacrificing diplomatic standing over financial gains, even personal ones undermines it. The country has forever let its generals and army commanders run loose in holding the main companies that import essential goods and dealing with far more money than anything that these security companies might bring. Moreover, au contraire, Algeria’s habit has been the opposite: easily letting away financial opportunities using dubious spiteful laws (Oil windfall taxes as an example) and more prudent diplomatic stances.
The second argument is that Algeria is seeking the US’s support on Western Sahara. This issue, while important to the Algerian authorities, has never garnered enough importance to make the country take such drastic measures, and indeed, Algeria has been successful in shaping the terms of the conflict. This argument is even weaker in the light of Morocco’s recent difficulties vs Aminatou and Spain. The third argument is Algeria’s desire for American arms, a drastic change in its stance with its old ally Russia if true. Lastly, Zitout says that the country wants its general to be protected when travelling abroad, since many of them could be accused of war crimes after Bouteflika’s reconciliation laws that largely exonerated them. Usually the preferred destination for these generals is Europe, somewhere on the shores of lake Geneva or the Cote d’Azur, and American protection will not prevent NGO’s and European countries launching criminal cases against them.
Algeria’s response to this will be closely watched in local and Arab circles. The traditional response of the government in situation like these is dead silence – the presidency and authorities often given the impression that they are beyond answering rumours and speculation. That is, until the rumour grows big enough, and there is no question that this will only grow. Aljazeera is a powerful force in the Algerian public opinion arena. The station carried the story both on its Arabic based website and on air, the local press will soon follow.
So the verdict is that the story has little truth, given what we know now. It appears that Zitout wants to corner Algeria in a difficult situation by forcing them to, once again, publicly state that they don’t accept foreign bases, humiliating both Algeria and the US after the diplomatic visit and potentially doing enough damage to reverse any diplomatic progress. Zitout’s public goal through the Rachad movement that he co-founded is to weaken and topple the current government via peaceful means (and from exile), and this could be one of the tools he is using.




16 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 13, 2009 at 15:18
alle
I don’t think this Zitout fellow seems very credible, and the “revelation” is apparently simply that Quds Press has picked up on one of his statements, which he makes all the time. But that doesn’t mean there’s no base in Algeria. There’s been a lot of talk about Algerian special forces being stationed in the south of Algeria. They’re probably there to help train and aid the Algerian troops under some sort of cooperative arrangement, not as a full-out base, but whether that counts is mostly beside the point — the authorities haven’t been admitting to that either. That there have been special forces in the Algerian south is actually beyond dispute: an American tv channel even made a report filming there, although I can’t recall which one. It can be found via Google.
December 13, 2009 at 18:13
Houwari
I’m not sure that having American troops training Algerian ones in Algerian bases is operationally equivalent to having an American base. The latter implies independently using the base logistically, as well as some possible mandate for the Americans to go and carry the operations that they want in an autonomous way, even if in a limited form. The former is standard military cooperation of the type that armies engage in around the world and the Algerian navy and air force in particular participate in various places, most often in the Mediterranean – the authorities have not been shy about this last, they routinely announce navy/air force cooperation on the shores of Algiers, and foreign ships have been docking on the port of Algiers. The announcements can be considered a form of propaganda vs Morocco.
On the other hand, to my knowledge the country has so far been resistant to the idea of Americans carrying missions on their own, or participating in missions that the Algerians supposedly plan and perform.
December 14, 2009 at 04:47
Kal
It was ABC. There’s also a CIA station, which was formally and unceremoniously revealed earlier this year.
I wouldn’t trust Zitout on the base(s) either though. The three reasons (or conditions) Aljazeera list seem like fantasies — the Sahara and Algeria getting any set of useful weapons from the US especially. The third idea greatly overestimates US influence in Europe (from what I know). Plus, (Houawari and Alle, you probably saw this too), but General Ward’s interview on Algerian state TV was rough if not hostile. That could be part a rouse or it could be because the Algerians actually think AFRICOM is a stupid idea and don’t see it as being nearly as beneficial for them as some Americans are trying to sell it as being. If the story about the base is true, the DRS is getting sloppy at keeping secrets!
December 13, 2009 at 19:19
omar
I like the arguments that the algerians are putting here….. it shows how much they are in denial & bunch of Hippocrates!!!!! I guess this base is to liberate Gaza ha??
January 4, 2010 at 10:02
CHARKA
Omar enuf and well said!
They are just trying to improvise political corridors by which they justify that call of having such a base on their soil. On the other hand they keep on bashing Morocco about he western Sahara issue along with Egypt claiming that Egyptians are a bunch of Jews-kissers!
Its pathetic anyways to manipulate facts in ways that would justify their ill favored stance.
December 14, 2009 at 08:22
wahid farid
Mr Zitout is absolutely right, and this shows how closely he is in monitoring the situation in Algeria.
When Central Com in Doha, Qatar was created, no one was predicting that the US will use it to wage not one but two wars (Iraq and Afghanistan), and it is for the same purpose they are setting up the Africom project.
According to Daniel Volman of the The African Security Research Project in Washington, D.C., The US is securing Permanant deals with all African nations -and mainly the Sahelian ones- to allow the US army Tomporarily use every african country military facilities (casernes, bases, barracks..etc) in case they need them. The US think they will need those bases for an eventual military invasion of the Nigeria Delta which is now regareded as the New Gulf for its OIL, and which has now become the most strategic for the USA according to Dick Cheney report.
The question we have to ask, ” When They gain a foothold, they cannot be stopped”, as they american proverb states. Once they are settled in any country, who can ask theme to get out? the Generals? no of course, especially as they are co-operating with them in the Private Security companies business in the Sahara and elsewhere in Algeria.
December 14, 2009 at 22:23
Houwari
Wahid, Thanks for the comment – I’d love to have some reading about the strategy in the Nigerian Delta . I don’t doubt that the US always had plans to have some involvement there, but how close are are they to realising this (especially that the hawks in the pentagon are parking for a while) and how necessary is it for them to use an Algerian base?
December 14, 2009 at 14:02
Madani
I’m sure he’s right, but he’s by no means the first to report this:
“In private, though, some US officials have confirmed the existence of at least one operational base in southern Algeria that fits this profile.” – Yahia H. Zoubir, “The United States: Islamism, Terrorism, and Democracy”.
“The establishment of a US military base at Tamanrasset, the administrative capital of the extreme south, was cloaked in secrecy, lest it provoke uproar. However, flight records of planes reveal that two US military flights, transporting 100 US Special Forces personnel and their dogs, landed at the base on 16 February 2006, followed by a third flight, carrying surveillance and listening equipment on the same day.” (Algeria: Anger of the Disposessed – Martin Evans and John Philips)
December 14, 2009 at 22:20
Houwari
Thanks for your comment Madani. You’ve just shifted my reading list -I’ve meant to read Anger of the Dispossessed for a while, but it’s at the forefront now.
My impression has been that these were rumours. It will be interesting to see how consistent the various accounts are.
December 15, 2009 at 13:23
North African blogs « The Gulf blog
[...] stumbled upon this new Algerian blog which looks to be the business. There’s an excellent post on the rumor of the US setting up a military base in the country which is followed up by some [...]
December 15, 2009 at 22:41
Vince Crawley
I just ran across this discussion on your blog.
There are some media reports of a deal between Algeria and the U.S. for temporary use of bases in Algeria. These reports aren’t accurate.
For more info, I invite you to read AFRICOM commander General William Ward’s news conference transcript from December 3 in Algiers, posted on the http://www.africom.mil website: http://bit.ly/5ouvZX
Quotes include:
“I did not come here with any request to put troops in the Sahel to combat terrorism and I have no plans to do so.”
“[T]here are no plans to conduct that type of training or exercises here in Algeria.”
The United States is not conducting any combat operations in the Sahel, to include Algeria or any of its neighboring countries.
Respectfully,
Vince Crawley
U.S. Africa Command Public Affairs
http://www.africom.mil
December 16, 2009 at 18:09
AFRICOM Comment on Bases Rumour « Algerian Review
[...] is the text of the comment in full, as posted in the previous [...]
December 19, 2009 at 12:44
Non-Arab Arab
Dear Mr. Crawley,
As a US citizen, your non-denial denial just reminds me of how easily fellow citizens such as yourself are willing to turn yourselves into official liars. But then given the way the military has come to see communication as a weapon instead of an instrument of honesty, I find it no surprise to see these Orwellian statements. Or maybe Clintonian is a better comparison – it depends on what your definition of the word “is” is eh? Or in this case what your definition of the word “accurate” is? I’ve spent enough time inside enough branches of the USG to understand these are the words bureaucrats and spokespeople use when they want to lie while appearing to tell the truth. Your pattern of lies is all too blatant and obvious, you are a poor propagandist.
August 31, 2011 at 09:03
Abu-al-Husam
Very well put – I was thinking of how to reply to his hogwash, and I don’t think I could have done so better than you have here. If I might add, you quoting a U.S. General and linking their report doesn’t make you seem biased at all. And we all know how truthful the U.S. military is.
January 1, 2010 at 23:56
First Censored Political Website in Algeria « Algerian Review
[...] stations and a staunch critic of the government. Last month he broke the rumour that Algeria has accepted temporary American military stations, a rumour vehemently denied by the Algerian state and AFRICOM – this is probably what annoyed [...]
October 29, 2011 at 10:56
John Ledbetter
The Air Force had decided to have strategic bases in Algeria at one time. The real fact is that it lack real value because of it’s location in relation to present day objects. The conflict involving the type of population and the party that Algeria has played a host to presents a difficulty in maintaining a posture that allows members to enter and exit the country with some degree of safety and conduct. I assume that the United States has some intention keeping it’s holdings of areas that have been held for Air Force. but it seems that as the cold war has ended the value of Algeria as a real region to commit to a large scale operation has sharply declined.