This led directly to Turkey’s open intervention in the conflict, starting in January 2020, which played into Russian hands. France was quick to decry the Turkish intervention, while remaining silent on the role of its Arab allies. Macron’s policy infuriated Algeria, whose leaders oppose intervention in North African affairs by states outside the region. Overall, the failure of France’s plan to bring Haftar to power damaged European credibility and influence in the conflict - leaving Russia, Turkey and the UAE firmly in charge.
Macron’s fixation on Turkey has crept into other policy areas, such as when he recently compared Turkey’s Ottoman-era “colonization” of Algeria to French colonial rule from 1830 to 1962. In fact, the Ottoman presence came at the request of Algeria’s local population during a time of Spanish encroachment. Macron’s rewriting of history infuriated both Algeria’s president and opposition figures; to unite Algeria’s warring political factions in this way was a French own goal, complicating bilateral security arrangements.
In sharp contrast, Algeria has maintained good relations with other Mediterranean EU states. Its national oil company, Sonatrach, recently signed a $1.4 billion oil and gas exploration deal with Italy’s ENI, reinforcing longstanding economic and security links between the two countries. Spain’s relations with Algeria also remain on an even keel, despite the closure of the Maghreb-Europe gas pipeline late last year.
The contradictions of French policy in the region are unlikely to further its long-term interests. Algeria is puzzled by Macron’s indulgence of Russian mercenaries in Libya and, potentially, in Mali in the future. Russia, a key supplier of weapons to Algeria, strongly opposed the opposition Hirak movement in its heyday three years ago, a policy that might not be in France’s long-term interests. In addition, Macron’s indulgence of the UAE, with whom France recently concluded important weapons contracts, sits uncomfortably with Abu Dhabi’s delight in fanning the flames of the Algeria-Morocco dispute and its keenness to recognize Morocco’s “sovereignty” over the disputed Western Sahara.
Many West African leaders believe France’s interventionism has worsened the many conflicts that in the West are often presented as “jihadists versus everyone else” - an oversimplification that makes it difficult to understand the multilayered nature of the crises raging across the vast Sahel region. In Mali, it is clear that the conflict will not be solved by military means alone; it is far more complex.
While some Malians have urged talks with armed groups, whose aims on the ground tend to be more local and criminal than religious or ideological, Paris disagrees. This is why France’s western allies are reluctant to engage militarily. As France draws down its troops in Mali, Malian leaders might be tempted to turn to Russian mercenaries, which would not bring long-term stability.
More than ever, French algorithms need to adjust to the 21st century. Framing a coherent strategy in northwestern Africa is no easy matter in an age when long-standing alliances and post-colonial spheres of interest have given way to transactional diplomacy. France holds fewer cards than it did as recently as 2011, and it cannot wish away the growing influence of Turkey and Russia.
Never has the need for a serious strategic debate between France, the EU and Algeria been greater. Macron has presided over a decline of French influence in Libya. What is needed is a serious rethink of French strategy towards a region to which it is bound by its colonial past.
* Francis Ghiles is one of the leading European experts on the Maghreb. He is a senior associate research fellow at the Barcelona Centre for International Affairs.
Courtesy: Middle East Eye