When fabrication substitutes for European diplomacy
ALGIERS - An individual presenting himself as the spokesperson for the European Union (EU) issued a statement claiming that Brussels was closely monitoring the situation and seeking clarification regarding the scope, objectives, and legal basis of the deployment of Algerian units in Niger, within the framework of the bilateral military memorandum of understanding.
However, authoritative sources have confirmed that no such representation has been made to the Algerian authorities. No request for clarification, no official inquiry, and no diplomatic exchange corresponding to the statements of this self-proclaimed spokesperson has taken place.
This fundamental clarification radically alters the nature of the statement. Had any such approach actually been undertaken, it would have been categorically rejected by Algeria on the clear grounds that it constitutes an impermissible interference in the internal affairs and sovereign decisions of an independent State.
How can it be explained that a so-called European spokesperson could publicly refer to representations that were never made? Under these circumstances, the statement by Anouar El Anouni amounts to pure fabrication.
When one takes the trouble to examine the author's profile, the reasons behind this fabrication and the true, barely concealable intentions of its instigators become clear. Everything becomes clear once you understand its underlying mechanics. El Anouni is of Franco-Moroccan origin.
In what exact capacity did this individual speak? On whose behalf was he speaking? On what institutional basis could he attribute to the European Union representations that it has manifestly never undertaken with Algiers? Why invoke nonexistent requests for clarification and thereby suggest that the European institutions are seeking explanations from Algeria regarding its security cooperation with Niger? This statement, read from a text and prepared in response to a question from a French journalist, reinforces the impression of a carefully orchestrated sequence, far removed from any spontaneous reaction.
Above all, this episode reveals a relentless French campaign against Algeria that definitively knows no bounds.
Unable to accept the geopolitical developments that consecrate the assertion of African States and the recomposition of the balance of power in the Sahel, Paris now appears to seek to shift its confrontations onto the European terrain, attempting to instrumentalize the EU's institutions to impart a communitarian dimension to its hostility toward Algiers.
--- The Sahel, that strategic wound that Paris fails to close ---
To understand this sequence, one must return to the Sahel's geopolitical reality.
France has suffered a considerable retreat of its influence in this region. Political transformations in several Sahelian countries have profoundly upset the equilibria inherited from the era when Paris wielded considerable levers of influence over a part of the African continent.
This evolution reflects African countries' growing determination to retake control of strategic choices and define partnerships corresponding to their interests.
However, Algeria, owing to its geographical position, security experience, and historical relations with the region's countries, remains a major actor in this recomposition.
It is precisely this regional role that appears to disturb certain French circles. Paris views the strengthening of relations between Algiers and its Sahelian neighbors with disfavor, particularly when these relations develop outside the spheres of influence it has long privileged.
France has no claim to assert over the Sahel. It neither owns nor arbiters. And the States of the region are under no obligation to submit their security choices to French preferences.
What appears unbearable to certain Parisian officials is manifestly to see Algeria act according to its own regional interests, without Paris being able to impose its agenda.
--- Algeria-Niger cooperation concerns the two capitals solely ---
The dispatch of Algerian units to Niger, at the request of the Nigerien authorities and within the framework of a bilateral agreement, falls within sovereign relations between two States.
Algeria and Niger share borders, security interests, and immediate strategic concerns. They face the threats traversing the Sahel. They have awaited neither Brussels' recommendations nor Paris' assessments to measure the dangers weighing upon their common environment.
It is therefore singular, to say the least, to see a communication, fallaciously attributed to a European institution, imply that this cooperation would require clarification on its part, even though no official representation has been undertaken with Algiers.
It is even more singular to see such a communication giving the impression that the sovereign decisions of two African countries should be subjected to the appreciation of external actors.
Algeria-Niger cooperation has no vocation to satisfy European or French geopolitical calculations. It responds to the interests of Algeria and Niger. That should suffice to comprehend its logic.
-- A fabrication within a context of political and commercial tensions --
The significance of this affair also relies upon the timing chosen.
Algerian-European relations are already weakened, at France's instigation, by several disputes, notably commercial restrictions targeting Algerian products and the difficulties surrounding the functioning of the Association Council.
In this context, the statement of the purported European spokesperson adds a new source of tension to relations that would require greater responsibility.
The European Union must shed full light on the conditions in which this communication was prepared and on the elements that permitted the invocation of representations that never existed. It must likewise ensure that its institutions do not become, once again, the instruments of bilateral contentions.
For its part, Algeria will pursue its relations with its partners based on its national interests, its engagements, and its principles. It has no justification to furnish to those who seek to politicize its regional initiatives.
Beyond this statement and its contestable character, to say the least, one reality endures: Algerian independence cannot be discussed, national sovereignty is not a diplomatic concession, and cooperation with neighboring countries is not a favor granted by any external power.