Tweet
ALGERIAN PRIME MINISTER'S CALL ON TURKEY
by Abdullah al-Ahsan*
Today's Zaman
Jan 13 2012
Turkey
It was shocking to see the Algerian prime minister's call on
"Turkish authorities to stop referring to Algerian history under
French colonial rule as part of Turkey's quarrel with France over
genocide allegations," (Today's Zaman, Jan. 7, 2012).
The Algerian prime minister expressed his views in the context of
the Turkish prime minister's reference to French atrocities committed
in Algeria which, in turn, was mentioned in the context of a French
decision to pass "a bill that would make it a crime to deny that
mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks nearly a century ago
constituted genocide." As Today's Zaman reported, "Turkey's prime
minister then accused the French of [committing] 'genocide' during
France's 132-year colonial rule in Algeria." I don't want to discuss
killings in Armenia at the beginning of the 20th century; I would,
rather, like to comment on the call by the Algerian prime minister. I
will also comment on the history of the French-Turkish relationship.
Clearly the Algerian prime minister does not want to see his country
getting involved in a row between its former colonial power and
Turkey. But is his resistance because he does not want his country to
be troubled concerning a controversy between two independent sovereign
states? Or is the issue of the killings of innocent civilians under
French colonial rule in Algeria no longer a matter of agitation for
him? Or does he want to dump that part of history into the trash? Or,
in the worst case scenario, maybe he wants to please his country's
colonial power in order to gain political support? If the last scenario
is the case, he should remember that one year ago France denied asylum
to Tunisian fugitive Ben Ali when he was desperately seeking refuge.
But even if the Algerian prime minister dumps part of his country's
history, should the Turks accept it? This question arises because,
when France occupied Algeria in 1830, Algeria was part of the Ottoman
state. It should be noted that the Ottomans never invaded Algeria;
Khairuddin Pasha (known as Barbarossa and Hayrettin in Turkish),
who was born on a Greek island in the Aegean Sea, organized forces
to liberate the area from the Spaniards around A.D. 1525. After
defeating Muslims in Spain, the Catholics were on a mission to capture
territories on the Mediterranean coasts. Khairuddin, of course, sought
and received Ottoman assistance for this purpose. Had the Ottomans
not assisted the people of Algeria at that moment in history, the fate
of Algerians today would have been similar to that of Spanish Muslims.
How could the Algerians forget this part of their history? Years
later when Catholic Spain sought a truce with the Ottomans, the
territory became part of the Ottoman state. Therefore, if Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is making a reference to French
atrocities in Algeria, he has a reason to.
The Turkish prime minister was referring to the killing of Algerians
by French troops in the middle of the 20th century. But one might find
a more pathetic picture from the early days of French occupation in
Algeria. According to an official French census report by the Service
de la Statistique Generale, the Algerian Muslim population in 1830
was about 3 million. The number declined to 2.6 million in 1845, to
2.307 million in 1856 and to 2.134 million in 1872. Did these people
emigrate? No. They were all massacred by invading French troops.
Algerians fought under the leadership of Abdul Qadir al-Jazairi until
1847. Then the revolt continued in the area of Kabylia until 1870.
Were these killings not genocide? Those Algerians who survived moved
to rural areas; Islam became a rural phenomenon and the French imported
European settlers to populate the cities.
In this context one should recall the earliest phase of the
French-Ottoman relationship -- a relationship that goes beyond the
first treaty between Francis I (1494-1597) and Suleyman the Magnificent
(1494-1566) in 1536. Under the treaty the Ottomans granted the French
privilege to conduct business in the prosperous Mediterranean region --
a privilege the British also sought but were denied. But the French
forgot this favor and invaded Egypt in 1798, violating the treaty. It
seems one also needs to remind the Algerian prime minister the excuse
France used to attack and occupy Algeria in 1830. In other words, the
Algerian prime minister should be rather careful in making statements,
particularly at a time when many Arab countries are experiencing
an awakening.
*Abdullah al-Ahsan is a professor of history and deputy dean at the
International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC)
at the International Islamic University of Malaysia.
by Abdullah al-Ahsan*
Today's Zaman
Jan 13 2012
Turkey
It was shocking to see the Algerian prime minister's call on
"Turkish authorities to stop referring to Algerian history under
French colonial rule as part of Turkey's quarrel with France over
genocide allegations," (Today's Zaman, Jan. 7, 2012).
The Algerian prime minister expressed his views in the context of
the Turkish prime minister's reference to French atrocities committed
in Algeria which, in turn, was mentioned in the context of a French
decision to pass "a bill that would make it a crime to deny that
mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks nearly a century ago
constituted genocide." As Today's Zaman reported, "Turkey's prime
minister then accused the French of [committing] 'genocide' during
France's 132-year colonial rule in Algeria." I don't want to discuss
killings in Armenia at the beginning of the 20th century; I would,
rather, like to comment on the call by the Algerian prime minister. I
will also comment on the history of the French-Turkish relationship.
Clearly the Algerian prime minister does not want to see his country
getting involved in a row between its former colonial power and
Turkey. But is his resistance because he does not want his country to
be troubled concerning a controversy between two independent sovereign
states? Or is the issue of the killings of innocent civilians under
French colonial rule in Algeria no longer a matter of agitation for
him? Or does he want to dump that part of history into the trash? Or,
in the worst case scenario, maybe he wants to please his country's
colonial power in order to gain political support? If the last scenario
is the case, he should remember that one year ago France denied asylum
to Tunisian fugitive Ben Ali when he was desperately seeking refuge.
But even if the Algerian prime minister dumps part of his country's
history, should the Turks accept it? This question arises because,
when France occupied Algeria in 1830, Algeria was part of the Ottoman
state. It should be noted that the Ottomans never invaded Algeria;
Khairuddin Pasha (known as Barbarossa and Hayrettin in Turkish),
who was born on a Greek island in the Aegean Sea, organized forces
to liberate the area from the Spaniards around A.D. 1525. After
defeating Muslims in Spain, the Catholics were on a mission to capture
territories on the Mediterranean coasts. Khairuddin, of course, sought
and received Ottoman assistance for this purpose. Had the Ottomans
not assisted the people of Algeria at that moment in history, the fate
of Algerians today would have been similar to that of Spanish Muslims.
How could the Algerians forget this part of their history? Years
later when Catholic Spain sought a truce with the Ottomans, the
territory became part of the Ottoman state. Therefore, if Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is making a reference to French
atrocities in Algeria, he has a reason to.
The Turkish prime minister was referring to the killing of Algerians
by French troops in the middle of the 20th century. But one might find
a more pathetic picture from the early days of French occupation in
Algeria. According to an official French census report by the Service
de la Statistique Generale, the Algerian Muslim population in 1830
was about 3 million. The number declined to 2.6 million in 1845, to
2.307 million in 1856 and to 2.134 million in 1872. Did these people
emigrate? No. They were all massacred by invading French troops.
Algerians fought under the leadership of Abdul Qadir al-Jazairi until
1847. Then the revolt continued in the area of Kabylia until 1870.
Were these killings not genocide? Those Algerians who survived moved
to rural areas; Islam became a rural phenomenon and the French imported
European settlers to populate the cities.
In this context one should recall the earliest phase of the
French-Ottoman relationship -- a relationship that goes beyond the
first treaty between Francis I (1494-1597) and Suleyman the Magnificent
(1494-1566) in 1536. Under the treaty the Ottomans granted the French
privilege to conduct business in the prosperous Mediterranean region --
a privilege the British also sought but were denied. But the French
forgot this favor and invaded Egypt in 1798, violating the treaty. It
seems one also needs to remind the Algerian prime minister the excuse
France used to attack and occupy Algeria in 1830. In other words, the
Algerian prime minister should be rather careful in making statements,
particularly at a time when many Arab countries are experiencing
an awakening.
*Abdullah al-Ahsan is a professor of history and deputy dean at the
International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC)
at the International Islamic University of Malaysia.