In this episode of International Horizons, RBI’s director, John Torpey interviewed Laetitia Bucaille about the factors that explain variation in resentment and grievances in former colonies drawing from the cases of Algeria and South Africa. Bucaille delves deeper into the case of Algeria and the affected populations whose identities were crossed cut by institutions and personal experiences as a former colony. Moreover, she explains how Algeria, considered not a colony but a French territory, still implemented discriminating laws against native Algerians who were deemed as second-class citizens. Finally, the author discusses the long-lasting consequences of this decolonization process and how it gets intertwined with politics and anti-Islam narratives in France.

Transcript:

John Torpey  00:01

How do former combatants experience what they’ve done in cases of violent conflict? How do they think about their enemies? How does this differ in different kinds of conflicts? Welcome to International Horizons, a podcast of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies that brings scholarly and diplomatic expertise to bear on our understanding of a wide range of international issues. My name is John Torpey, and I’m director of the Ralph Bunche Institute at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. We’re fortunate to have with us today the Lætitia Bucaille, who is a a professor of political sociology at Institut National des Langues et des Civilisations Orientales, sometimes better known as INALCO, and also a member of the Institut Universitaire de France.  

John Torpey  00:56

She focuses on activists and combatants, mobilization, violence and post-violence situations, and has conducted fieldwork in Algeria, the Palestinian territories and South Africa. Her most recent book in English is called Forgiveness and Resentment, Post Conflict Algeria/France and South Africa. And it’s been published by the University of Pennsylvania Press in 2019. Thanks for being with us today, Lætitia Bucaille

Laetitia Bucaille  01:32

Hello, John, thank you for the invitation. 

John Torpey  01:34

Great to have you here. So this is a very interesting piece of work that continues work that you’ve been doing for a long time. Your book is being translated into English. It’s, you know, to me an unusual kind of subject for sociologists to tackle. You attempt in the book to analyze the post-war reconstructions developed by former fighters in apartheid-era South Africa and in war-torn Algeria in the context of the French-Algerian War. So maybe you could explain, to start with, what exactly you’re trying to do in the book?

Laetitia Bucaille  02:17

Well, yes, peace is often considered through political accords, international negotiations and peace treaties. But in fact, peace doesn’t happen only because local or international politicals have decided so. My question somehow is: what happens on the ground? How do people cope with the project of peace? Maybe they support it, but maybe they don’t support it, maybe they don’t agree with this project of peace? So the political resolution of a conflict is not necessarily followed by the pacification of society. 

Laetitia Bucaille  02:58

So to question the state of peace, I chose to focus on combatants, rather on ex-combatants. So this is a reflection on the combatants’ experience after the end of hostilities, and once there is a peace agreement. So through the narratives of individuals who have perpetrated violence, or will have been exposed to violence, through the account of the past and the standing of peace, the idea is to explore the processes of demobilization of mines–that’s the words of John Horn, historian who studied the Second World War, demobilization of mine–and and to try to see if there is or not an awakening of the culture of war. So these processes are supposed to lead to the full acceptance of the ex-enemy. You know, the question is, can the ex-enemy, can he become a partner? Maybe not a friend, maybe that’s going too far. But can you become a partner? Or at least, can you become a legitimate member of the political community? That would be peace among the individual level?

John Torpey  04:27

Some very interesting set of questions. I mean, but maybe you could talk a little bit about why you’ve chosen the particular cases that you’ve chosen. I mean, one is obviously French and has presumably a kind of natural interest for you as a French person, but you’ve also looked at South Africa. I mean, is there something particular about these two conflicts that made you want to choose them? 

Laetitia Bucaille  04:52

Well, actually,  the comparison was really striking. And when I’ve gone to Algeria for many years–I knew Algeria before I started this research. I went to South Africa for the first time in 2003. And I was really struck by the differences. Because when you talk to an Algerian or French activist, we took part in the war that happened now 60 years ago. Sometimes it’s really strange, because some of them, when you talk to them, you feel like the war has happened a few months ago; there is still a huge amount of anger of bitterness, people talk about it with a lot of emotion. Whereas when I went, when I did this fieldwork in South Africa in the years between 2003 and 2010, I was amazed by the fact that the conflict was not so far away. But the people would talk much more about forgiveness, reconciliation, and in a very calm way. I mean, this was, of course, imposed by the political elites, this talk about reconciliation. But, you know, most people would embrace it, would they really believe in it, it’s difficult to say. 

Laetitia Bucaille  06:33

But that was really striking to see this difference. Because, you might think that time would appease, think that people learn with time to cope with the difficulties of past. While with France and Algeria, the subject is still very emotional. South Africa and Algeria are almost opposite cases. It’s interesting, because the FLN (Front de libération nationale) and the South African ANC, (African National Congress), had some connections. The FLN was an example for the ANC how they liberated from colonialism, right? So there are these connections between the two movements. But the scenarios were very, very different. Because in South Africa, the theme of reconciliation has been preeminent, at least during the Mandela years. And it shaped the society and it shaped the common narratives. Whereas in Algeria, the victory of decolonialism was the thing, still the big thing. 

Laetitia Bucaille  08:07

In South Africa, the ANC made room for the ex-adversaries, in the political community. I mean, the Afrikaners, the political parties representing the Afrikaners, were in the arena, they were in Parliament, they were partners. And the government, the new government in South Africa, paid little to the ex-combatants from the ANC, for the contribution to the struggle. 

Laetitia Bucaille  08:40

In Algeria, it’s completely different. The ex-adversary has vanished from the political community because there are not more French citizens in Algeria, most of the Pied-Noirs–what we call the Pied-Noirs, the Europeans who lived in Algeria–left Algeria, enormous majority left Algeria. So somehow the Algerians were between themselves and the government. The FLN chose to cherish, to pay tribute to the veterans of the FLN. The ex-combatants have been elevated to the rank of heroes, and they’ve received generous rewards thanks to the oil rent. So until now, I mean the ex-combatants have, you know, sometimes they’re not even called the ex-combatants, they are still seen as combatants are rewarded for their contribution to the war. And it’s still a source of legitimacy to have fought against colonialism and to be still mobilized against new forms of colonialism, French colonialism.

John Torpey  10:24

Right I mean, wouldn’t you say that they’re in certain respects, fundamentally different kinds of conflicts? I mean, the South African conflict was internal, basically. I mean, MK [the paramilitary wing of the African National Congress] was often located outside the borders of South Africa. But essentially, it was a kind of internal struggle that, I’m not sure I would really ever call a war, whereas the French Algerian story was one of, you know, a violent attempt to hold on to a colonial possession. And, so in that sense, they’re very different kinds of conflicts.

Laetitia Bucaille  11:04

Well, but you know, Algeria, they were part of France, they were de facto; they were inside the French Republic. And officially, it was the case, it was part of France, there were “departments”. There were three “departments” of France. And, it was not expected that the Europeans from Algeria, the Pied-Noirs, would leave massively Algeria. That’s the big difference, actually, between France, and between Algeria and South Africa. 

Laetitia Bucaille  11:46

In South Africa, because the settlers came few centuries ago. They didn’t have any connection anymore with Holland or with other European countries. In France, in Algeria, it was a bit different the settlers came during the 19th century. But you know, most of these Pied-Noirs, when they came to France, in 1962, it was the first visit to France; they’ve never had been in France, because they came from Italy, from Spain, from France, and some of them were three generations of four generations of people. I mean, the FLN and the ANC made total different choices. But at the time of Frantz Fanon, it was kind of legitimate, it was the spirit of the time to get rid of the colonists and to send them back home. At the time of the ANC violence or you know, the relation this very conflictual relationship between the colonizer and the colonized was completely different; violence was not so legitimate in the 80s or in the 90s. So, the ANC made total different choice.

Laetitia Bucaille  13:06

But what is very interesting is that there is this ideological level, where Algeria has a very strong discourse against colonialism. And in South Africa, there is this discourse about forgiveness. But what is interesting is that on an individual level, on the intimate level, people have different really opposite practices. Because in South Africa, if you go to South Africa, of course, the relationships between Blacks and Whites are very different from what it was during the apartheid era. But there are still huge gaps separating Blacks and Whites. And there is still reluctance to mix with each other. I mean, you know, people tend to stay inside the community even if they are, of course, relationships, at workplaces, at schools and so on, but people tend to stay inside the community and to have a limited practice of the multicultural society. 

Laetitia Bucaille  14:19

What is interesting is that in Algeria and France even if there is this very strong ideological belief about colonialism, fight against colonialism so on, Algerians are very –some of them kept relationships with French people with the Pied-Noirs –and they are very keen sometimes to preserve this relationship, to have encounters with Pied-Noirs. And these encounters revealed the existence of a connection, or at least desire for connection that has survived the war and the subsequent separation of these two people. There is some kind of on both sides, of course. It’s more common among Pied-Noirs, among French who live in Algeria, than among the Algerians, because the Algerians were exposed to connection with the Europeans, of course, were heroes, it was only the people who lived in the big cities like Algiers, Oran and some other places. So it was a limited number of Algerians. But those who had interactions with Pied-Noirs, there is as well on the site a kind of nostalgie, and a desire to connect or to reconnect with these people used to leave Algeria.

John Torpey  15:57

I mean, this is all very interesting. To put it briefly, it seems to me there two things going on. One is that, you’re basically saying that Algeria was a part of France for the continental or metropolitan French in a way that I did simply not appreciate. And so that separation was more unnatural for those Algerian populations, whether European or native-born Algerian. So that’s something I think we should expand on a little bit. For example, I don’t remember exactly when did France incorporate, or take over Algeria? And when did it become part of France, as a whole? 

John Torpey  16:51

And then the other question is about the importance of the ideas of forgiveness and reconciliation in South Africa, which sounds to me like a kind of ringing endorsement of the TRC, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, as an effort to bring these populations to a new kind of self understanding of post-apartheid, self understanding the multicultural self-understanding that you were talking about. And the TRC didn’t always get the highest marks, I think, at the time, but what you’re saying, it seems to me is it actually made a huge difference in South Africa’s ability to move forward. But anyway, let’s maybe start with this question about Algeria. And, when it became part of France, and the extent to which people in Metropolitan France or Continental France (or whatever we should call it) actually thought of it as part of France.

Laetitia Bucaille  17:55

Well, Algeria was conquered during the 19th century, in 1830. And in the late 19th century, it became part of France as an incorporated as department, of course, even if it was part of the French Republic, the Republican law was not applied completely in Algeria, there were differences of treatment between French citizens and Algerian population, who had the French nationality. But at the same time, didn’t have the full citizenship. So it was a dual citizenship regime. You know, like, they had to go to war; they participated in different in the First World War and the Second World War, but at the same time, when they demobilized, they had a package that was half the one that was given to the French citizens. 

Laetitia Bucaille  19:31

So, yes, the idea about what the French from Algeria believed, and some Algerians will believe that was the same. Algeria was French. Algeria was part of France that was as simple as that. So, that’s why we often compare the Algerian War, the similarity it had to France with the Vietnam War, the significance it had in the United States. It’s true that there are a lot of similarities, you know. But the difference, I mean, somehow the Algerian War is more important to France, because it was not only French people going to war in Algeria, it was as well a colony of friends and the connections were very strong. Because at the end of the Algerian War, when Algeria became independent in 1962, about one people, French people, European people from Algeria, came to France. And I’m saying came because sometimes we say, come back, but it was not coming back, it was going to France. And for many of them, it was the first time they went to France. So they had to start a new life to that. So that’s why the Algerian question is still a subject of controversy in France, and fuels a lot of emotion.

Laetitia Bucaille  21:30

Because of the war, because of the practices of torture especially, continues to be one of the heated questions. Some people are still trying to defend the honor of the army and consider that torture was either unnecessary or a very residual practice–so it’s just a mistake of a few people. Others consider that it was the main fault of the French Republic. And at the time, some authors describe the Algerian War, even as a civil war in France, because there was a huge split among the generation of the resistance was really dominant in these years in France. The people who had resisted Nazi Germany during the second world war, they were in power, they had huge positions, some of them stand with the idea that Algeria should stay in France. It would be like Pied-Noirs, it would be like, renouncement to accept the idea that Algeria would separate with France. And the other part of the resistance said that it was a scandal that the French army, the French would practice torture, like the Nazis practiced torture against the resistance. That French was now practicing torture in Algeria was a big shock to them. 

Laetitia Bucaille  23:06

So there was a huge split among this generation of resistance. And it was really divided. So it was the question of the conduct of war, but it was as well, the question of the colonial system, okay. And at the time, of course, there were already people denouncing the colonial system pointing the injustice, the brutality of the colonial system, but now, it’s still a debate. 

Laetitia Bucaille  23:44

And those nostalgic for the French Algeria are still talking about the advantages of colonization; the good things that colonization would have brought. I mean, this is still talked in France. And somehow the failures of independent Algeria, the fact that it plunged into civil war rendered this. And these opinions about the good thing about colonization were accepted by the French public opinion more easily because of this difficulties that Algeria went through. The nostalgic for French Algeria made themselves hurt in the 90s in the year 2000. And still try to convince, or try to impose the views about the good aspects of colonization. Of course, this is a debate, and this is not necessarily the common opinion in France, but, you know, there is still talk about that.

John Torpey  25:15

How do the people in Algeria feel about this sort of idea?

Laetitia Bucaille  25:19

Well, somehow this is a big gift given to the political elite to the political regime, because it gives them approval, it gives them signs that the colonization mind is still on. So they can still defend the regime saying, “we have to fight against colonialism, colonialism is still here. So we need to preserve the heritage of the revolution.” And you know, Bouteflika, the former president of Algeria, who was regarded as the one who ended the civil war in Algeria, he used a lot of rhetoric against France. And that would mobilize the Algerian opinion against France. And that would be something that you need; the Algerians among themselves, because they still have this enemy. If the enemy is still here, then maybe they shouldn’t fight against each other, but they should be careful about these attitudes, these colonialist attitudes, attempts to have this desire of colonizing the world and Algeria.

John Torpey  26:51

Right. So, you know, I don’t know France certainly anywhere nearly as well as you do. But when I’m there, it does, it always struck me that the Algerian War is an issue, is a thing. And that still kind of haunts the country and has the kinds of political consequences that you’ve been describing. And I guess, a question, you know, propose the fact that the other case was South Africa, and that that seems to have worked out relatively well, at least in terms of the people getting getting along with each other, not in terms of resolving economic disparities, which obviously persist in big ways. But I guess the question is there some kind of process that you could imagine France going through that would help it get past this unpleasant past or this problematic past? I mean, is that something that people have talked about have suggested should happen? Or does it just play out in the media and in books that people write?

Laetitia Bucaille  28:03

Well, there have been several attempts. Emmanuel Macron took some positions about the past. Benjamin Stora was one of the many historians about the Algerian War, and the Algerian-French past, to write a report about the past. So this report was published last year. And, you know, there were a lot of reactions, comments. And it was decided that there would be a shared commission of historians, French and Algerian historians, working together. So there is this commission, but Algeria is very slow to go to on this process. Algeria sometimes asked for apology excuses from France, but what is good Algeria is to ask for this apology but without obtaining it. Otherwise, they cannot play with it anymore somehow. But Macron did several things. But the difficult thing is that there are two aspects with reconciliation with the Algerian War. Do you want to reconcile the French people among themselves about the Algerian war? That is one thing. You know, the Pied-Noir, the Harkis–the Algerian people who fought with the French against the FLN, and some of them came to France. So they are the Pied-Noirs; they are the Harkis. 

Laetitia Bucaille  29:53

They are the veterans from the French army, the people who did the military service, and there is the immigrants of the descendants of immigrants from Algeria. So they are different categories. And each time a president take a state maybe is, is contenting some of these people, but other people are unhappy, but what he did. So there is reconciliation among French people, and then there is reconciliation between French and Algerian. So, and somehow these two goals are a bit contradictory. So, it’s not easy to conduct the two processes together. And Macron did apologize for –there is this French mathematician was abducted by the French army, he was part of the Communist Party, he was abducted and he was killed by the French, His body was never found, and 60 years after that happened, Macron acknowledged that there was that it was the responsibility of the French state in this abduction and in this murder. So and he apologized for that, and he made, as well, a speech in direction of the Harkis to apologize for the attitude of the French state towards them. Because not only were they sometimes abundant in Algeria, but when they came to France, they were placed in camps, and they were treated as second class citizens. So, but at the same time, Macron doesn’t want to go too far, and he doesn’t want for example, he already made it clear that it would not apologize to Algeria. And what he says is that what is important is not to say “I’m sorry,” but to acknowledge the past and to look for the truth, and he said that the historians have to work and to deliver the truth about the past.

John Torpey  32:37

I mean, this raises for me one final question that I guess I’d like to ask, and, it is about this work. It fits into some of the work, it seems to me, that’s been going on for the last 20 years, I guess, on collective memory, and on the ways in which the past impinges upon the present. And it strikes me that this is a very different kind of history than, say, Britain’s relationship with its colonies and its colonial past. It’s much more about a very specific conflict that was in certain senses internal to France about a territory that was really, that was independent until 150 years ago or whatever exactly it was. And so, I mean does it seem to you that this kind of problem of dealing with the past is more prevalent today than it used to be? Or is this something that comes along whenever these kinds of conflicts take place and have to be wound down and, resolved in a certain sense? I mean, is there anything particularly unique about the French story with regard to Algeria?

Laetitia Bucaille  34:03

Well, somehow it’s unique, because the relations are still very strong, between the two countries, because there is immigration, because there is this population of Pied-Noirs, which is 1 million people and the descendants, because they are the Harkis. And because it’s on both sides, the ex-adversary on the other is a bit of an obsession. And so, I think we are in an era as well, where everybody is allowed, or is encouraged to talk about his own personal wants and feelings.

Laetitia Bucaille  34:52

So of course, there is room now for people to talk about the pain of living country where you used to leave all the pain that it was to live in a colonial country where you were despised and maybe you went to school with the Europeans, but you were not you were regarded as a different person. And, I would say that what happens is Algeria is still concerns, you know, is still a matter of interest for a lot of people. It’s a foreign country, but it’s a closed foreign country where there is a lot of common history. And, of course, there is a lot of things going on as well with debate about racism, discrimination, Islam, the danger of Islamism, and so on. And, you know, Algeria, is connected to these things. So sometimes there is a big kind of blending of all these issues that are connected, but are, of course, very different. So the fantasy about Islam about what is a good Muslim, if you discriminate people or not. There is as well talks from descendants of Algerians who say that discrimination in France is the same discrimination that happened during the colonial Algeria. There was this movement that was created in 2005, which is called “Les Indigenes de la Republique”: Republic Indigenous, meaning that the Arab population is still treated as second class citizens, like they were during the colonial era. I mean, of course, there is discrimination, racism in France going on. But it’s very different from what happened during the colonial era, where during the colonial era, there were there were laws that were defining the system of discrimination. I mean, even if there is racism today, in France, the law is not against minority groups, and they can fight against racism, with the law. So that’s a huge difference, of course.

John Torpey  37:50

Fascinating. I’m afraid we’ve run out of time, but incredibly interesting overview of what’s happened in France around the Algerian War and parallel developments in South Africa after the end of apartheid. So I hope everybody will rush out and get your latest book or the one that you’re in the process of getting published in English. 

John Torpey  38:19

I want to thank Laetitia Bucaille for sharing her insights about the conflicts in French Algeria and in apartheid South Africa and after, look for us on the New Books Network, and remember to subscribe and rate International Horizons on Spotify and Apple podcasts. I want to thank Oswaldo Mena Aguilar for his technical assistance as well as to acknowledge Duncan Mackay for sharing his song “International Horizons” as the theme music for the show. This is John Torpey, saying, thanks for joining us and we look forward to having you with us for the next episode of International Horizons.