5 ms·

Is there any analysis why there was major violent conflict in colonial Algeria with the French, but there was not as much in Tunisia.

csomar 1y ago
The US asked France to get out of Tunisia. Then they created the country.
- aspenmayer 1y ago
  Was this before or after the Vietnam War? I’m not that familiar with this part of history.
  - csomar 1y ago
    Way before. Also it is worth mentioning that the North African campaign liberated North Africa and Tunisia from the Germans. The idea that Tunisia got its independence from France is shallow. It was more like Turkish -> French -> German -> American -> New Republic.
- pier25 1y ago
  I grew up in Tunisia during the Ben Ali dictatorship in the 90s and the conpiracy theory floating around is he was a CIA trained asset.
School-Cotton 1y ago
Probably just because Algeria was a way bigger deal to France than Tunisia was. It was considered an integral part of France (whereas Tunisia never was) and around a million ethnically French people lived there. Which would the US have fought harder to keep: Hawaii, or the Marshall Islands?
jcranmer 1y ago
The article mentions this briefly, but Tunisia just wasn't as important to the French as Algeria was. To France, Algeria (at least the populated northern coast of it) wasn't a colony, it was Metropolitan France--it received full representation in the French legislature, for example. (Note that this was in practice limited to the French settlers in Algeria, as the natives were largely excluded from civic participation--not unlike the apartheid system in South Africa). Given that native populations weren't particularly well-treated, especially after their lot failed to improve despite being the major backbone of the Free French Army in WW2, it's not much of a surprise that they resented French rule and chose to become independent. And quite like the settler colonies of other countries in Africa, the settler minority who held power in Algeria weren't particularly inclined to give it up to the majority they largely felt beneath them. And since it was a severe insult to national pride to let a core part of France become independent, the French government resisted to the point that it literally broke the government (the Fourth Republic fell because of it, leading to the Fifth Republic).
- xwolfi 1y ago
  Well it has to do also with the European population in Algeria. Ofc Algeria was more precious to us in terms of resources, sheer size etc, but it was also home to millions of Europeans and extremely expensive to abandon or resettle them - a bit like if all the former countries of the Israelis citizens had to take them back today if Israel were to be taken back by its native original inhabitants: a complete nightmare nobody would support and we'd rather move along and let it be a bit of a mess rather than bring the mess back home. That was at least the feeling at the time, and we still had to do it, and it is to this day a complete mess of people brought back who don't feel French and aren't Algerians really. We'll pay for it for many decades until it finally disappear, like every subgroup that got "imported" in France and had to merge painfully since France started. Tunisia in contrast, we really didn't care all that much, there was no cost giving it back and we lost nothing. And fast forward 70 years, we probably actually saved tons of money doing so, so we're all good. Note that if you talk people to people, it now seems to be in the past, Algerians are proud to be Algerians, French are ashamed to have damage the country so much for so long, and we try to be good friends. I've never met an hostile Algerian, as in a recent immigrant. I've met many hostile 3rd generation immigrants from Algeria whose grandparents fled back to France, and they still have trouble accepting that uprooting. There seems to be nothing to do except wait and smile and tell them it's gonna be ok, with a glass of wine and bit of saucisson.
  - mytailorisrich 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - Spooky23 1y ago
      When you say “French had to flee”, you mean European settlers. Your question is the answer.
      - mytailorisrich 1y ago
        [flagged]
mytailorisrich 1y ago
Algeria wasn't considered a colony. It was annexed in 1848 and as such a fullblown part of France, and it saw large European settlement but with a segregated/apartheid system. Independence was therefore a very nasty and bloody affair on both sides that ended with all the Europeans having to live with nothing effectively on pain of death (114 years after Algeria had been annexed so enough time to create deep feelings). The French invasion of Algeria has always seemed unique and odd to me: Annexing an Arab territory especially while denying equal rights to the "indigenous" population (the term that was used) was a recipe for disaster and ultimately it proved untenable. In contrast Tunisia was only a protectorate after the French invaded from Algeria in 1881.
- natmaka 1y ago
  > The French invasion of Algeria has always seemed unique and odd to me It began with centuries of piracy and enslavement in the Mediterranean sea, leading to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars , which in turn led to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Algiers_(1816) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Algiers_(1816) . All this doesn't set a path for the invader to offer equal rights to the "indigenous" population.
  - mytailorisrich 1y ago
    All quite beside the point. A military action, even a colonial invasion, to "pacify" a place and to take control of it has little to do with a full annexation. The US did not make Afghanistan a State... And even among European colonial empires Algeria is quite unique. France had lost most of its Empire during the Revolution and Napoleonic period so was keen to rebuild one. France did not have a settled Canada or Australia, either, so perhaps this also played a role but it seems unrealistic to believe that trying that with an Arabic Muslim country could have ever worked.
    - natmaka 1y ago
      > "pacify" a place and to take control of it has little to do with a full annexation Indeed. No objective is intangible. Actions taken to reduce an aggressive enemy to inaction can lead to a promising discovery (in this case, that of what would become Algeria, which was then a rich agricultural and pleasant territory occupied by non-unified tribes) leading to a desire to seize it.

csomar 1y ago

The US asked France to get out of Tunisia. Then they created the country.

aspenmayer 1y ago
Was this before or after the Vietnam War? I’m not that familiar with this part of history.
- csomar 1y ago
  Way before. Also it is worth mentioning that the North African campaign liberated North Africa and Tunisia from the Germans. The idea that Tunisia got its independence from France is shallow. It was more like Turkish -> French -> German -> American -> New Republic.
pier25 1y ago
I grew up in Tunisia during the Ben Ali dictatorship in the 90s and the conpiracy theory floating around is he was a CIA trained asset.

School-Cotton 1y ago

Probably just because Algeria was a way bigger deal to France than Tunisia was. It was considered an integral part of France (whereas Tunisia never was) and around a million ethnically French people lived there. Which would the US have fought harder to keep: Hawaii, or the Marshall Islands?

jcranmer 1y ago

The article mentions this briefly, but Tunisia just wasn't as important to the French as Algeria was. To France, Algeria (at least the populated northern coast of it) wasn't a colony, it was Metropolitan France--it received full representation in the French legislature, for example. (Note that this was in practice limited to the French settlers in Algeria, as the natives were largely excluded from civic participation--not unlike the apartheid system in South Africa). Given that native populations weren't particularly well-treated, especially after their lot failed to improve despite being the major backbone of the Free French Army in WW2, it's not much of a surprise that they resented French rule and chose to become independent. And quite like the settler colonies of other countries in Africa, the settler minority who held power in Algeria weren't particularly inclined to give it up to the majority they largely felt beneath them. And since it was a severe insult to national pride to let a core part of France become independent, the French government resisted to the point that it literally broke the government (the Fourth Republic fell because of it, leading to the Fifth Republic).

xwolfi 1y ago
Well it has to do also with the European population in Algeria. Ofc Algeria was more precious to us in terms of resources, sheer size etc, but it was also home to millions of Europeans and extremely expensive to abandon or resettle them - a bit like if all the former countries of the Israelis citizens had to take them back today if Israel were to be taken back by its native original inhabitants: a complete nightmare nobody would support and we'd rather move along and let it be a bit of a mess rather than bring the mess back home. That was at least the feeling at the time, and we still had to do it, and it is to this day a complete mess of people brought back who don't feel French and aren't Algerians really. We'll pay for it for many decades until it finally disappear, like every subgroup that got "imported" in France and had to merge painfully since France started. Tunisia in contrast, we really didn't care all that much, there was no cost giving it back and we lost nothing. And fast forward 70 years, we probably actually saved tons of money doing so, so we're all good. Note that if you talk people to people, it now seems to be in the past, Algerians are proud to be Algerians, French are ashamed to have damage the country so much for so long, and we try to be good friends. I've never met an hostile Algerian, as in a recent immigrant. I've met many hostile 3rd generation immigrants from Algeria whose grandparents fled back to France, and they still have trouble accepting that uprooting. There seems to be nothing to do except wait and smile and tell them it's gonna be ok, with a glass of wine and bit of saucisson.
- mytailorisrich 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - Spooky23 1y ago
    When you say “French had to flee”, you mean European settlers. Your question is the answer.
    - mytailorisrich 1y ago
      [flagged]

mytailorisrich 1y ago

Algeria wasn't considered a colony. It was annexed in 1848 and as such a fullblown part of France, and it saw large European settlement but with a segregated/apartheid system. Independence was therefore a very nasty and bloody affair on both sides that ended with all the Europeans having to live with nothing effectively on pain of death (114 years after Algeria had been annexed so enough time to create deep feelings). The French invasion of Algeria has always seemed unique and odd to me: Annexing an Arab territory especially while denying equal rights to the "indigenous" population (the term that was used) was a recipe for disaster and ultimately it proved untenable. In contrast Tunisia was only a protectorate after the French invaded from Algeria in 1881.

natmaka 1y ago
> The French invasion of Algeria has always seemed unique and odd to me It began with centuries of piracy and enslavement in the Mediterranean sea, leading to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars , which in turn led to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Algiers_(1816) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Algiers_(1816) . All this doesn't set a path for the invader to offer equal rights to the "indigenous" population.
- mytailorisrich 1y ago
  All quite beside the point. A military action, even a colonial invasion, to "pacify" a place and to take control of it has little to do with a full annexation. The US did not make Afghanistan a State... And even among European colonial empires Algeria is quite unique. France had lost most of its Empire during the Revolution and Napoleonic period so was keen to rebuild one. France did not have a settled Canada or Australia, either, so perhaps this also played a role but it seems unrealistic to believe that trying that with an Arabic Muslim country could have ever worked.
  - natmaka 1y ago
    > "pacify" a place and to take control of it has little to do with a full annexation Indeed. No objective is intangible. Actions taken to reduce an aggressive enemy to inaction can lead to a promising discovery (in this case, that of what would become Algeria, which was then a rich agricultural and pleasant territory occupied by non-unified tribes) leading to a desire to seize it.