Today we all look back at WWII as a huge lesson in life. Hitler was an evil dictator whop took away some of the most basic human rights from innocent people. It’s common place in our culture. We have all grown up with the horrifying images constantly pounding into our heads. To us it seems so common place. So how can people ignore what atrocities happened in Europe? You would think that for those who lived through the destruction and pain, they would have a first hand experience on why and how not to repeat the past. Then why?
After the end of WWII, France regained control of their colony in North Africa: Algeria. But as France celebrated the end of a rough, long war, Algerians (not French Algerians) began to protest for their own Independence. But France, fresh off of getting a chance to have power, refused. France would continue to keep a hold on their “empire” until the Vietnamese conflict. Once France lost Vietnam, Algeria made a push to fight for their independence. But France wasn’t about to loose two colonies, not that fast.
As the French tried to take control of the colony, they were faced with the National Liberation Front ( or the Front de Libération Nationale, FLN in French). This force would lead the Guerrilla fighting that would make the biggest impact in cities like Algiers. Algiers itself saw the beginning of what would be the biggest stain on this tattered cloth. As the French began to lose more and more control, extreme measures were implemented.
Since the FLN had no uniform or no home base or no military hiarchy, the French found it difficult to combat their forces. Attacks would be spuratik. Soliders could never fully identify their enemy nor could any witnesses. So the French took on the strategy of torture to get information on FLN operatives. The military had full authority to execute these horendous acts on whoever they saw fit. Eventually, the methods would work and the French would gain control of the city. but all with many costs.
Thousands of Algerians were left withy physical, or mental, scares or died from the torture. After reading about this, I asked myself how could the soldiers do this and how could the country do this?
For the “justification” of the soliders, all I could explain would be that they were simply following orders. The mission had to be completed and they were given full reign on how to finish it. But even with orders being given, how could someone reach that point? How could they not question the morality of their orders?
Battle of Algiers
I like how you bring up how we look back at WWII and think, “wow, we should really not repeat the past.” I would like to bring up the fact that France tried to assimilate the people in Algeria and Senegal, and today, France focuses on assimilating their immigrants in France. You would think that French politicians would look to the past and realize that this policy did not really work out for them. However, I suppose since France is not a colonial holding, the people can dictate how they want their society to function, and what policies are best for them. Personally, I see a huge problem in trying to control people on the basis of culture and values.
I wonder if the tactics of the Algerian members of the FLN helped their cause more, or hurt their people more. As you mentioned, the FLN did not wear uniforms and worked in secret. The French had to torture information out of members. But sometimes the French were not torturing members, and instead were hurting innocent bystanders. It was impossible for them to know. In the film, The Battle of the Algiers, one Algerian man shoots a French police officer and runs away. Fellow policemen search for the culprit and arrest an old Algerian man who just happened to be walking down the street. I wonder if killing the police officer was enough of a “reward” to the FLN member for essentially giving up an innocent Algerian.
I really like the comparisons and parallels that you draw attention to. I also thought the distinction between a people or populous and their respective governments was interesting and probably not done enough when looking back on historical events and movements. Overall, great post.
I really liked your blog post and the questions you raised. It seems that we can look back through history and see examples of a lot of these atrocities. How could a country such as France practice these types of authoritarian acts after just being part of the winning side against the very same type of authoritarian regime? I like that you bring up the notion that the soldiers excuses we that they “were just following orders” as well, because that seems to be a very easy to-go-to and blanket type of excuse. We can see it in accounts from Nazi deathcamp workers and Japanese soldiers in Nanjing just for other examples.
After WW2, with the Nuremberg trials and principles fresh in the mind of the world, there was little merit to the excuse of “following orders” as low-ranking Nazis used this defense and it was struck down. It seems that this type of action (torture), regardless of context, would have stopped people from blindly following orders of superiors, but the military culture in France must not have evolved so early.
I think there are parallels to the US actions in Iraq and Afghanistan concerning the treatment of prisoners in Abu Ghraib Prison and Guantanamo Bay. Is it likely that torture is an effective method of getting information? Maybe. Is there an effect on the population in the area that has citizens being tortured? Likely yes, it makes them less likely to support the organization or group that is doing the torturing. In that case, then it is likely that torture might help in the short term in gathering information but distracts and damages the mission in the long term.