Confusion
Algeria did not keep quiet following its classification by the United States and France as among the countries posing a terror risk. However, Mourad Medelci’s department, the Algerian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, did not see it fit to publicize the Algerian reaction. The press, citing unofficial sources, did mention the meeting between the American ambassador and the Algerian government. On the other hand, it is only yesterday that the meeting with the French ambassador - on Jan. 5, before that of his American counterpart - was officially announced by Medelci in a radio address.
To withhold media coverage of a national reaction, to what Medelci describes as a “humiliation," is all but incomprehensible. Why should the discussions with the two ambassadors and the letter of protest by the Algerian chief diplomat be kept secret for nearly 10 days? Perhaps one first needs to realize the effect that these actions would produce in Paris and Washington before jumping full steam ahead into hostility. Medelci’s revelation yesterday means that, for Algeria, the time has come to go on the offensive and accept it publicly. It is true that, since then, Paris and Washington have felt very embarrassed by a blunder that is so difficult to defend: from the already vague concept of a risky country, they both moved on to the notion of “risky nationality," with all its hidden profiling implications. For, in reality, what assurances can Washington or Paris offer that no American or French national will ever highjack a plane, and that none will ever be recruited by Bin Laden himself?
If it does not cross the mind of the average Algerian to turn up his nose at such American or French determination to prevent or fight the terrorist threat, then we cannot and will not understand that our very Algerian character, in itself, is enough to make us potential disciples of Bin Laden. The same reasoning goes, incidentally, for Yemenites, Iraqis, and even Afghans and Iranians, and it is even more inept, immoral, and especially dangerous to cultivate the confusion between terrorism and the Algerian nationality.
To withhold media coverage of a national reaction, to what Medelci describes as a “humiliation," is all but incomprehensible. Why should the discussions with the two ambassadors and the letter of protest by the Algerian chief diplomat be kept secret for nearly 10 days? Perhaps one first needs to realize the effect that these actions would produce in Paris and Washington before jumping full steam ahead into hostility. Medelci’s revelation yesterday means that, for Algeria, the time has come to go on the offensive and accept it publicly. It is true that, since then, Paris and Washington have felt very embarrassed by a blunder that is so difficult to defend: from the already vague concept of a risky country, they both moved on to the notion of “risky nationality," with all its hidden profiling implications. For, in reality, what assurances can Washington or Paris offer that no American or French national will ever highjack a plane, and that none will ever be recruited by Bin Laden himself?
If it does not cross the mind of the average Algerian to turn up his nose at such American or French determination to prevent or fight the terrorist threat, then we cannot and will not understand that our very Algerian character, in itself, is enough to make us potential disciples of Bin Laden. The same reasoning goes, incidentally, for Yemenites, Iraqis, and even Afghans and Iranians, and it is even more inept, immoral, and especially dangerous to cultivate the confusion between terrorism and the Algerian nationality.
Previous article![]( "Iran is Ready for Enemy Aggression")
Next article![]( "Liberation From Slavery")
