American Interference
When invited to express his opinion in the forum of the El Khabar daily paper, the U.S. ambassador to Algeria, Mr. Henry S. Ensher, stated that the American government will be ready to play the role of mediator between Algeria and Morocco as they resolve their conflicts, “if both parties consent.”* According to him, the United States is supporting all efforts aimed at reopening the borders between Algeria and Morocco and at resolving the conflicts that characterize the relationship between the two countries.
In reference to the upcoming elections in Algeria, the U.S. ambassador thinks that “the new parties, which have made their agreement, don't have enough time to get to know each other and to get to know their projects and programs.”* So, not content to reveal to the public his country's position on the border problem between Algeria and Morocco, the diplomat allows himself to candidly deliver an assessment of the next elections. He pushes the envelope even further by suggesting that some Algerians support Islamist ideas, “which is normal, since they share the same society and the same country and since they make up a part of society.”*
It's not so much the content of these statements that poses a problem, but rather their air of interference in the internal affairs of our country. Is the ambassador unaware that he is obligated to perform his diplomatic duties by the book? Is he aware of the impact of his words in the very country where he officially works when he suggests that “only field results”* will allow us to know if the reforms currently in progress are positive or negative?
These seemingly innocuous statements are the obvious expression of interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign country and should provoke official protests from Medelci [the Algerian minister of foreign affairs]. After the statements concerning the eventual rise of an Islamist power by Xavier Driencourt, the French ambassador to Algeria, during a recent encounter with the press, which are similar to those made by the American ambassador, it seems that the representatives of these two powers are becoming more and more at ease here, to the point of departing from the established rules of bilateral relations.
The maneuver is probably paving the way for a change that will bring about an Algeria Islamized, following the example of other countries in the region, and subject to Gulf monarchies, the immense democratic nature of which is a secret to no one, in the best interest of Westerners. For them, an exceptional Algeria is a messy Algeria. This is why the ambassadors don't hesitate to overstep their boundaries on the eve of a crucial election. It is nevertheless true, as Mr. Henry S. Ensher states himself, that “Americans know little about Algeria.”*
*Editor's note: These quotes, while translated accurately, could not be verified in English.
In reference to the upcoming elections in Algeria, the U.S. ambassador thinks that “the new parties, which have made their agreement, don't have enough time to get to know each other and to get to know their projects and programs.”* So, not content to reveal to the public his country's position on the border problem between Algeria and Morocco, the diplomat allows himself to candidly deliver an assessment of the next elections. He pushes the envelope even further by suggesting that some Algerians support Islamist ideas, “which is normal, since they share the same society and the same country and since they make up a part of society.”*
It's not so much the content of these statements that poses a problem, but rather their air of interference in the internal affairs of our country. Is the ambassador unaware that he is obligated to perform his diplomatic duties by the book? Is he aware of the impact of his words in the very country where he officially works when he suggests that “only field results”* will allow us to know if the reforms currently in progress are positive or negative?
These seemingly innocuous statements are the obvious expression of interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign country and should provoke official protests from Medelci [the Algerian minister of foreign affairs]. After the statements concerning the eventual rise of an Islamist power by Xavier Driencourt, the French ambassador to Algeria, during a recent encounter with the press, which are similar to those made by the American ambassador, it seems that the representatives of these two powers are becoming more and more at ease here, to the point of departing from the established rules of bilateral relations.
The maneuver is probably paving the way for a change that will bring about an Algeria Islamized, following the example of other countries in the region, and subject to Gulf monarchies, the immense democratic nature of which is a secret to no one, in the best interest of Westerners. For them, an exceptional Algeria is a messy Algeria. This is why the ambassadors don't hesitate to overstep their boundaries on the eve of a crucial election. It is nevertheless true, as Mr. Henry S. Ensher states himself, that “Americans know little about Algeria.”*
*Editor's note: These quotes, while translated accurately, could not be verified in English.