WI European minority of Algeria unilateral declaration of independance in 1961 ?

What would have been the outcome of a secession of the european minority in Algeria in 1961, with the active help of some french military (General Salan, Massu, Bigeard) that were in Algeria to fight the algerian's FLN ?

Could we have a kind of Rhodesia or South-Africa in Maghreb, this time with a french-european minority who continue to rule politically and economically upon the muslim arabo-berber majority ?
 
Last edited:
They have no industry, rely on native workforce in the farms, and many of the settlers wouldn't support a move that woulde effectively cut them from France.

THe secessionnists would battle the FLN's guerilla, and would have to protect the vast coastline against a French action. A losing proposition IMHO.
 
The settlers alone couldn't possibly hold Algeria; they needed the active help of the French military.

The French military could hold Algeria -- but they'd need the consent of the French government. That means either a civilian government that's willing to pay for a long war and indefinite occupation, or a government installed by a military coup. Which they kinda sorta did in 1958 -- though that was not so much a coup as a very convincing threat of one. The result was DeGaulle, which in retrospect was a lucky break for France, at least WRT Algeria.

Incidentally, insofar as the OAS had a strategic goal, this was it. Completely unrealistic, and led to nothing but bloodshed, horror, and making a bad situation much worse.


Doug M.
 
It has actually been envisionned by either proeminent Gaullists (namely Alain Peyrefitte) and OAS members, who even discussed it, AFAIK, with moderates from the provisional Algerian Government in mid-1962, before the Pied-Noir exodus.

The idea, born after the failure of the 1961 putsch, was to "Israelise" not all of Algeria, but the Oranais zone (Oran being a city with a European majority). The Pieds-Noirs and Algerian Jews (who were French citizens by law, unlike the Muslims), were to gather in the Oran-Tlemcen-Sidi-Bel-Abbès zone, esure they would have a demographic majority, and organise themselves as a European stronghold, either within France proper (it was Peyrefitte's idea) or, more probably after a solid majority in France favored Algerian independance, as an independant country.

Actually, Oran was a rather industrialized zone (less that Algiers, arguably) and one of the more prosperous agricultural area in Algeria and, economically, the idea was not totally stupid. I also suppose that the leaders of the Oranian solution would have been reinforced by rebel officers, either condemned or ousted from the French army after the Putsch, and some right-wing radicals from France (and maby a few French colonists from Subsaharian Africa). Oh, and Harkis, too.

This said, a White rump Algeria would probably survive only for a few years, and probably not after 1975.

The country is bound to maintain a large, standing army to protect itself from a probably very hostile Algeria, from Muslim dissent within the country (assuming, of course, The Oranais didn't expelled, or worse, non-loyaist Muslims). Relations with France will be horrible. I'm pretty sure that the Oranais would back every Anti-Gaullist terroist organisation in France proper, and France, shifting to the 1960's industrial and European policies, would do everthing to distance from people who would be as popular ad the radical Afrikaners in South Africa. The Oranais would have no support from the Socialist Bloc (duh), but, aside from ultra-conservative circles, I doubt the US would do anything favorable to a colonialist regime who would arguably be a troublesome element for Western strategy in the Middle East and the Mediterranean. The only help the Oranais could hope for would come from Francoist Spain, Portugal, South Africa and probably Israel (and maybe military dictaroships in Greece and latin America). Marocco, having very bad relations with algeria, might be a favourable neutral.

However, deprived from real economic perspectives, being a pariah state with, I suppose, few democratic features, under the permanent pressure of hostile neighbors and without any real, powerful ally to balance it (not to mention any legitimacy), especially after the Carnation Revolution in Portugal and Franco's death in Spain, I guess the country would collapse. You would have, either a transitional French mandate to set everything ready for retrocession to Algeria, or a violent collapse, the Oranais fleeing either to Isreal (for the Jewish population), Spain, maybe South Africa. I doubt many would reach France, given the hostiliy between the two countries.
 
Actually that would be interesting, if an Oranist stat collapesed in the mid 70`s. The impact of those Europeans on SA.
 

abc123

Banned
The settlers alone couldn't possibly hold Algeria; they needed the active help of the French military.

The French military could hold Algeria -- but they'd need the consent of the French government. That means either a civilian government that's willing to pay for a long war and indefinite occupation, or a government installed by a military coup.
Doug M.


I agree completely.
;)
 

abc123

Banned
It has actually been envisionned by either proeminent Gaullists (namely Alain Peyrefitte) and OAS members, who even discussed it, AFAIK, with moderates from the provisional Algerian Government in mid-1962, before the Pied-Noir exodus.

The idea, born after the failure of the 1961 putsch, was to "Israelise" not all of Algeria, but the Oranais zone (Oran being a city with a European majority). The Pieds-Noirs and Algerian Jews (who were French citizens by law, unlike the Muslims), were to gather in the Oran-Tlemcen-Sidi-Bel-Abbès zone, esure they would have a demographic majority, and organise themselves as a European stronghold, either within France proper (it was Peyrefitte's idea) or, more probably after a solid majority in France favored Algerian independance, as an independant country.


Well, that would be a pretty intresting solution.
BUT, not feasible without active help of France.
;)
 
Incidentally, insofar as the OAS had a strategic goal, this was it. Completely unrealistic, and led to nothing but bloodshed, horror, and making a bad situation much worse.


Doug M.

Out of curiosity, which was, exactly, the goal the OAS had?

EDIT: I hadn't seen the thread you had started. That's clear enough. Thanks.
 
Well, that would be a pretty intresting solution.
BUT, not feasible without active help of France.
;)

You're 90 % right. However, I think a OAS-Oranist strategy would have worked with France's neutrality if the FLN leadership had been seized earlier by the Border army, say in 1962 (the outer resistance army based in Tunisia and Marocco ; they historically got rid of the more liberal elemnts of the FLN in favour of Ben Bella, then seized power for themselves, with Boumediene and the military-Arab socialist regime of the 1970's). The colonists might take avantage of the inner FLN stifes to ensure their control on the Oranais and try to make a deal with the victorious FLN faction. This requires, however, a non-Gaullist power in Paris, with a benevolent neutraliy, of active support by a major power.

Another way, probably less ASB, would be that the Oranais solution is, first, implemented by the French government, then discarded under internatinal pressure, discontent from the Metropolitan public opinion and economic cost of such a stronghold. The radical elements in Oran try (again) to force a change in Paris, fail, and declare their independance, in late 1962 or 1963.
 
One problem: Oran could not be made secure without some combination of a massively militarized garrison/security state and/or ethnically cleansing the large Arab minority.

The economic difficulties would also be nontrivial.


Doug M.
 
One problem: Oran could not be made secure without some combination of a massively militarized garrison/security state and/or ethnically cleansing the large Arab minority.

The economic difficulties would also be nontrivial.

How difficult, compared to, say, Israel?
 
Israel has the US, who do the Pieds-Noirs have?

Lesser powers, as I said before : Iberian dictatorships, South Africa, maybe Israel and Taiwan. One of the best assets would be the Mers-El-Kebir naval base, but I can't see France, or the US for that matter, rent it in exgance of military support to an Oranian Republic (although I guess they would have called it République d'Algérie Française, or something like that).

I don't think the real difference with Israel lies with economic potential (Oran was, as I said, quite industrialised) or even military organisation. Unlike Israel, however, Oran just can't get the sympathy of powerful nations and has no real strategic value to bargain.
 
I don't think the real difference with Israel lies with economic potential (Oran was, as I said, quite industrialised) or even military organisation.

One, the maximum settler population -- assuming all settlers move to Oran Libre and stay there, which seems unlikely -- is about half the contemporary Jewish population of Israel.

Two, while the contemporary Arab population in Israel was around 12%, in Oran it would be -- depending on where the boundaries were drawn -- between 30% and 50%.

Three, while Oran proper was industrialized, it was doing things like agroprocessing and light industry -- turning Algerian cotton, corn and tobacco into textiles, canned foods and cigarettes. These light industries tended to be labor-intensive, and so relied on a supply of cheap Arab labor. So that gives Oran Libre a nasty choice -- expel its Arab population and let its light industrial sector collapse, or keep them and deal with some very alarming security concerns. Google the Oran Massacre for just how bad this could get.

There was also some heavier industry: machinery, chemicals, cement and the like, and of course the rapidly growing oil sector. These didn't use so much cheap labor, so they didn't involve the security concerns of the light industrial sector. However, these industries were extremely dependent upon imports to keep running. And almost all the imports came from (and exports went to) France. Naturally enough; it was a colonial economy, non? But if France is hostile, pow, the entire industrial sector collapses. Given time, presumably it could be reconfigured to find different sources for raw materials and spare parts, and new export markets -- but Franco's Spain doesn't seem like a very good substitute as a trading partner.

So, it might perhaps look a little like Israel. But a smaller, poorer, meaner, dumber, more paranoid and much less secure Israel. One could reasonably ask why anyone would want to live there.


Doug M.
 
Top