The “Battle of Algiers” is a classic film that does a fantastic job portraying the conflict between pro-independence Algerians, and the French. This movie showcases dissent that escalates into a full-blown uprising. Furthermore, Richard Fogarty’s and Laura Ann Stoler’s works both analyze colonial interactions that help shed light into why the age of colonization fell, especially in France’s case. The French colonial empire collapsed because it failed to treat its subjects as equals, and in the end, no longer had the will to keep its colonial practices.

The Battle of Algiers is an Italian movie that portrays several events that occurred in Algiers during the Algerian War of Independence. Gillo Pontecorvo, the director of the film, showcases the growing escalation in tensions between the French and the local Algerians. One of the techniques he relies on to tell his story is showing the differences in the quality of life between the Casbah and the Port area that was populated by the French. The movie illustrates how the tension and societal interactions between the two groups lead to brawls, with police intervening and supporting the French civilians. Eventually, brawls turned into skirmishes with the police. The film does an excellent job showcasing the more controversial tactics used between both sides. The Algerian insurgency relied on women and children to avoid random searches, as well as targeted civilian locations such as cafes and clubs. The French military tortured individuals for information, used informants, and relied on shock tactics to overwhelm the insurgency. While the French army defeated the insurgency and wiped out its members, France lost in the grand strategic theater. The movie’s epilogue showcases a massive popular uprising with thousands of individuals marching for independence. At this point, Pontecorvo shows the audience that regardless the number of French tanks present, Algeria belonged to the Algerians. There are several scenes within the “Battle of Algiers” that show how France’s failure to treat its subjects as equals, led to disenfranchisement and a clamor for independence.

One of the first scenes within the movie already set the tone where the French treated the Algerians as second-class citizens (movie 9:07). The main character, who is Algerian, is gambling with other people and is then accused of committing a crime by an elderly French woman. He chooses to flee rather than explain himself because he understands that the policeman will not reason with him. A group of French students prevent him from escaping which creates a brawl. This scene shows the viewer how the Algerians and the French lived in two separate “spheres” while within one city.

Stoler addresses colonial concerns of “contamination” in her work. The scene painted in the movie is an example of the resulting quarantine set by colonial officials. The French feared “affective contamination” (Stoler, 113). Stoler argued that the French became concerned with the locals interacting with the Westerners. Even Dutch officials discouraged native nannies for children, and for Westerners to keep themselves. They believed that children were “dangerously at risk of entirely degenerating and later being unfit for learning and civilization because of how they are reared” (Stoler 117). As such, children have kept away from locals and were only taught Western disciplines. One can see the impact of this policy in “Battle of Algiers” where Westerners apparently presented an image of xenophobia toward the Algerians. Furthermore, one can see French perceptions and stereotyping affect their security posture when inspecting civilians during the period of martial law.

The French constantly underestimated the Algerian FLN, which contributed to France’s downfall. “…French officers made their judgments within the parameters of preexisting stereotypes based upon race.” (Fogarty, 57). While Fogarty referred to French treatment of Colonial troops, the sentiment remained even after the war. The French treated many of their colonial fighters as incompetent, and required French supervision. Even so, many of the fighters in the “Battle of Algiers” were survivors of World War II. As such, they were dogged and unconventional.

The “Battle of Algiers” showcases France’s overconfidence and the Algerian combat ability through hit and run attacks. In the movie, the Algerian insurgency conducted several hit and run attacks, as well as terror bombings. In one assault, the FLN attacked a police station, killing many French officers (Movie 26:10). The police were completely unprepared and surprised by FLN’s organization and tenacity. The police had to then rely on the military to combat the growing threat. As such, this scene provides an excellent example towards how France’s behavior and treatment of the Algerians turned into a significant disadvantage.

The métissage debate highlighted France’s inability to fulfill its promise to elevate all its citizens to a full French status. France questioned the citizenship of its “mixed” population. The métissage were people with one parent who was a local, and the other was a European. According to Stoler, the métissage were “a threat to white prestige, an embodiment of European degeneration and moral decay” (Stoler 80). Through this mentality and the accompanying behavior, the French alienated a significant portion of their Algerian population; those who might be willing to support French colonial rule. Instead, the FLN relied on the métis population to carry out many of their attacks.

France’s poor behavior and treatment of its métis population was exemplified as many chose to resist French control. For example, the FLN relied on their mixed race members to blend in with the French population. Individuals who “looked French” were able to circumvent the French military’s checkpoints. In the movie, one FLN agent was able to breach the security point just because she was dressed in nice Western attire, and looked French (movie 46:00). She then planted a bomb in a café, and managed to kill many. Had the French soldiers resisted profiling individuals and continued to check everyone equally, that bombing could have been prevented. The tactics used are considered controversial. But, a clear message was sent to France, the métissage do not support the Colonial government. As France slowly continued to lose the war of ideas, it resorted to brute force as the last thrust in asserting control over Algeria.

The French paratroopers’ reliance on inhumane tactics to overcome the enemy proved that they didn’t have an ethical issue, as they did not treat the Algerians as equals. The French military treated the FLN fighters more poorly than they treated their colonial troops. The French army did have a long and controversial history with working with colonial forces. Fogarty mentioned a spike of Algerian desertions from the French army during WWI (Fogarty, 61). The military has a long memory, and it is possible that these French paratroop forces knew, and considered the Algerians to be subhuman and cowardly. Once these soldiers viewed these men as traitors, it is much easier on the soldiers’ psyche to treat the enemy as less than “honorable” humans. As such, torture became a primary tool, and the paratroop regiment Colonel justified his actions to the media without any remorse.

The Colonel’s interview with the media shows that France became more interested in control, rather than reconciliation. When the Colonel first briefed his men, he argued that the bottom line was that humane tactics are ineffective, and they needed to escalate. During the interview with the press, the Colonel presents two sides. He argues that the conflict is no longer about civil injustices, but the fundamental reality that France wanted to stay, and the Algerians did not want them (Movie, 1:33:30). This fact makes it impossible for France to reconcile with its colony. Furthermore, the conflict reached a point where the Algerians would never fully trust nor accept the French as rulers. Even though the French would eventually defeat the FLN, they still lost the long political war.

The last scene of the film marked the end of France’s rule over Algeria. In this scene, there is a mass protest with thousands of people. The Algerians choose to act as one group with one loud voice. Instead of relying on terrorism and an insurgency, the Algerians caught media attention as they called for freedom. The tanks on the streets of Algiers show that the French were occupiers and not really in control. In the end, France declared that it would withdraw.

The film provides an excellent overview in the Algeria’s escalation with France, which led to its independence. The French colonial empire fell apart in Algeria because, throughout its rule, France did not treat all its subjects equally. Furthermore, the many promises it made to elevate the local population into “proper” French status repeatedly failed. The Algerians lost interest in becoming French citizens, and chose to pursue independence. Had the French treated their Algerian counterparts as equals, it is possible that Algeria would have remained a French colony.

Work cited

The Battle of Algiers. Dir. Gillo Pontecorvo. Prod. Antonio Musu and Yacef Saadi. By

Franco Solinas and Gillo Pontecorvo. Perf. Brahim Haggiag and Yacef Saadi.

N.p., n.d. Web. 26 May 2017.

Fogarty, Richard. Race and War in France: Colonial Subjects in the French Army,1914-1918. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins U, 2013. Print.

Stoler, Ann Laura. Carnal Knowledge and Imperial Power: Race and the Intimate in Colonial Rule. Berkeley: U of California, 2010. Print.