The French colonial empire was vast in its reach and influence in the world. Many bought into French imperialism because of its foundation on French republican ideology of so-called “equality for all.” However, academic scholars are now aware of the paradoxical and contradictory nature of French imperialist policy; such policy resulted in a complex and tense relationship between the French colonial empire and those it colonized. Richard S. Fogarty and Ann Laura Stoler evaluate and analyze this tension within the French colonial empire by specifically focusing on matters of race relations, religious difference, French identity, and sexual arrangements and other private domestic affairs. Using the works of Fogarty and Stoler as a framework, I will be analyzing the 1967 French film La Bataille d’Alger (The Battle of Algiers) to show how the French colonial empire’s own creation of conflict and hostility towards Algerians through the use of oppressive measures contributed to and eventually led to decolonization.

The Battle of Algiers depicts events that occurred in French Algeria from 1954 to 1957 during the Algerian War, one specific event being the Battle of Algiers (the capital of Algeria). The film begins with the introduction of the National Liberation Front (FLN) and the violence carried out by Algerians against French officials. In the film, the violence and conflict between the Algerians and French colonial government continues to escalate with the French resorting to the use of French army paratroopers and illegal methods to quell the unrest among Algerians. The film ends with the capture and/or assassination of all four leaders of the FLN and the presumption that the French have won the Battle of Algiers by containing the conflict and FLN. However, the movie does note that on July 2, 1962, after two more years of struggle against the French colonial government, Algeria was finally able to gain independence.

An early scene in the movie (around the seven minute mark) exhibits the developing feelings of Algerian nationalism among Algerians and their desire for liberation from colonial rule. In this particular scene, there is a voiceover of a person who appears to either be an advocate of or from an organization called the National Liberation Front (FLN). The unnamed person is speaking to the people of Algeria and asking them to take up arms against French colonial rule:

“People of Algeria, our combat is directed against colonialism. Our aim: independence and restoration of the Algerian state, in accordance with Islamic principle and the respect of basic liberties, regardless of race or religion. To avoid bloodshed, we propose that the French authorities negotiate with us our right to self determination. Algerians, it is your duty to save your country and restore its liberty. Its victory will be yours. Forward, brothers! Unite! The FLN calls you to arms.” (Pontecorvo, Battle of Algiers)

This scene highlights the importance of racial and religious issues to the intense conflict between Algerians and the French colonial government. Fogarty also notes the significance of both racial and religious issues in his work. Although Fogarty’s work generally focuses on the French’s use of race with regards to recruitment of indigenous groups into the French army, these French conceptions of race is still relevant to this discussion as these beliefs still permeated French colonial society. Fogarty writes, “…it is evident from the language [French officers] used that French officers made their judgments within the parameters of preexisting stereotypes based upon race. Even when actual experience modified the view of the usefulness or capabilities of a certain group, officers merely fitted the new realities neatly into racial categories they had already defined. In a very real way, race ordered the use of troupes indigenes” (57). The use of race and racial identity were important as they were a way to systematically characterize and categorize specific African groups. French officers relied on their own racial prejudices stereotypical characteristics to decide the best “racial categories” to employ and deploy in the French army. Among the Algerians during the time period this film depicts, there is a desire to return Algeria to its original state without French colonial rule and its oppressive racial and religious systems.

Another brief scene I find interesting is the scene after Ali Omar is out of the French prison and encounters a young messenger boy of the FLN (around thirteen minute mark). The scene reveals that despite Ali’s ability to speak French, he is unable to read French. However, the young boy, who has most likely grown up in an Algeria under French colonial rule for the majority if not for his entire life, is literate and able to read French. Regardless of whether this was intentional or not by the film creators, this scene reveals the actual reality of Algerians and their relationship to the French language. Fogarty and Stoler both write extensively regarding the French language and its use as a device to civilize Algerians while simultaneously emphasizing French superiority. Algerians were fully aware of the civil and social disadvantages they faced even with France’s so-called “civilizing mission” and the French Republican ideology of equality. Fogarty notes that there was a belief that indigenous “soldiers’ limited minds would be unable to grasp variations in vocabulary” (156) and so they were taught a simplified version of the French language. It was typical of colonial authorities to attempt to instill ideas of the so-called “place” of indigenous children of colonized territories in society under colonial rule as Stoler notes: “Colonial authorities with competing agendas agreed on two premises: children had to be taught both their place and their race, and the family was the crucial site in which future subjects were to be made and loyal citizenship was to be learned. With this frame, the domestic life of individuals was increasingly subject to public scrutiny by a wide range of private and government organizations” (84). Knowing this, it is unsurprising why an older Algerian would be more illiterate than a young Algerian child; there was a belief that children, particularly those of mixed parentage, could be “affectively contaminated” with French ideals and culture.

The next short scene I would like to discuss is the scene regarding the strike among Algerians when Colonel Mathieu is speaking to the press (around one hour and ten minute mark):

Colonel Mathieu: But in Indochina they won.

Reporter: And here?

Colonel Mathieu: That depends on you.

Reporter: On us? You intend to sign us up?

Colonel Mathieu: God forbid! Just do your reporting and do it well. It’s not warriors we need.

Reporter: Then what?

Colonel Mathieu: Political will, which is sometimes there and sometimes isn’t.

I found this to be an interesting scene as it revealed the French colonial government’s willingness to sway public opinion and global opinion through the use of press journalism. This ties into the misconception of French society being colorblind: “Recent scholarship has challenged the notion that France was really color-blind in any era of its recent history, including at the time of the Great War. During this period, official French discourse hid many unofficial comments that revealed racist attitudes toward both colonial subjects and African American soldiers…” (Fogarty 6). French officials were able to control a particular narrative of their own colonial rule and presented it in such a way to eliminate the Algerian perspective that would reveal deeply racist and prejudiced attitudes. General perceptions of colonial subjects are not favorable as seen in one other scene in the film in which an innocent Algerian man is accused by many French onlookers of shooting a French police officer. He is referred to as “dirty” and an “Arab,” revealing the stereotypes and biases French citizens held of Algerians, and of colonial subjects in general.

In sum, the film, The Battle of Algiers, is nuanced in its depiction of the events surrounding and leading up to the decolonization of Algeria. This film aids in our understanding of the role of racial, religious, sexual, and other issues in the establishment of French superiority in its colonial territories and how these issues contributed to increased tension within these territoires with French colonial authority. The French colonial government and greater French society essentially played a part in the decolonization of their own colonial territory by adding fuel to the fire of Algerian dissent by continuously escalating violent conflict and through racist attitudes.

Works 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. Allied Artists Corporation, 1969.

Fogarty, Richard Standish. 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.