Consensus in France That A Minister Defeated the Head of State

A cartoon in the French satirical newspaper Le Canard Enchaîné vividly summarised the role of the far-right’s French Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau in dragging Algerian-French relations toward a dark horizon, reflecting the same position of Algerian authorities before and after the rift.

In a sarcastic tone, Le Canard Enchaîné commented on French President Emmanuel Macron’s decision to withdraw his ambassador from Algeria and retaliate against its decision to expel 12 employees working at the French embassy in Algiers. The newspaper published a picture of Interior Minister Bruno Roteaut smiling and commented, “Everything is going wonderfully wrong”, clearly referring to this minister’s prominent role in destroying bilateral relations.

The Algerian authorities’ accusation that Minister Retailleau had sabotaged relations between the two countries was not merely an exaggeration or an inaccurate description of the tensions that gripped the Algiers-Paris axis. Rather, it has become a conviction among many French people, even if the Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs himself, Jean-Noël Barrot, attempted to exonerate his government colleague from the worsening of bilateral relations in an interview with Radio France Internationale (France Inter) the day after the rift between the two countries.

Nothing is more indicative of this than the debate on the set of the far-right CNews channel. It concluded that French diplomacy, in dealing with the escalating situation with Algeria, was torn between two currents. The first, led by President Emmanuel Macron, called for calm, while the second, represented by Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau, called for escalation. Supporters of the second option emerged victorious.

What’s interesting is that the faction led by the Interior Minister triumphed over the faction led by the Head of State in a strange paradox, because when the crisis intensified, Macron attempted to take the Algerian file out of the hands of Retailleau, who presumably lacked the authority or access to it, based on the constitutional powers granted to both parties. This is especially true given the vast difference between the two positions, especially if the observer realises that the political system in France is presidential.

Without disregarding the possibility of a role swap between President Macron and his Interior Minister, to confuse decision-makers in Algeria amid a devastating, unprecedented crisis since the end of French colonialism more than six decades ago, the hypothesis of the French president’s weakness remains strongly present. This is due to his declining popularity and the loss of his parliamentary majority in the early parliamentary elections he called for last summer. This forced him to ally with a right-wing movement hostile to Algeria, which is still reeling from a political, military, and moral defeat at the hands of the stubborn Algerian people.

However, statements that could be considered a slip of the tongue by Bruno Retailleau, issued just hours after Macron’s decision to withdraw his country’s ambassador from Algeria and implement the reciprocity resolution, support the hypothesis of the “strong” Interior Minister versus the “weak” President. In an interview with the far-right CNews channel, held Tuesday night, Retailleau asserted that Algerian private services were behind the alleged kidnapping of an Algerian fugitive from justice on French soil.

He said in the interview: “It is unacceptable, and truly unpalatable, for France to be a playground for Algerian services,” referring to the kidnapping allegations promoted by the Paris authorities, while the case is still in the hands of the judiciary.

This is a dangerous slip that reveals that the independence of the judiciary in France is merely a pretext for settling scores with other countries. With this statement, he interferes with judicial decisions by attempting to establish a charge that never occurred against an accused who is innocent until proven guilty. This person also enjoys diplomatic immunity based on the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

France had previously witnessed an incident in 1996 in which a Zairean diplomat was implicated in the murder of two French children. However, the French authorities did not rush to arrest him and allowed him to leave French territory without difficulty, as he enjoyed diplomatic immunity. This incident exposed the policy of double standards that France employed in its dealings with Algeria. Fortunately, the Algerian response was on par with the French recklessness and perhaps even exceeded it.