Our society is still based around Islam, and around a retrograde conception of social relationships. And so, even though the number of women who entered universities, or took up paid work after independence was very low, this still seemed like a revolution for the mind-set of the average Algerian. And as long as we avoided a debate on the place of religion in society, Islamic fundamentalism remained a potential The Berber movement The Berber ethnic minority is at the forefront of the struggle for democracy. But there is a constant tension between those who would confine the struggle to matters of cultural indentity, and those who would like to extend demands for democracy and development in such a way as to unite all Algerians against the fundamentalists and Said Saadi, leader of the Regrouping for Culture and Democracy (RCD) calls for the eradicatation of the fundamentalists and the FIS. This had led him to support the state of emergency, and call on the army to do the dirty work of crushing the fundamentalists. He has turned himself into a satallite in orbit around a regime which is discredited among the people, and which is directly responsible for the present social and political impasse. The reality is that "the eradication of the FIS" by the army includes the eradication of people in revolt in general, and large numbers of marginalised youth in particular. These are the social base from which the FIS recruits. Politician "eradicators" like Saadi see only the regressive political and ideological nature of fundamentalism, and ignore the issue of the social crisis. This hardly favours the comming together of progressive political forces. The other mainly-Berber party, the Front of Socialist Forces (FFS) is more concerned with social questions, and is more consistent in its support for democratic 16 force. But at the moment of independence, in 1962, there were no organised fundamentalist currents, just a few personalities and religious leaders, and a few fundamentalist members of the government. When did the Islamic fundamentalist movement develop into its current form?
Sanadja: The islamic fundamentalists began attacking baracks to steal weapons in 1977-78. So armed guerilla groups existed before the present wave of state repression of the fundamentalist opposition.
Adel: The war in Afghanistan was an important model for the fundamentalists. A number of their young militants went to fight there. When they came back, preparations were made for an armed struggle, but not in a very organised way. In those days, there were as many "leaders" as guerilla groups!
Nowadays, the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) is not really coordinated on a national level. There are lots of autonomous groups of 15-20 guerillas. demands. So far the FFS has attracted most of those who want to counter the fundamentalists' popular influence without turning to the army. But the FFS policy has other ambiguities. FFS leader Ait Ahmed concentrates his attacks so much on the regime that he presents the FIS as martyrs. A short-term reaction prevails over a more fundamental analysis of the social and political nature of the fundamentalist currents. The result is a catch-all antiregime front, which inevitably incorporates forces whos claims to democracy cannot be taken seriously. The Berber movement as a whole has had some victories: it is no longer taboo or "unpatriotic" to discuss the pluri-ethnic and pluri-lingual reality of the country. And a number of bodies, including the trade union confederation UGTA, now regognise and use the Berber language Tamazigh as well as Arabic and French. A national conference of Berber organisation will probably be held on 13-14 April. This may lead to an upturn in activity. But the sad reality is that, in recent weeks, the movement has seemed weak on the ground. The boycott of Arab-only schools continues in the Berber-speaking region of Kabylie, but without real organisation. And some militants have challenged the tactical wisdom of the boycott now that the fundamentalists are calling on all Moslems
The movement is much less organised and structured than the guerilla movement in the war of indepence, or if we look at the movements in Latin America. And with the current military offensive of the regime, the guerilla movement is very
The declarations of those guerillas captured by the regime tell us a lot about the internal funcioning of fundamentalist groups. The emir, the leader is all-powerful. He has all the privilidges he wants. The others have to obay and to execute his orders. If anyone questions his orders, he is put in quarentine. If he continues, he is executed.
I know quite a few men who were FIS militants before the current wave of repression, and who are now in hidding They hide from their former comrades because they are not willing to be press-ganged into activities that could cost them their lives. And they hide from the state becuase, whenever there is an assasination, known sympathisers of the fundamentalists are rounded up by the Military Police. Leaders of the main fundamentalist and democratic opp osition parties met in Rome in January this year and signed a joint declaration supporting a "peaceful and political solution to the crisis" Is there really a moderate or democratic fundamentalist current with which one can negotiate?
Leila: All this talk of dialogue is just so much smoke. There are two clans in Algeria, locked in a struggle. If these two forces start to discuss with each other, what is that supposed to bring to the population?
As for the "moderate" fundamentalists, I remember when the FIS was the major fundamentalist force, and everyone considered the Hamas and Ennahda groups as moderate forces, even though they shared the same social project as the FIS. And today, when the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) dominates the scene, when the fundamentalist attacks become more and more violent, the FIS seems to be a moderate force! Me, I can't see any moderates among islamic fundamentalists!
Adel: FIS leaders Abassi Madani and Ali Belhadj still want to establish a dictatureship. But they now say they are ready to play by the rules of the democratic system to win power. Leila is right to say that dialogue is not really possible between the fundamentalists and the regime. The only way out of the
violence in this country. There are also 3,500, or 10,000 widows of the victims of the other side. This is the classic approach of the "exterminator" current - we are the modernists, which means the others are the barbarians. They have no right to a defence, or even to live.
And so sympathisers of the Islamic Salvation Front are being killed even if they are not armed, and even if they are not politically active any more."
International Viewpoint #265 April 1995 impasse is a third perspective: based on a dialogue with the people. We need a democratic dynamic, and in a sense much widder than an electoral campaign.
The democratic forces face two problems: how to work together, and how to overcome the lack of a democratic tradition. The terror of the 1990s has made things even more difficult, by anesthesing the labour and socal movements.
Democratic parties have to do more than say nasty things about the fundamentalists. We have to combine democratic and social demands, to attack the root of the social crisis which has provided such fertile ground for fundamentalism. We have to try to find solutions for the most immediate demands: housing, work, the right to a future.
As for the democratic struggle, the most immediate concerns should be the rights of women, an end to the regime's repressive policies, and the introduction of basic civil liberties and the rights guaranteed by the constitution. What role do women play in the democratic movements?
Adel: Women were the first group to resist the fundamentalists, back in 198991. Unfortunately they were virtually alone in the struggle. As a result, most women's associations are much weaker Women and Fundamentalism The March issue of International Viewpoint carried articles on the struggle against fundamentalism in Algeria, France, the United States, and in the immigrant than a few years ago.
Leila: Various drafts of the family code were being discussed by the government as far back as 1963. Women's associations were formed even then, in order to oppose this kind of legislation.
In the period of liberalisation after 1988, a range of women's associations were formed, but they were characterised by partisan ideological positions, which held them back. And male militants of all the parties have never been interested in women's problems. We have never been a priority for them.
Sanhadja: There are important differences between the women's associations. Some are for the abolition of the Family Code, others for its modification. Some organisations say we must try to transform the way people think. Others say this is a secondary question.
Incidently, I don't agree that the women's organisations were a failure because of the individual political convictions of their members. The reasons are much more complex. Women in an archaic society are subject to all kinds of pressures. And between 1989 and 1991, the minority of women in the women's movement were alone in their opposition to the regime (over the family code) and the fundamentalists. And this little movement of ours was confronted with a whole range of problems which were not specific to women, and which are still major problems for the whole political sphere in Algeria. What now?
Leila: A democratic front is of prime importance. But this must be more than just a get-together of the "bosses" of the various organisations. For the time being,
Algeria the democratic parties seem more concerned with promoting their leaders, or stressing their historic legitimacy than by building a movement around "basic demands" like the struggle against fundamentalist fascism and state repression.
Adel: A social explosion could happen at any moment. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) plan for Algeria has caused a 40% devaluation of the Dinar, budget cuts and the restructuring of enterprises in the state sector. Mass dismissals, and the further collapse of the population's purchasing power can be expected over the coming months. None of this is really new, but it is becoming more and more intense. There have been a number of important strikes recently, and there is a real hope that the social movement will begin to move out of what seemed to be a tragic inertia. But our moments of hope are only justified if we manage to articulate democratic and social demands together.
Leila: Those in power never wanted democracy, or a multi-party system. The present situation is a fantastic opportunity for the regime. They have a great reason to forbid everything that became permitted after the youth of Algeria revolted in 1988.
Adel: International pressure can push