Rethinking Algeria’s Military Doctrine

Algeria’s 1976 constitution banned the army from taking part in foreign operations, effectively nullifying the country’s significant military capabilities and reputation as having Africa’s second-strongest military after Egypt. The noninterventionist constitution also left the country vulnerable and unable to respond to security threats in the region.

For example, Algeria could not intervene in Libya in 2011. This paved the way for NATO’s erratic intervention, which transformed the country into an open battleground for jihadists and foreign countries such as Russia, Turkey, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. It was also unable to respond militarily to the 2012 kidnapping of seven Algerian diplomats in the Malian city of Gao by an al-Qaida-linked group; the government instead chose to hold secret talks with the kidnappers.

Algeria also refused France’s requests in 2012 to participate in its counterterrorism operation in Mali and Niger, a stance that it reiterated when French President Emmanuel Macron met with Algeria’s powerful army chief in 2017.

In 2013, al-Mourabitoun, an al-Qaidaaffiliated terrorist group originating from Mali, attacked the In Amenas gas plant along the Algerian-Libyan border, taking hundreds of Algerian and foreign workers hostage. The operation to free them resulted in the death of 68 people, including 38 foreigners, 29 terrorists and one security guard. To prevent future attacks, the Algerian army merely bolstered its defenses on the border, instead of going after the terrorists’ bases across the border.

Algeria still participated in some select foreign operations, however. Former President Houari Boumediene deployed Algerian soldiers to fight alongside Egypt in its 1967 and 1973 wars with Israel. And even after the ban, the government sent token contingents to participate in the United Nations peacekeeping missions in Angola, Haiti, Democratic Republic of Congo and the Eritrean-Ethiopian border.

The new constitution would enable the president to send troops abroad on peacekeeping or security missions, if he secures two-thirds support in parliament for the operations. It should be remembered, however, that the military is already a formidable force within Algeria itself. In fact, it was formed before Algeria became an independent nation. It helped to establish the state and continues to openly rule the country to this day. It chose Tebboune, a member of the ruling National Liberation Front, to serve as president. Algerians consider him responsible for ensuring that the government does not deviate from its mandate.

Tebboune also wants to restore Algeria’s reputation as a defender of the oppressed and Algiers as a top international mediator. In the past, the city hosted the signing of several landmark agreements, such as the 1975 deal that settled the Iraq-Iran dispute over the Shatt al-Arab Waterway, the 1981 deal between the U.S. and Iran that freed 52 American hostages seized in Tehran, and the 2000 peace agreement between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

The powerful military establishment strongly backs the new constitution, which it believes will help unite the ideologically and ethnically divided country and give it the ability to tackle serious security threats, mainly in Libya and Mali. But even with the power to wage war abroad, Algerians would likely be wary of doing so. The country’s war of independence led to more than 1 million deaths, and its 10-year civil war cost more than 200,000 lives. The political elite as well as the military establishment have therefore grown averse to large-scale conflict.

But Algerians are aware that they live in a region that is prone to instability. Though they want to establish peaceful relations with Morocco, a country with which Algeria has a long-running dispute over Western Sahara, they also want to play a role in taming the region’s myriad conflicts. The country is therefore positioning itself to wield influence in Libya independent of Egypt, Turkey and other foreign actors and to establish a balance among all the different players of the region.

Under the new constitution, the president would designate the head of the leading party or party coalition to form the Cabinet within one month of a general election; if he or she is unable to do so, the president can select another person to form a government irrespective of the size of that person’s party in parliament. Presidential term limits would also be introduced; a president would be able to serve only two five-year consecutive or separate terms in office. The limits would also be applied to members of parliament, which could interfere with public choice in legislative representation and prevent political parties from growing.

In addition, Amazigh would be recognised as a national language, though not on par with Arabic, the country’s official language. Despite early attempts to avoid referring to Islam as the state religion, the constitution committee backed down, after overwhelming opposition from Islamic political parties.

However, the new constitution would also give the president overwhelming powers, including the authority to appoint judges, the head of the Supreme Court, and senior civilian and military officials without consultation. He would also be able to veto parliamentary initiatives and dissolve parliament. His oversight powers would extend to the ministries of Interior and Foreign Affairs. Opposition groups have been highly critical of the lack of presidential accountability and the placement of the president outside the executive branch. It probably wouldn’t be an overstatement to describe the role of president under the new