Yesterday, at a meeting with the Algerian speaker of parliament, Ammar Sadani (or Saadani), the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that the years of “discord” among the Muslim countries was over. These years of discord had allowed Israel to occupy Palestine and for the West to dominate the lands of Islam. But, the “enemies” of the ummah had been weakened by recent developments in the Middle East, and, Ahmadinejad said, Iran and Algeria could change the balance of power in the Middle East against Israel and the United States. Sadani, in support of the Iranian president, responded, ever carefully, by stating that “all Muslims of the world have been moved by the atrocities committed by the Zionists against the oppressed people of Palestine.”

This was typical Algerian political jargon; many Algerian leaders have denounced Israel and the United States. What, however, was unique about this situation was that Sadani then went on to support Ahmadinejad????????s comments on the Holocaust. Though not nearly as inflammatory or violent in nature, Sadani????????s comments represented a dangerous trend in Algerian diplomacy.

President Abdelaziz Bouteflika said yesterday that the 1945 V-E Day massacres at Setif and Gulema perpetrated by the French against Algerian protestors, as well as the French colonization as a whole, were “genocide” against Algerian identity, history, language and traditions. Fair enough. This is satisfactory. I am inclined to agree, in fact. However, Sadani’s statement that the Jewish is Holocaust is in some way invalidated by the fact that few Holocaust activists mention the French colonization of Algeria, is reprehensible and contrary to Algerian national interests. By adopting the Iranian line towards Israel, Mr. Sadani risks endangering the Algerian relationship to the West, which is strategically more advantageous for Algerian than is Algeria’s with Iran. Algeria’s desire for military, and economic modernization is incompatable with support for Iran. Algeria’s relationship with the United States, the EU and NATO are poised to be enormously fruitful if Algeria makes an effort at exploiting them. However, Bouteflika’s support for the Iranian nuclear program, undermines his efforts towards integration with the United States and Europe’s anti-terrorist stance. As dandy a diplomat as Bouteflika was in his prime, the geo-political climate of today demands that, if he wishes to mazimize his interests internationally, he recoil from the increasingly intimate relationship that Algiers has had with Tehran in the past six years.

Algeria and Iran resumed diplomatic ties only after Iran’s hardline stance in support of Algerian terrorists was ended by former president Mohammad Khatami, a modern, reformist. The old fear that Iran would use the fragmented nature of Algeria’s polity to its own ends was largely forgotten during Khamtami’s presidency, because he and Bouteflika shared a common vision of a modern and open Islamic world (see the “Dialogue of Civilizations” campaign that was headed by Khatami and Bouteflika, for example). That mutual vision is gone today. Iran has moved further and further away from the reformist agenda since the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It is virulently anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli, anti-American, and over all contentious and militant. If Algeria follows this backward position, as Syria and Hezb Allah have, it will be led down the path of clientelism and isolation. This position is perhaps a consession to Algeria’s Islamist (or “Islamic”) parties in parliament, and if so is greatly misguided. It can only lead Algeria into conflict with its newer Western allies leaves Algeria vulnerable to Iranian political influence. Influence (or control) from abroad has never been appreciated in Algeria, there is no reason for this to change now. Algeria rejected the Islamic Republic‘s line in the 1990‘s, and should continue to do so as long as Iran refuses to behave in a constructive manner internationally. Iran is no longer the ally in reform that it was under Khatami, it is a regional zealot and bully. Algeria’s hopes of greater cooperation and integration into NATO and its aims of resoring its international prestige will be put in danger if it places itself on the wrong side of the international divide when it comes to the Iranian issue. Not only will Algeria risk its position as a leader in the Arab world, but it will also risk engendering the hostility of the West. Iran and Algeria ought to have amiable relations and should cooperate when their interests coincide, but when Iran’s ability to produce and export terrorism are being strengthened, Algeria should side with its true allies, the EU, NATO and the US.

As much as Algerian Islamists and Third Worldists would like to believe that Algeria’s future lies in the Islamic world alone, Algeria has more vested economic, cultural (there are millions of Algerians living and working in the West), and military ties with the West. Algeria cannot forget this. While, Algeria has built strong ties with various other developing nations recently (South Korea, China and Iran are among the most powerful), it should keep the most autocratic regimes at an arm’s length. This means that while Algeria allows China (together with Japan) to build the country’s first East-West highway, Algeria should make sure to not adopt the Chinese foreign policy, as some other African states have recently. This week, as Mr. Sadani derided the Zionists, the Algerian Chief of Staff for the People’s National Army, Ga????d Salah, made his way to Washington. If Mr. Sadani had made his comments less carefully, Mr. Salah’s stay in Washington might not be so producive or comfortable, as the United State has not been totally comfortable with increasing direct military sales to Algeria anyway. This new relationship with Iran is not healthy for Algeria’s national interest, but it remains to be seen what the result of it will be when it comes to Algeria’s relationship with the United States and Europe.