• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Anouar Boukhars"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North Africa",
    "Algeria",
    "Morocco"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Security",
    "Military"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Other

Reassessing the Power of Regional Security Providers: The Case of Algeria and Morocco

More than half a decade after the collapse of the Libyan state and the severe destabilization of Mali, regional policymakers are still seeking the appropriate principles and patterns of management that can foster a modicum of stability in the broader regional security architecture linking the Maghreb and the Sahel.

Link Copied
By Anouar Boukhars
Published on Feb 27, 2019
Program mobile hero image

Program

Middle East

The Middle East Program in Washington combines in-depth regional knowledge with incisive comparative analysis to provide deeply informed recommendations. With expertise in the Gulf, North Africa, Iran, and Israel/Palestine, we examine crosscutting themes of political, economic, and social change in both English and Arabic.

Learn More

Source: Middle Eastern Studies

More than half a decade after the collapse of the Libyan state and the severe destabilization of Mali, regional policymakers are still seeking the appropriate principles and patterns of management that can foster a modicum of stability in the broader regional security architecture linking the Maghreb and the Sahel. In such processes of constructing management options, the importance of regional powers in affecting regional security becomes salient, as the outcomes of their role and orientations can be determinant in building effective or failed security orders. It is thus crucial that regional powers not be identified simply based on their material capabilities (military spending, economic size, population size) but also on their behaviour in executing a wide range of security issues. First, their performance in initiating coordinated policies and achieving their security policy preferences is paramount to the provision of regional leadership. In other words, the possession of a higher degree of relative military power or economic capabilities is not the most accurate yardstick for judging whether or not a state be recognized as a regional security provider. Second, this recognition, which is largely a function of both the material and ideational capabilities that guide the behaviour of regional powers, must be earned.

The logic here is that when aspiring regional security providers are confronted with or called upon to tackle regional security problems, the relevance of their power relies on their capacity to lead, assist, cajole and persuade. To a significant extent, this leadership is reflected in their ability to influence their neighbours, reduce security dilemma dynamics with other powers in the system, and limit the intrusions of extra-regional powers.1 Such outcomes cannot transpire unless underpinned by three key criteria: (a) the capacity and willingness to contribute to regional security (military aid, mediation, peacekeeping), (b) soft power resources (transnational religious belonging, cultural diplomacy, economic relations) and (c) acceptance of great power status by peer states.

Obvious as it may sound, effective leadership is also heavily contingent upon the domestic performance of regional powers.2 Countries that aspire to be regional leaders but are hobbled by structural problems, incoherent political institutions and disintegrating national projects will have difficulty assuming the mantle of regional responsibility and acting as interlocutors between their region and major powers. Currently none of the much talked about regional powers in Africa (Algeria, Nigeria or South Africa) have been able to harness the potential of their capabilities for the advancement of their regions’ security and peace. Ideally, given their size and economic and military potential, they should bolster their neighbours’ security, political stability and economic vitality.3 The reality however is that it is external interveners or underrated emerging regional powers that assume this role. In the case of the Sahel and West Africa, it is France and Morocco that have distinguished themselves as active actors. France is leading anti-insurgent operations against al Qaeda-linked fighters while Morocco is using its soft power assets, bolstered by its growing military capability, to spread its influence in the region. Morocco’s combination of elements of soft and hard power to advance its regional aims effectively provides an interesting case study that offers a clear counterpoint to Algeria’s approach to exercising state power.

This article examines the roles and orientations of both Algeria and Morocco and assesses how their foreign policy behaviour affects their regional economic and security order. Much has been written on Algeria as a regional power or pivotal state.4 Very few studies, however, have provided an integral assessment of the country’s actual behaviour in executing the basic auxiliary roles regional security providers take on as leaders, power brokers, agenda-setters and protectors. In this regard, the choice of Morocco whose foreign policy behaviour emphasizes the use of soft power provides an interesting comparative case to broaden the traditional determinants of how rising powers aspire to contest the mantle of regional leadership...

Read Full Text

This article was originally published in Volume 55, Issue 2: Dimensions of Security in the Maghreb of the Middle Eastern Studies Journal.

Notes

1. D. Frazier and R. Stewart-Ingersoll, ‘Regional Powers and Security: A Framework for Understanding Order within Regional Security Complexes’, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.16, No.4 (2010), p.741.

2. T. McNamee, Harnessing the Power of Africa’s Swing States: The Catalytic Role of Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa, The Brenthurst Foundation (January 2016). http://www.thebrenthurstfoundation.org/workspace/files/2016-01-harnessing-the-power-of-africa-s-swing-states-brenthurst-paper.pdf.

3. J. Cilliers, J. Sch€unemann and J. D Moyer, ‘Power and influence in Africa: Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria and South Africa’, African Futures paper 14, Institute for Security Studies, (March 2015). https://issafrica.s3. amazonaws.com/site/uploads/AfricanFuturesNo14-V2.pdf; See also, C. Clapham, G. Mills and J. Herbst (eds), Big African States (Johannesburg: Wits University Press, 2006).

4. R. Chase, E. Hill and P. Kennedy, ‘Pivotal States and U.S. Strategy’ in Foreign Affairs, Vol.75, No.1 (1996); S. Chena, ‘Portée et Limites de l’hégémonie Algérienne dans l’aire sahélo-maghrébin’ in Herodote, Vol.142, No.3, pp.108–124; R. A. Mortimer, ‘Algerian foreign policy: from revolution to national interest’ The Journal of North African Studies, Vol.20, No.3 (2015), pp.466–482; Serge Sur (ed.), ‘L’Algerie, puissance regionale’, Questions internationales, no 81 (2016: Special Issue); Chena Salim (2011).

About the Author

Anouar Boukhars

Former Nonresident Fellow, Middle East Program

Boukhars was a nonresident fellow in Carnegie’s Middle East Program. He is a professor of countering violent extremism and counter-terrorism at the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, National Defense University.

    Recent Work

  • Research
    Islamic Institutions in Arab States: Mapping the Dynamics of Control, Co-option, and Contention
      • +6

      Yasmine Farouk, Nathan J. Brown, Maysaa Shuja Al-Deen, …

  • Article
    Islamic Authority and Arab States in a Time of Pandemic
      • +3

      Frederic Wehrey, Nathan J. Brown, Bader Al-Saif, …

Anouar Boukhars
Former Nonresident Fellow, Middle East Program
Political ReformSecurityMilitaryNorth AfricaAlgeriaMorocco

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europe Fails to Learn the Lessons from Ceuta

    The aftermath of the Ceuta crisis shows Europe has drawn the wrong lessons. Rather than doubling down on failed migration policies, the EU needs to address the underlying roots of such episodes.

      Richard Youngs

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Ten Years After Karimov’s Death, How Much Has Uzbekistan Really Changed?

    In the tenth year of his presidency, President Mirziyoyev’s system is becoming even more personalized than that of his predecessor Karimov.

      Galiya Ibragimova

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    As It Turns 25, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Reflects the New World Order

    With the growth in points of friction between the great powers, organizations like the SCO will continue to play a role in the strategic adaptation of the smaller powers caught between them.

      Temur Umarov

  • People dancing in the foreground, with a group of people in suites watching and an Air China plane in the background
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Two Key Takeaways From Xi’s Egypt Visit

    Amid celebrations of bilateral ties was a deeper focus on stability in the Middle East.

      Amr Hamzawy

  • UAV Forpost of russian air force takes off at Kubinka air force base
    Article
    In Russia’s Long Drone Shadow

    Moscow is testing Europe’s defenses with drone incursions and could decide to use drones against the continent on a much larger scale once the war in Ukraine pauses. European countries will need Kyiv to help them prepare for such a possibility.

      • Pavlo Zvenyhorodskyi

      Pavlo Zvenyhorodskyi

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.