In The Media
Lahcen Achy
{
"authors": [
"Lahcen Achy"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [
"Arab Awakening"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Maghreb",
"Algeria",
"North Africa"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Economy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Why Did Protests in Algeria Fail to Gain Momentum?
Despite sporadic demonstrations and calls for change from prominent intellectuals and political figures, the widespread protests that brought down leaders in Tunisia and Egypt are still largely absent in Algeria.
By Lahcen Achy
Published on Mar 31, 2011
Source: Foreign Policy
One explanation for this difference lies in Algeria's rich oil and gas resources, which gave the regime more resources to address the public's dissatisfaction without resorting to violence. The government has allocated more money for food subsidies, awarded pay increases to court clerks and municipal civil servants, and helped young entrepreneurs by offering them interest-free loans to establish their businesses, granting them a three-year tax exemption, and likely reserving a quota of local public contracts for them. The president also promised cash transfers and furniture for poor families in 14 isolated regions. And the government lifted the state of emergency after 19 years.
Economic aid packages, however, are only part of the reason why Algerians have shown little enthusiasm for radical changes in the country. Five other factors also seem to be at play.
First, the public does not share a common set of grievances. Calls for national protests mobilized only about 2,000 demonstrators. Instead, concerns tend to be specific to particular groups. Associations of petroleum workers, public health employees, telecommunications professionals, fire fighters, religious preachers, municipal civil servants, and the unemployed protested separately to defend their own economic and social interests. Protests by graduate students opposing university reform since mid February, and an open-ended strike by physicians in public hospitals, were able to mobilize more people compared to anti-regime protests.
Second, the opposition appears divided and constrained by regulations that restrict the right to demonstrate. Independent trade unions, human rights organizations, opposition parties, and youth associations established an ad-hoc coalition in January--the National Coordination for Democratic Change (CNCD in French)--to push for change through peaceful protests. The coalition favors weekly organized protests instead of the kind of spontaneous daily demonstrations that proved so effective in Egypt and Tunisia. Internal disagreements within the CNCD have already emerged between human rights organizations and trade unions on the one hand, and political parties on the other. The bone of contention is on maintaining demonstrations every Saturday in Algiers despite their ban by the regime and the inability of the Rally for Culture and Democracy (RCD) and the Socialist Forces Front to mobilize people on common grounds.
Third, protestors have faced a strong security apparatus. Algeria has expanded its security forces in recent years, from 50,000 police officers in the mid-1990s to about 170,000 officers now. Officers are both well-paid--they earn 65 percent more than average public civil servant (U.S. $470 compared to U.S. $280 per month)--and enjoy good career prospects, making it unlikely they would turn against the government. Their tactic of dividing protesters into small groups also prevents any sense of power that would come from mass mobilization. The police in Algeria relied on anti-riot trucks and have not so far, unlike in most other countries in the region, fired on crowds.
Fourth, the military in Algeria is more integrated into the country's political sphere than in Tunisia or Egypt--making any potential resignation by the president irrelevant for regime change. The People's National Army counts approximately 140,000 active members and 100,000 reservists, and has always played a leading role in the country's affairs. All of Algeria's presidents have been supported by the army. The emergency law that was lifted earlier this month after being in force for two decades only strengthened the military's authority. In addition, many general officers manage the largest public-sector companies, giving them privileged access to strategic sectors in the economy.
Fifth, the specter of the civil war in the 1990s is still very fresh in people's minds. Fears of another period of violence and insecurity keep Algerians from seeking a radical change despite their economic and social grievances. The civil war, which took place in the nineties led to between 100,000 and 120,000 deaths, with most families losing at least one member. Although in September 1999, the Islamic Salvation Army (AIS) announced the end of its attacks and Algerians approved massively a National Reconciliation initiative, sporadic violence continues to erupt in the country threatening peace and stability.
These factors do not mean Algeria won't experience regime change at some point. The upheaval in the region could still lead to unexpected effects. But the widespread calls for change that so forcefully brought down leaders in Tunisia and Egypt are largely absent in Algeria now. In spite of the sporadic demonstrations and of the calls for change from prominent intellectuals and political figures, a unifying movement that transcends societal divisions is yet to be seen in Algeria.
About the Author
Lahcen Achy
Former Nonresident Senior Associate, Middle East Center
Achy is an economist with expertise in development, institutional economics, trade, and labor and a focus on the Middle East and North Africa.
- Arab States Need Industrial Policy Reform
- The Price of Stability in AlgeriaPaper
Lahcen Achy
Recent Work
Carnegie India 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 India
- India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible PathwaysArticle
A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.
Rajiv Bhatia
- India’s Press Note 3 Gamble: Opening the FDI Door to ChinaArticle
On March 10, 2026, India’s Union Cabinet approved amendments to Press Note 3, a regulation that mandated government approval on all foreign direct investment (FDI) from countries sharing a land border with India. This amendment raises questions primarily about whether its stated benefits will materialize and if the risks have been adequately weighed. This piece will address the same.
Konark Bhandari
- The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil ImportsCommentary
This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.
Vrinda Sahai
- India-China Economic Ties: Determinants and PossibilitiesPaper
This paper examines the evolution of India-China economic ties from 2005 to 2025. It explores the impact of global events, bilateral political ties, and domestic policies on distinct spheres of the economic relationship.
Santosh Pai
- TRUST and TariffsCommentary
The India-U.S. relationship currently appears buffeted between three “Ts”—TRUST, Tariffs, and Trump.
Arun K. Singh
