Parliament Approves Law Criminalizing French Colonialism: Algeria Does Not Apologize for Its Memory, France Urged to Confront Its Bloody Past – BY: Maamar Gani

Algeria is not required to seek permission to speak its truth, nor to soften its tone to appease the political heir of a colonial system whose consequences have yet to fade. When the Algerian Parliament votes to criminalize French colonialism, it is not opening a confrontation with a state; rather, it is closing a long chapter of enforced silence and affirming that national memory is neither negotiable nor a tool for diplomatic blackmail.

France’s swift characterization of the move as a “hostile initiative” once again inverts the equation: condemning the crime is portrayed as a crime, and holding history to account is framed as a threat to bilateral relations. This logic is not new. It is the natural extension of a long-standing policy of denial, which for decades sought to embellish colonialism through the rhetoric of a so-called “civilizing mission” and to reduce atrocities to mere “contextual errors,” as though millions of victims were nothing more than footnotes in the narrative of power.

Algeria, for its part, has done no more than exercise its sovereign right. Memory here is not an emotional slogan, but the very foundation of a state forged in resistance and sacrifice—sacrifices measured not only in numbers, but in the deep psychological, social, and cultural scars that persist to this day. Criminalizing colonialism is not an act of revenge; it is a necessary historical correction in the face of repeated attempts by France to erase its past through legal maneuvers at times, and diplomatic discourse at others.

The sharp and condescending French reaction exposes a deeper predicament: official France does not seek full acknowledgment because it knows that acknowledgment inevitably leads to accountability—and accountability shakes the state’s carefully constructed narrative about itself. Hence Paris prefers to manage memory rather than confront it, calling for “reconciliation” without justice and for “turning the page” without reading what was written on it in Algerian blood.

Yet today’s Algeria is not yesterday’s Algeria. Its stance on memory is a sovereign decision emanating from its highest authorities and reflecting a national consensus that international relations cannot be built on enforced amnesia or distorted parity. Genuine parity requires mutual recognition, not the imposition of conditions from the vantage point of a colonial heir. It requires respect for the choices of peoples, not threats whenever they raise their voices in defense of truth.

France, which frequently invokes values and human rights, is first and foremost called upon to apply these principles to its own colonial history. One cannot condemn yesterday’s crimes elsewhere while demanding immunity for one’s own memory. Nor can so-called “strategic” relations stand firm atop a humiliated memory and a people long urged to forget in the name of partnership.

In confronting France on this issue, Algeria is not acting out of a desire for rupture, but out of a commitment to clarity—clarity that ends double standards and places relations on a sound footing: recognition, responsibility, and mutual respect. Threats, pressure, and hostile rhetoric will not alter one fundamental truth: colonialism is a crime, its criminalization is a right, and Algerian memory is a red line.

At this critical juncture, Algeria stands on the right side of history. It does not bargain over its memory, nor does it dilute its language to please those who have yet to apologize. Whoever seeks a genuine partnership with Algeria must begin here: with acknowledging the wound, not denying its existence.