The debate over educational curricula in Algeria and the status of the French language has taken on broad dimensions in the political discussion, as it has turned into an open confrontation between the Islamic and secular currents, with the invocation of discussions related to identity, the position of religion in the state, and the limits of the influence of the colonial legacy on Algeria’s cultural and educational choices.
In this context, a political and intellectual confrontation is taking place remotely between Abdelrazak Makri, the former president of the Movement of Society for Peace (affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood), and Othmane Mazouz, the president of the Rally for Culture and Democracy (secular-oriented), as the two men’s discourse reflects two divergent visions of Algeria and of the choices that should govern the school and society.
In his recent publications, Mokri adopted a direct, aggressive tone, describing the secular movement as a servant of France, questioning the reasons for its sudden resurgence at this particular time, and whether, as he put it, it was motivated by “something at the official level,” or whether France had “promised it something.” He also addressed the popular support for this movement, wondering “how forces that failed to compete in popular elections can have influence over important decisions?”
Maqri goes even further when he links the defense of French to a political and cultural stance on Arabic, questioning the reasons for what he considers this movement’s “hatred” of the Arabic language, and its insistence on defending a foreign language (French) that he sees as declining globally, at a time when English is advancing in science, technology and scientific research.
Through these questions, Maqri does not present the battle as a dispute over the choice of a foreign language, but rather places it within a confrontation between two projects. The first, as is evident from his discourse, wants to promote Arabic and move towards English as the language of science and international openness, while the second accuses him of seeking to preserve cultural and linguistic extensions linked to France.
Maqri did not stop at language; in another article, he moved on to secularism itself, offering a historical and intellectual reading of it. He argues that secularism arose in a specific Western context linked to the conflict between church and state and the European religious wars, while the Islamic world, in his view, did not experience a similar conflict between religion and science.
In more detail, Maqri distinguishes between secularists whom he considers “moderate,” who believe in separating religious institutions from state institutions without excluding religion from society, and whom he describes as willing to cooperate on issues that serve the nation, and “hardline” secularists whom he accuses of seeking to confine Islam in the public, educational and cultural spheres, and of defending the culture and identity of colonial states.
It is precisely here that Mokri's discourse intersects with his stance on educational reforms, as he sees the battle over language not as a purely technical one, but rather as part of a broader struggle over the cultural foundations of the Algerian school system. Therefore, he uses terms like "colonialism," "identity," and "dependency" to describe his opponents, and presents the confrontation with them as an extension of the battle to defend the pillars of national identity.
In contrast, the discourse represented by the secularist movement, as particularly evident in the positions of Othman Maazouz, rejects this direct link between secularism and loyalty to France. According to this view, defending secularism does not necessarily mean defending the French model, just as using French or demanding its continued use in education does not imply adopting a French agenda.
Othmane Mazouz, who currently leads the Rally for Culture and Democracy (RCD), expresses this perception clearly in his response to the discourse of treason, in an article he wrote, saying that “treason” has become a substitute for argument in the political and cultural debate in Algeria, considering that narrowing the space for debate leads to expanding the circle of accusations of collaboration, Frenchification, serving foreign interests, and harming identity.
Maazouz argues that invoking France has become, in his view, a "ready-made answer" to every dissenting opinion, criticizing the association of defending secularism, French culture, or philosophy with Francophonie or serving foreign agendas. He emphasized that French colonialism is a historical fact, but it should not become a means of explaining every political and cultural difference more than sixdecades after independence.
The head of the RCD defends multilingualism, considering that Arabic belongs to all Algerians, but it is not a “membership card in nationalism,” and that mastering Arabic, French, Amazigh and English does not detract from an Algerian’s nationalism, but can be a strength if it is employed in the service of science, the economy and culture.
Mezouz also rejected the use of identity and religion as tools to categorize political opponents, stressing that disagreements over language, philosophy, or the form of government should not be transformed into accusations of patriotism or religious bias. He also criticized resorting to conspiracy theories and suggesting the existence of foreign powers behind opposing movements, instead of presenting evidence and discussing their ideas and programs.
This debate comes at a time when the Ministry of Education has taken steps towards rearranging the status of foreign languages, especially by promoting English and delaying the teaching of French in primary education, which has sparked a heated confrontation between supportive and opposing and apprehensive factions.
This dispute reveals the persistence of old divisions within the Algerian political landscape, even if they are being reproduced today through the lens of the education system. Islamists view the language issue as part of completing cultural independence and liberating themselves from the vestiges of colonialism, while secularists believe that Algeria can preserve its national identity without turning language into a political battleground or considering openness to French as a sign of subservience.
Tags:
africa
