The army’s ambiguous pacification strategy left it unsuited to counterinsurgency

Evidence

Regroupment undeniably made life much more difficult for the A.L.N., but—as so often in the Algerian war—French policy found itself caught in the insoluble paradox of what was good militarily being bad politically, and vice versa. It was a pitfall into which, to some extent, the Americans were to stumble in South Vietnam. By the Battle of Algiers, Germaine Tillion concluded gloomily, “The implantation of the F.L.N. in the Algerian masses was too deep for any détente whatever to occur without the global agreement which it alone could give.” — Horne, Alistair, A Savage War of Peace- Algeria 1954-1962, 693 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

In that grim winter of 1954 she had observed the Aurès peasants “watch their goats dying for want of a little fodder … or starving workers eat their grain seed, their hope for the following year”. She had been equally shocked by the heavy-handedness of the army’s counter-measures. — Horne, Alistair, A Savage War of Peace- Algeria 1954-1962, 346 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: A militarily victorious counterinsurgency can still lose due to non-battlefield factors; A N.A.T.O.-style conventional army was unfit for the ambivalent task of pacification; French counterinsurgency repeatedly traded military advantage for political costs — Horne, Alistair, A Savage War of Peace- Algeria 1954-1962, 693 (+5 more)

Broader Connections