Suchergebnisse

Résumé La guerre d'Algérie, qui se déroule au sein d'une démocratie garantissant la liberté d'expression et de communication, n'a pas été une guerre transparente, parce que le pouvoir civil et militaire s'est efforcé de contrôler l'information. Cependant, les combattants eux-mêmes ont révélé et raconté ce qu'ils vivaient. Certes minoritaires, ces témoins revêtent une importance considérable car ils fissurent le mur de la communication officielle. Au début marginale et peu audible, la parole des soldats sur la guerre d'Algérie devient de plus en plus forte, jusqu'à faire retentir un fort bruit médiatique au moment des confessions du général Aussaresses.

Paul Aussaresses, The Battle of the Casbah: Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism in Algeria, 1955–1957, trans. by Robert L. Miller. New York: Enigma Books, 2002. 185 pp. $25.00. Reviewed by Daniel Moran, Naval Postgraduate School ; In 1957, French soldiers tortured approximately 40 percent of the male population of the Muslim quarter of Algiers to try to root out the terrorist network of the Algerian National Liberation Front (known to history as the FLN). This campaign, although shadowy and shrouded in euphemism, was not, strictly speaking, secret. Systematic torture in Algeria was the subject of widespread public comment at the time—one French general was relieved of his command after condemning it in the press—and it has attracted a good deal of scholarly investigation since. Several major participants, including the commanding ofªcer in Algiers, General Jacques Massu, have written about it, for the most part unapologetically. Their frankness has been facilitated by the blanket amnesty issued by the French government in 1968, absolving all those who served in Algeria of whatever crimes they may have committed there.

Purpose: The article examines the trial of French General Paul Aussaresses (b. 1918, d. 2013) in the 2000s for war crimes committed during the Algerian War (1954 to 1962). Approach/Methodology/Design: A historiographical analysis covering topics such as colonialism, public memory, collective memory, counter-narratives, education, forgetting, and authenticity. Findings: Public history without individual memories or lived experiences of communities that have survived historical events can be viewed as inauthentic. It might even be called propaganda to present only state-sanctioned accounts of historical events. Many governments will consequently enact laws to distinguish between what constitutes official national narratives—and what remains peripheral, or perhaps extremist individual, historical accounts. Practical Implications: This paper contributes to the scholarly literature examining oral testimonials in political and war crime tribunals, and the ethics of conducting public history research using media archives. Originality/value: Towards a greater understanding of collective memory processes, the case of the Algerian War reveals the constant negotiations, formal networks, and informal channels used to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate sources of historical memory—and the consequences on culture, law, and society.