University of Paris VIII professor, Abdul Nour Bin Antar, was hosted by the ACRPS Democratic Transition Seminar this week. He presented his study analysing Algeria's security doctrine in a troubled regional context, in which he sought to explore the relationship between the constitutional amendment that theoretically transformed a well-established security doctrine preventing the deployment of Algerian forces abroad or in the way of the political transition ongoing since President Abdelaziz Bouteflika left power.

Bin Antar began his lecture by highlighting three types of security doctrines in the Arab region. The first type is based on the principle of realism and involves a sort of isolationist self-reliance in building national defence capabilities. The second is a hybrid security doctrine that integrates domestic defence and security capabilities with external strategic alliances— the type that applies to most Arab countries. The third is a doctrine that depends completely on external forces, adopted by countries that do not have independent defence capabilities, and are reliant on the umbrella of external defence. Bin Antar began by stating that the Algerian security doctrine, which comes within the first category, has historically been founded on military and political non-interference, refraining from sending troops abroad, or intervening in the domestic affairs of other countries. This principle has been in place since independence except for the Arab wars against Israel in 1967 and 1973.

Given the proximity of the greatest threats to Algeria's territorial integrity and interests (for example, those resulting from the deterioration of the security situation in Libya and Mali), controversy arose over its security doctrine and the priority of adhering to the moral or security imperative was questioned. The risks related to non-interference have overshadowed discussions about the recent constitutional amendment to allow Algerian forces to be deployed abroad. The repercussions of the security unrest in Libya have reached the point of threatening petroleum resources within Algerian territory itself (for example the 2013 storming of the Tigantourine gas plant). Bin Antar also discussed the implications of the security crisis in Mali and how it led observers to anticipate shifts in Algeria's security doctrine. A clear shift happened because of Mali (allowing French warplanes to use Algerian airspace during their military operations in Mali in 2012), which indicated a pragmatic change. This was followed by the legal change proposing the constitutional amendment frameworks to send troops abroad but limited to peacekeeping missions only. And these do not constitute an intervention related to the special interests of the state, but rather a contribution to international collective action for international legitimacy.

There was a push towards reviewing the security doctrine unchanged since independence, and an understanding emerged that adherence to this belief was not absolute. This was evident in the case of Mali, as Algeria refused to intervene in Mali rhetorically, but in practice provided Algerian airspace for French operations in Mali, as well as logistical services within the same framework. The matter, therefore, was subject to practical adjustments made inevitable by the security situation. The researcher presented another angle for discussion based on the debate on legality and legitimacy, as he distinguished between the legitimacy of adopting international decisions, and that which relates to the national security goals and interests of Algeria. He stressed that Algeria has abided by international decisions, but the reality of the situation on the ground has stripped the international decisions of legitimacy to suit the interests of some countries that interfered in Libya. The researcher reviewed academic debates regarding the feasibility of intervention and its link to achieving stability and peace.

Then the researcher explained that the constitutional amendments are in theory linked to the political transformation in Algeria. However, Algeria is yet to complete its democratic transition, which is still undergoing a within the regime. It is difficult to approach the matter according to the principles of civil control over the armed forces. Requiring a parliament vote does not imply democratic control if parliament is in practice dominated by the executive branch.