Five billion dollars over 25 years is not too much compensation for a brutal occupation but the precedent has been set: Italy not only officially apologised, but paid damages to Libya.

By Sana Harb, Algiers

“After the tragic period of the Italian occupation, and in the name of the Italian people, I feel it is my duty to apologise and express our sorrow for what occurred so many years ago.” Did Silvio Berlusconi, President of the Italian Council, actually calculate what this would cost? Surely, as a businessman, he did. The agreement will allow us to have fewer illegal immigrants and more natural gas and Libyan oil which is of the highest quality. But this does little to lessen the significance of his gesture and the words he uttered; words that still repulse former colonies like Portugal, Great Britain and France.

“This is a historical era during which courageous men are attesting to the defeat of colonialism,” declared Mouammar Kadhafi, raising his hand in a sign of victory.  

Tripoli’s persuasive arguments

In Africa, Italy’s gesture towards Libya had, as can only be expected, a profound effect – leading to commentary far and wide. “A breach has been opened,” wrote a Burkina newspaper. It is, indeed, a first. But can the Italian affair serve as an example to other former colonial states as many African countries would hope? According to Le Guide, Libya is not interested in material compensation. Instead, what matters most to the African nation is the precedent it establishes in international law.

According to Le Guide, Libya is not interested in material compensation. Instead, what matters most to the African nation is the precedent it establishes in international law. Indeed, this precedent instigated a number of debates in Africa where calls have been made to France to follow Italy’s example. But can others really follow suit? Not all former colonies have persuasive arguments at their disposal like Libya, rich in oil and natural gas. Without them, their demands for an official apology from their respective colonisers fall on deaf ears. The second point to note is that, when compared to other colonial empires, Italians seem to have a more objective outlook on history. Unlike French parliamentarians, they do not attempt to find positive aspects of colonialism. Political pragmatism and an unabashed acceptance of colonial history led the Italian political community to break the taboo surrounding the acknowledgement of the facts and the expression of apologies. This frame of mind does not exist in France where citizens returning from Algeria still make up a considerable percentage of the electorate; where the beneficial aspects of colonialism were defended by way of the February 23, 2005 law. It is also true that the tumultuous 90s, in an Algeria that was thirsting for violent confrontation, helped to ease apprehensions surrounding this topic.

For France, it is neither a precedent nor a reference

In terms of negotiation, Algeria has, in theory, the means to be as persuasive as Libya. But in Franco-Algerian relations, already tense since independence, economic trade has virtually never been affected by divergent political points of view.

It is unlikely that there will be any change in this regard, even if some political figures standing at a distance from power would wish the contrary by emphasizing Libya’s historical success.

From the French perspective, they were eager to declare that the agreement signed between Italy and Libya was neither a precedent nor a reference, as the history of any two peoples advances at its own pace and each is unique.

It is obvious that Paris is not ready to follow in Italy’s footsteps, neither through acknowledgement, apologies nor compensation.

Algerian historian, Mohamed Harbi thinks that France will eventually admit its mistakes, not because of the necessary relationship it maintains with its former colonies but because of a change in public opinion in France where immigrant populations weigh heavily in the balance.