Talk:Algerian War

Discussion

• Option 2 Algerian victory is too simplistic, when the result was far more nuanced. There was no Algerian military victory. This wasn't Berlin 1945 or Saigon 1975. The French had won the war militarily by 1959, but De Gaulle realised the situation was unsustainable in the long term, leading to the referenda, negotiations and finally the Evian Accords, this is all reflected in the End of the War section. Template:Infobox military conflict#Parameters under Result applies here: "this parameter may use one of two standard terms: "X victory" or "Inconclusive". The term used is for the "immediate" outcome of the "subject" conflict and should reflect what the sources say. In cases where the standard terms do not accurately describe the outcome, a link or note should be made to the section of the article where the result is discussed in detail (such as "See the Aftermath section"). Such a note can also be used in conjunction with the standard terms but should not be used to conceal an ambiguity in the "immediate" result. Do not introduce non-standard terms like "decisive", "marginal" or "tactical", or contradictory statements like "decisive tactical victory but strategic defeat". Omit this parameter altogether rather than engage in speculation about which side won or by how much." In the previous RfC in 2017: Talk:Algerian War/Archive 4#RfC about the result parameter in the Infobox there was "a clear consensus opposing a change to FLN victory". Mztourist (talk) 03:54, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Option 1: Algerian victory, the liberation war was more than a military event and the result was that the French were kicked out. Keith-264 (talk) 09:21, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Option 1: Algerian victory. As the article states, the Algerian liberation war was never ment to overcome an overwhelming French army. It was about acheiving the main political objective of the war which is driving the French off Algerian soil and the bringing French Algeria to an end using different means (military, political, social..). This was acheived, so it's an Algerian victory Per 4 RS in the lede and the infobox. Nourerrahmane (talk) 11:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Option 1: Algerian victory, I totally agree with @Keith-264 comments. More than a military event, the main objective was to gain independence from the French. The Algerians succeeded so it is an Algerian victory, nothing else.Descartes16 (talk) 12:54, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Comment If, as has been stated by supporters of Option 1, this was "more than a military event," is it proper to use Infobox Military Conflict at all? It seems to be 'wired' for specific results, and while the FLN did achieve their goals at the end of the day it certainly wasn't through the use of military force. There doesn't seem to be any capability to add 'Political Victory,' for example. Intothatdarkness 15:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  Hi; The FLN (ALN) did use military force, It's still a military conflict. However, the goal was not to destroy the military capabilities of your oponent as much as to push your opponent to negotiate. I would quote Historian Jamil Abun Nasr :"after June 1958 the A.L.N. command abandoned the practice of using battalion-sized formations in engagements with the French army, and reverted to the guerrilla tactics of the first year of the revolution. The battalions were broken up into companies using hit-and-run tactics and avoiding positional battles. This meant that the A.L.N. no longer aimed at a military Dien Bien Phu, but at providing the foundations of a political victory by the threat of an indefinite continuation of the fighting." (Abun Nasr, A History of the Maghrib in the Islamic period (1987) pp 348)) Nourerrahmane (talk) 15:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  Of course they used military force. But they did not defeat the French militarily. That's my point. Intothatdarkness 16:53, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  I agree with you. However they still won the war per many cited RS, and this is what the infobox is about. Therefore I can't agree with Mztourist when he describes spelling Algerian/FLN victory or French defeat per RS as "too simplistic", Also The French did not win Militarly as this would imply that they did won the War through military means. The FLN lost the battle of Algiers and switched to more hit and run tactics but nowhere this should be understood asamilitary defeat. Military successes are not a fundamental requirement in these kind of wars. The Vietnam war is also a good example. Nourerrahmane (talk) 17:26, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  Actually South Vietnam WAS defeated militarily. US involvement ended for different reasons, but 1975 was a clear, crushing military victory for the North. I happen to agree that the infobox used in this instance is too simplistic, but there doesn't appear to be any option. Intothatdarkness 18:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  the U.S withdrew due to the public pressure which was a direct result of a prolonged guerilla warefare engaged by the north. And this is what those wars are about and which seems that you and Mr Mztourist miss the point. I suggest you read my recent addition in this article. Speaking of the infobox it showcases the outcome of the war per RS. Nourerrahmane (talk) 18:41, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  I think you miss the point when it comes to Vietnam. The conflict itself ended in 1975, not when the US pulled out its troops. But that's not the point of this discussion. One of the biggest problems with Wikipedia infoboxes is they don't handle nuance very well, and your argument is a perfect example of this. The French were not defeated in a military sense, but they did eventually end their presence in Algeria. Not because they lost militarily, but because the French government decided to cut their losses. I'm more in favor of Option 2 at this point, but I'm sure everything will be simplified to Option 1. Carry on. Intothatdarkness 18:49, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  It was just an example that showcased the point of doing guerilla warfare that actually provoked a chain of events that caused the military victory of the North. Speaking of the Algerian war, cutting loses, suffering public pressure and the collapse of an entire republic, dealing with international condemnations and risking a coup and a civil war is not directly related to military engagements. However they make the whole point of the war engaged by the FLN in the first place. Direct Military engagements are not the whole story of this war. Nourerrahmane (talk) 19:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  I do respect your opinion though and I enjoyed this vietnam comparison debate. Nourerrahmane (talk) 19:10, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  Algeria was totally different from the Vietnam War, which ended with a clear military victory, as I stated in my comment. Mztourist (talk) 06:49, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  • The infobox isn't perfect and I don't know of a better one. Quite a lot of liberation struggles in the military, diplomatic, Cold War, economic and others dimensions were like this but as a short cut, the FLN fought and won. Keith-264 (talk) 16:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Option 1: I don't see how a war launched to win Algerian independence and ended with Algeria gaining independence would not be considered an outright Algerian triumph. The vast majority of reliable sources can confirm this.^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][12][16][17][18]} Skitash (talk) 19:18, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  I don't think this list supports "Algerian victory". It's fairly clear that France lost; that a majority of sources say. But that alone is not enough to determine who won. Was it an internationally recognized Algerian government? Was it an armed group that called itself "Algeria"? Of the sources you provided, I counted five that attribute the victory to "Algeria" or "Algerians" and seven to the FLN. This is a significant difference since even the info box labels three different armed groups in Algeria, not just one. It seems that this was a uniquely FLN victory as the MNA, while also working for Algerian Independence, also fought against the FLN and lost. In fact, an outcome result of "Algerian victory" would lead to the rather bizarre result; a faction which is not even listed as a participant somehow won!

  As such, a third option, such as, FLN victory, should be used instead of Algerian Victory (note though that this is not a vote, nor do I intend to vote.) HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 06:07, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  The FLN had a political branch called the provisional government of the Algerian republic or (GPRA) which played a crucial role in getting the Algerian war of independence to the international stage and has scored diplomatic victories over the French in the UN.

  Regarding “Algerian” as a geopolitical affiliation, it has been around since the 16th century’s Regency of Algiers. The FLN proclamation of 1 November 1954 stressed that the goal of this war was to restore Algerian sovereignty as it had been prior to 1830 (date of the French invasion). Nourerrahmane (talk) 07:19, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  That is better but still not what the sources cited above say; they do not attribute this victory to the Republic of Algeria but rather the FLN. Otherwise the sources would simply have said "Republic of Algeria". Do you have sources which explicitly attribute the victory to "Republic of Algeria" or any equivalent name for this organization (as opposed to a victory for the FLN or a more vague "Algerians"). This brings up a larger problem though, that calling a result of "Algerian Victory" would imply that the MNA also won, which is simply not true. The MNA was also made up of Algerians yet they lost their political struggle to the FLN. As such, this was a victory does not apply to all those who were recognized as Algerian.

  As for the other claims, the same problem applies. The FLN can claim that its goal was to restore Algerian sovereignty. This does mean that the FLN equates to Algeria though, since there were other groups fighting for Algeria but also opposing the FLN. If France having lost is accepted as fact, the problem still remains of who won. As said before, having the outcome box name a participant which is not even named in the infobox is a problem. HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 07:41, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  Correction: This does not mean that the FLN equates to Algeria though. HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 07:42, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  Wouldn’t be enough that both affiliated themselves to Algeria and that the MNA, despite being a political rival to the FLN, still takes a share in this victory against the French ? The MNA founder was Messali Hadj…Considered the Father of Algerian nationalism by the FLN whose members were part of this Independentist movement (North African start) prior to the war. Algerian victory is good way not to disregard the MNA as you stated. Speaking of RS, a good number stress that the “Algerians” won their independence. Nourerrahmane (talk) 07:59, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  No, it would not. I would need sources that consider the MNA to also be a victor in this conflict. From what I see, they lost to the FLN. Going back once more to the sources above, a majority attribute this victory solely to the FLN, not an FLN-MPA coalition or something along these lines. I pointed out that, at least among the sources provided above, "Algerian victory" is in the minority. Since it is in the minority and since the infobox does not include "Algeria" or "Algerian" as a belligerent, "Algerian victory" should not be the result of this war. HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 08:16, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  Even if more sources were brought though, this still would leave by doubts on how "Algerian" this victory was. Without a doubt the primary group that won this conflict was Algerian. I question if they speak for most Algerians or if they were simply the most effective armed group that resisted French forces. I already mentioned the MNA but a question is also to be had if this organization represented Berber interests too or it if unilaterally spoke on their behalf without meaningfully engaging with Berbers grievances. These issues make calling this victory "Algerian" as opposed to "FLN" problematic. HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 08:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  Berbers were a primary force within the FLN, Please check the Soummam conference. Public support was also an important factor that helped take the war to the halls of the UN. This was displayed in the massive december 1960 protests. In terms of public support; The FLN had an overwhelming grip to the point where the Algerian anthem had a whole part dedicated for the FLN. Nourerrahmane (talk) 08:48, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

  Thank you. This response abates by concerns about the Berbers but still does not solve the problem of this being an FLN victory. This fact about the Algerian anthem is further evidence of an FLN victory as opposed to a broader, undefined Algerian victory; I fail to see why anyone in the MNA would remotely support this rival organization monopolizing space in the national anthem. Given I stand by not voting on this RfC I won't comment further. None of the arguments presented counter the fact that a majority of the sources (by 7 to 5) provided by Skitash refer to an FLN victory, nor do they address the problem of belligerents in the infobox. HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 09:05, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Option 1 (Algerian victory). Repeating my comment in the earlier discussion above: it should be reasonably common sense that a war started for Algerian independence and whose immediate and most significant result was Algerian independence would be summarized as an Algerian victory. The suggestion that it is not a victory because the FLN did not directly defeat the French army in the field is irrelevant for the purposes of a summary: plenty of wars are won or lost because one side decides to withdraw or to accept the other's demands. It would be counter-intuitive and rather WP:EXCEPTIONAL to insist on some editorial stance that these are not "victories" for this reason alone. It is the job of the article itself to explain the various details, including successes and setbacks, regardless of the overall result. The job of the infobox parameter is to help readers understand what the main result of the war was at a glance.

Moreover, there are already cited sources in the article that show WP:RS summarizing the war's result in this manner (as an Algerian victory or French defeat),^[19] and it's not hard to find more from a short search, as I mentioned above:^{[20][21][22][23]} R Prazeres (talk) 19:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Option 1 (Algerian victory). Given the sources that are used already & some more added above, I don't think it's in doubt. Eastfarthingan (talk) 22:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Option 1 The term is even found in Benjamin Stora, a historian specializing in this period of history, in France, where the subject is very sensitive. So I see no reservations about using it here. Moreover, this term corresponds to a fact. Monsieur Patillo (talk) 12:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

• Option 2 Per WP:RESULT and the template documentation. This is a nuanced result as those sources used in the infobox evidence. The infobox is a blunt instrument and a result of X victory is perceived as a military victory but this was definitely not the case. As one source states: the French army might have won the battle (of Algiers) by crushing the ALN, but ultimately, they lost the war. In winning the war, the ultimate result (but not the immediate result) was Algerian independence. This was achieved politically in the international arena and because the war became politically unpopular within France. The immediate result was a ceasefire through the Évian Accords. The accords required referenda, and independence occurred a few months later after these. Even then, France retained concessions. France was not driven from Algeria but chose to leave on terms but even then, there is nuance vis-à-vis the OAS. Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, the infobox is to summarise key facts from the body of the article. Algerian victory is not supported by the body of the article. The fact that the "result" in the infobox presently cites several sources only confirms that the body of the article does not clearly support the result presented and, as already stated, the sources cited indicate nuance. In supporting option 2, I have reservations that the section End of the war does not adequately capture the nuance of the result. Some of the nuance is presented in the section Strategy of internationalisation of the Algerian War led by the FLN but there is no particular place within the article that condenses the result of the war and the nuance of the war as represented in sources. Per INFOBOXPURPOSE, the article should remain complete without the infobox. In respect to the result, it does not. This is a deficiency in the article that needs to be remedied. Without this, discussing what the result in the infobox should be is putting the cart before the horse. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:40, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  1. "In winning the war, the ultimate result (but not the immediate result) was Algerian independence" This doesn't make sense. Algerian independence was the objective of the war and the consequence of the result (winning the war).

  2. WP:RESULT states that the result should be restricted to "X victory" or "Inconclusive." The term used in the infobox is for the immediate outcome of the conflict and should reflect what RS state (which in this case is Algerian victory).

  3. "a result of X victory is perceived as a military victory" This is false. War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) states "Taliban victory" based on what several RS say. Same goes for the Soviet–Afghan War, the Angolan War of Independence, and several anti-colonial wars. Skitash (talk) 14:49, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  1. the consequence of the result (winning the war). A consequence of the result was independence but it was not the [immediate] result; it is something that followed. It was the referenda that resulted in independence and hypothetically the referenda may not have supported independence.
  2. WP:RESULT also continues: Where the result does not accurately fit with these restrictions use "See aftermath" (or similar). The sources are telling us that there is nuance to the result. They are telling us that it was effectively a strategic victory but tactically inconclusive or even a defeat. [T]he result does not accurately fit with these restrictions.
  3. These examples fall to WP:OTHERCONTENT, which of itself is not a substantive argument unless these represent best practice. There is currently a discussion at Soviet–Afghan War addressing this question and the other two examples clearly do not follow WP:RESULT and the template documentation. None of these articles are GA or FA. They do not represent best practice. However, my statement was a result of X victory is perceived as a military victory [by readers]. This OTHERCONTENT does not refute how writing X victory is perceived by readers.

  Cinderella157 (talk)

• "Algerian victory" is overly simplistic for several reasons. First, there was no military per se. On the contrary, the French army had the upper hand over the FLN and it was the French government that decided keeping Algeria was not feasible in the long term. Also, there was no Algerian state per se at the time (unless one counts the Provisional Government of the Algerian Republic) so the belligerent was arguably the FLN rather than "Algeria" as a whole. We have to take into account the reality of the times : for example, First Indochina War states "DR Vietnamese victory" and Vietnam War states "North Vietnamese victory", not "Vietnamese victory". So in my opinion, option 2 would be the better choice. "FLN victory" is another possible option, for they did achieve political - if not military victory - and took power. Psychloppos (talk) 12:23, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

• Option 1: Algerian victory, according to the most reliable and recent historical sources, The French army faced considerable challenges, particularly in the mountains and the desert. The sources that attempt to challenge the historical facts are predominantly French, often written by individuals with a nostalgic view of French Algeria. Riad Salih (talk) 05:25, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

• Option 1 per all the comments above and the numerous citations backing up the assertion that this war resulted in a victory for Algeria and their independence. Consensus seems to be already clear in this four month old discussion , but since two editors have offered to close it imminently I'm just adding another voice to this. I'm not convinced by the case for further nuance  — Amakuru (talk) 22:51, 10 July 2025 (UTC)