Lakhdar Brahimi Interview: Conversations with History; Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley
Page 1 of 6
Mr. Ambassador, welcome to Berkeley.
Thank you very much.
Where were you born and raised?
In central Algeria, 100 kilometers south of the capital.
And looking back, how do you think your parents shaped your thinking about the world?
Not much, I'm sorry to say, because my father passed away when I was very young. I was eleven, and my mother was a simple, uneducated peasant.
What about your education? Tell us a little bit about your education, both in Algeria and elsewhere.
My education took place in Algeria and briefly in Paris, France, but I didn't finish, I didn't graduate, because of the war of liberation. I started studying law and political science and I left in 1956 -- I had one year more to go -- to join our struggle for independence.
In what ways were you affected, beyond what you just described, by the struggle for independence by Algeria?
That has shaped our lives, the buildup to that struggle to the violent phase of that struggle, and then the struggle itself, and then forced independence. What we did was preparing, fighting the war, and then [the work] during the after-war [period].
Do you think the lessons of that struggle are still relevant today?
I believe so, positive and negative. What we have learned from that struggle is the importance of freedom, the importance of mobilization, the importance of justice, equality, and so on. But also, looking back, we see all the mistakes we have made, all the things that were not right during the struggle and after the struggle.
The movie, "The Battle of Algiers," is making the rounds both on campuses and in the Pentagon. Is that a good account, in your view? I'm not asking you for an endorsement but as somebody who participated ...
It is. First of all, it is just about one short phase, which is the Battle of Algiers, in 1957, I think, in the capital, in the Casbah. But it is a very, very accurate account written by one of the main participants in that battle, and as a matter of fact, quite a few of the actors were playing their own role.
Did this experience in a liberation struggle impact your understandings as you became a negotiator?
Most probably. Yes, sure, most probably.
Anything in particular stand out that you understand that you might not have understood if you had not gone through such a struggle?
Probably I understand very much the people who rise against injustice. I understand even the excesses that can happen once you start fighting against injustice, not to condone it but to understand how you get there.
There is also a natural and very, very strong empathy with the underdog, with people who have suffered, people who have been pushed around by foreigners in particular, but also by their own people. I understand also how people who have struggled for independence, who have played a very important role, can nevertheless become baddies and abuse the power they legitimately reach and the support that they get from their people, then they abuse it and forget. There is a distance that takes place between the people who did the fighting and those who call themselves their leaders.
So, it's the old adage that applies everywhere: power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely?
Yes.
What led you into diplomatic work both for your country at first and then into a multilateral context?
I don't know; I think I just drifted into it. I literally drifted into it in 1956 when I left Paris. I went to attend a student conference in Bandung, Indonesia, one year after the big Bandung conference. I was asked to stay there to represent our liberation movement in Southeast Asia. That's how it started.
I know in reading about the negotiations in Afghanistan you were very sensitive to the role of the outside actor.
Oh, very much so.
We'll talk about that in a minute.
Next page: Being a Diplomat
© Copyright 2005, Regents of the University of California