London – Algiers – Quds Press Agency – Former diplomat and Algerian opposition political activist Mohamed Larbi Zitout warned of the possible consequences of the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between Algeria and the United States of America, and expressed concern that the treaty may be a tool for the Algerian regime  to reach its opponents abroad and for the American administration to spread its influence in North Africa.

Zitout indicated exclusively to Quds Press that what causes him concern in the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between Algeria and the USA is that it was set up officially in order to exchange information and people between the two countries.  He said: “This legal treaty between the United States and the Algerian regime was basically made in order to allow Algerians to be handed over to the ruling group in Algeria and for Algerians claimed to pose a security threat to be surrendered to the US.  This is a very dangerous move and violates the Algerian Constitution, which does not permit Algerians to be handed over to any other state for investigation.   But the danger of the treaty is that it legally and officially establishes an unacknowledged existing reality.  Aware of its great significance, the US Attorney General described it on the day of the signing as “a historic event”; it permits US security agencies to share the files of anyone claimed to be accused, and thus opens state security and financial secrets to foreign organisations.  It undoubtedly contradicts the most basic minimum standards for national sovereignty.”

Zitout indicated that the treaty is part of a wider American plan to spread influence in the Sahel and Sahara region through the gateway of Algeria: “This treaty comes within the frame of an American strategy with the target of dominating Algeria, a gradual strategy including a lot of soft diplomacy with the Algerian government.  Since 2001 the US has realised the exceptional importance of Algeria as a gateway to domination of North Africa, and has worked to spread its influence through military, security, economic, and legal agreements.  Through military agreements, for example, it has guaranteed itself the ability to use Algerian military bases, notably in the south, for its own purposes.  Under the rubric of security it has been able to get special privileges allowing major activity by American intelligence agencies and security companies in Algeria, especially in the Sahara and in the larger towns such as Algiers.  At the economic level, American oil companies have gained access to considerable advantages, to the point that America has in a few years become the biggest importer of Algerian energy.”

Zitout drew attention to the fact that the cooperation between the Algerian regime and the current American administration serves both sides’ interests, but called on the United States of America to restrain itself from siding with the Algerian regime: “The regime in Algeria knows that its days are coming to a close, especially with the social protests that in some Algerian cities have come close to civil disobedience, as in Annaba recently.  This is why it is trying to strengthen itself through external relations, including with America, in order to strike at its opponents and make things difficult for them everywhere and blacken their reputations.  The United States of America considers that, by dominating Algeria, it will spread its influence throughout North Africa, and thus that this will prepare it to contend with the great powers at leisure.”

He added: “But America needs to understand that the Algerian people, apart from wider Islamic issues, has no historical quarrel with the United States, neither in the past nor at present.  For America to link itself to a regime that it has itself described from time to time as failing and corrupt, is a great strategic error comparable to the American administration’s position on the Shah’s regime in its last days.”