When it comes to soccer, the Arabs are probably as fanatical as say the English, Brazilians or Koreans. Or maybe not! The sad events surrounding the qualifying World Cup match between Egypt and Algeria, which was held in Sudan, have soured the dignified attributes that many nations attach to the game. A decisive match involving two national teams was transformed into a bitter and hateful feud between people and governments.
Egypt lost the game and its bid to qualify. Algeria will be the only Arab country to play in South Africa next year. But what followed the match was both shocking and disturbing. Demonstrators in Algiers attacked Egyptian-owned interests, destroying and torching offices. In Cairo, thousands of young and angry Egyptians attempted to march toward the Algerian Embassy, but were prevented from doing so by riot police. There were allegations that Egyptian fans were attacked and abused by Algerians in Khartoum as they made their way to the airport. Reports said that Egyptian-owned coffee shops were set on fire in Marseille, France, where a large Algerian expat community lives.
The media in both countries mobilized the public. A sports commentator on an Egyptian satellite channel made incendiary remarks about Algeria, the country and the people. There were others who called for total boycott and demanded that the government takes action to avenge injured national pride. Cairo recalled its ambassador in Algeria and relations between the two Arab countries dipped to unprecedented levels.
It was a bit surreal, especially when Israel, of all countries, called on the two Arab nations to exercise self-restraint! It was another low point in inter-Arab relations. The media were not innocent in this case. It had unnecessarily marshaled public opinion in a way that turned this affair into a serious regional crisis. Geography was benevolent for if the two countries shared land borders who knows what could have happened.
When it comes to deep-seated ancient rivalries one could probably understand the political connotations behind a soccer match that features England and France, Iran and Iraq, or Turkey and Greece. But it is ludicrous to give the same weight to a game, no matter how critical, between Egypt and Algeria.
The two Arab countries were never at war; they were not even colonized by the same Western power. On the contrary, when Algerians were struggling for independence from France in the middle of last century, it was Egypt, under Gamal Abdel Nasser, that rallied to support Algerian nationalists. So much so that France joined the Tripartite Aggression against Egypt after the latter’s decision to nationalize the Suez Canal in 1956.
Looking back at the history of bilateral relations one hardly finds points of contention that are serious enough to warrant mutual hostility at public levels. If Algeria has problems with its neighbors it is with Morocco, over the western desert, and with Tunisia, to a lesser extent. The majority of Egyptian laborers are based in the Gulf countries and Libya. Few headed to Algeria, whose economic relations are mostly with Europe, especially France.
How then can one explain the recent flare-up of animosity between Egyptians and Algerians? In soccer the two countries had met before and in most cases it was unfortunate that these meetings were critical to the chances of both teams as they attempted to qualify for a major championship. But that alone is no reason to create such psychological obsessions and mistrusts at national levels.
Soccer is supposed to bring nations together by focusing on good play, fine sportsmanship and appreciation of competition. Cultural and political differences aside, sports is one way to build bridges not destroy them.
But in the case of Egypt and Algeria it had driven apart two “brotherly” Arab nations. The diatribe that I had witnessed on some of Egypt’s TV channels was unprecedented. I am sure that some Algerian commentators did not waste time waging attack on Egypt.
The two countries are different in many ways. Algeria is still trying to find closure to years of civil war in which tens of thousands were killed and injured. Because of its colonial past, which lasted longer than most other Arab countries, millions of Algerians were forced to emigrate to France and other francophone countries. Egypt, on the other hand, has been relatively stable for decades. Its political and economic attention has been focused on its eastern and southern Arab neighbors.
Millions of Egyptians live and work in Gulf states. Egypt’s role in the Middle East peace process has seen better days. Its relations with Sudan, its southern neighbor, have been turbulent for years. None of this explains the strange acrimony between Egypt and Algeria. The latter has never competed with Cairo for pan-Arab leadership, nor does it have the credentials for such role. Both countries have enough internal problems, whether political, economic or social.
The only plausible explanation for the recent fracas could be that at least one of the governments is seeking to export its domestic difficulties and redirect public attention outward.
Soccer, the primary sporting activity in the Arab world, receives official patronage and backing in an unusual manner. Royalty and officialdom have adopted the sport in a way to demonstrate a narrow sense of nationalism. Soccer is the alternative to politics, or maybe an extension of it that is both benign and sterile.
Creating imaginary foreign enemies is one easy way to deflect attention from local issues. It could be that the media were led, or misled, into making the Egypt-Algeria affair an existential, even a chauvinist, conflict. It could be that people, on both sides of the divide, were juxtaposing their most inner frustrations about many things that had gone wrong with their lives. A key soccer match was one way to let these frustrations out, even against brethren!
— Osama Al Sharif is a veteran Arab journalist and political
commentator based in Jordan.
