Algeria: why the military might not want to give up power

Algeria recently had their 21st Friday of protests. Reuters has this summary:

The military has tried to appease protests by helping the judiciary to meet demands for the prosecution of people suspected of corruption. Several former senior officials, including ex-prime ministers Ahmed Ouyahia and Abdelmalek Sellal have been placed in custody over charges including “dissipation of public funds”. . . . Anti-government protests now seek the resignation of interim president Abdelkader Bensalah, a former head of the upper house of parliament, and Prime Minister Noureddine Bedoui.

Let's key in on the corruption topic.



Here's an article from The Globe Post with this:

In a recent report by the Brookings Institute, it was found that around 90 percent of Algerian protestors, soldiers, and junior officers in the military and almost 80 percent of non-protestors and senior military officers believe the rallies will result in a transition to democracy. However, this could prove difficult because, despite the large numbers attendees, the movement lacks the organization to be able to negotiate with military leaders and reach a compromise, Sharan Grewal, a research fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings, said at an event at the Brookings Institute on Wednesday.

So everyone believes that democracy will happen, but here's a little wrench in the process and that has to do with the military.

Those who hold higher-rankings have benefitted from the corruption of the former Algerian regime, which makes them resistant to change, whereas lower officers have not experienced such benefits. However, the report found that the lower and upper ranking officers would come together if the rise of democracy threatened military power. If this were to happen this would increase the probability of the military repressing protest efforts, said [Sharan Grewal, a research fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings].

It is interesting that The Globe Post is saying that high ranking military officials have benefited from corruption. Yet at the same time these military officials are the ones who are arresting people suspected of corruption. I actually don't find it odd that lower and upper ranking officials are aligned when it comes to resisting the democratic movement if it impacts the military's power. Lower ranking officers may not benefit from corruption, but their desires have to be that they'll move up the ranks someday and get a piece of the corruption pie.