This Wednesday evening, December 14, it’s more than a football match that will be played at the Al-Bayt stadium (Al-Khor), in the Qatari desert. For the first time, an Arab country, Morocco, will participate in a World Cup semi-final. An event of considerable symbolic significance, as explained by Maghreb specialist Pierre Vermeren, professor of contemporary history at the University of Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne and director of the book Misconceptions about the Arab World (The Blue Rider, 2012).
L’Express: How to understand the intensity of this Moroccan pride that has been expressed for a few days?
Pierre Vermeren: Morocco has a very particular history. It is a very old empire that has become a nation-state, which resisted the Ottoman Empire, and a religious power that is quite unique in contemporary Islam. In Islamic terms, it is much more capable than its counterparts in the Gulf… Morocco has not experienced a civil war or a revolution, it has not needed a war to free itself from colonization. And some even affirm today that it was not colonized, that the protectorate was not much… It is a society relatively preserved by history, if we compare it to the Algerian or Egyptian style. The monarchy plays very well on this very old history, on this particularism.
How do you analyze the incidents that took place on the Champs-Elysées after Morocco’s victories? Willingness to affirm, resentment towards France? The question has become political…
The affirmation of this victory by Moroccan nationals and dual nationals, in the heart of the French capital and almost all provincial towns, is a political fact, especially when it obscures the success of the France team. At the start of the demonstration, all the Franco-Moroccan youth were there. It was a very socially diverse audience and not at all violent. The phase of the thugs is something else… It’s like that in all processions. A violent minority warmed up and sought their Warholian quarter of an hour of glory. Victory is a pretext. Several hours also elapsed between the two phases of the demonstration.
France’s relationship with Morocco still seems less conflictual than with Algeria. Why ?
The situation is of course less tense, because the liabilities are not the same. There is no liability linked to the Algerian war. Morocco is a country where nationalism is on edge. There is a very strong Moroccan and Muslim communitarianism. We are surprised by the reflexes of the diaspora, but Moroccans are very proud of their history. As with the whole of Africa, the country’s colonial history and relative poverty, which is the cause of immigration, have created tensions, even resentment. With France, there have been temporary crises, but the relationship is less conflictual than with Algeria, and less staged by the authorities.
For the Franco-Moroccans, will tomorrow’s match be primarily a heartbreak or a reconciliation between their two ancestries?
The tendency is to support the team that is presumed to be the weakest. Of course, Franco-Moroccans are tempted to go to Morocco, a country that has never won the World Cup. That he arrives at this level of the competition, it was unexpected. In Morocco, football is the second religion after Islam. We can not imagine this devouring passion, this frustration accumulated over decades of watching his team lose. In a poor, authoritarian, formerly colonized country, where opportunities for national joy are rare, there is an overinvestment in football.
“For a moment, Morocco is the representative of the Arab world, Africa and Islam”
Out of twenty-six players, the Moroccan selection only has twelve born in the country. Many were trained in Europe. Is it basically a very European team?
The Maghreb countries have chosen to repatriate “their” players, not to leave the Zidane and Benzema of tomorrow to France or other European countries. This is the whole issue of immigration and the diaspora. The diaspora is attached to the country of origin, even captive to it. Today, we can no longer consider the Maghreb countries without the latter, vital in all areas: sport, show biz, science, literature. Football is the symbol of this unprecedented novelty in the history of peoples. The Heads of State of the Maghreb have long understood the capital importance for them of this emigration.
Would a victory for Morocco against France be seen as revenge for the colonial past?
Resentment and the spirit of revenge are the main engines of human history. There would be immense joy, but in joy there is always a positive part and a slightly bad part… In any case, it would be a symbolic victory for the country, for history, for religion, for ancestors. Morocco is a very communal society, where events are experienced collectively. Our societies are very individualistic, even if football is a bit of an exception.
The Arab world today seems entirely behind Morocco, beyond its political, diplomatic or religious divisions. Is this a front unit?
Of course there are huge divisions in the Arab world. But for a moment, Morocco is its representative, as well as Africa, Islam, even Third World countries – apart from Latin America – which have never reached this stage. of the competition.
The Moroccan selection showed its support for the Palestinian cause. Isn’t it out of step with the regime, which has moved closer to Israel? Should this be seen as hypocrisy?
Obviously there is a discrepancy. Morocco recently entered into agreements with Israel. If all Arab countries, with a few exceptions, have abandoned the Palestinian cause, it remains in the hearts of all their inhabitants. For the peoples of the region, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has kept a symbolic and political charge intact. This is not hypocrisy at all. There is a gap between the heart and the reason, that is to say the real politics, state interests well understood by Moroccans. There is a kind of redemption in this support. It solves nothing and is purely symbolic, but in Arab countries, the symbolic is essential.
Has the awarding of the World Cup to Qatar sparked protests in Morocco? Have the criticisms leveled at Qatar by Western states contributed, conversely, to uniting the Arab world?
The countries of North Africa and the Middle East do not have much esteem for the Gulf countries, mushroom states created in 40 years thanks to petrodollars. They know that these countries have cut badly with their slavery past, especially towards Africans and even Asians. They resort a lot to so-called Arab prostitution. The Arab countries are not fooled by the special circumstances in which this World Cup was awarded to Qatar. Nor are they unaware of Western hypocrisy on the subject.
What would be the political and geopolitical consequences of a possible final victory for Morocco?
It would be an immense satisfaction, the feeling of accomplishment. It’s the most beautiful thing that could happen to Morocco, and even the Algerians would be very happy… It would be a symbolic compensation. Narcissistically, that would be fine. For power, victory would act as a powerful narcoleptic. It would make Moroccans even more imbued with their superiority over their neighbours, even more nationalistic…
Has the Moroccan power exploited, even exploited, the sporting successes of Morocco?
In an unprecedented way, the king descended in the middle of the crowd to celebrate the round of 16. He takes advantage of these successes, he just has to let this sequence unfold. The work was done upstream: the Moroccan government, like the Algerian government, has been interested in football for decades.