When a right-wing politician objects to a student exchange program, we’re not simply observing an academic debate; rather, we’re witnessing a political investment in a scholarly endeavor. The recent opposition by François-Xavier Bellamy, a prominent figure in the French right-wing party ‘Les Républicains,’ to Algeria’s inclusion in the ‘Erasmus+’ program raises critical questions about the line between principled stances and electoral calculations, and between defending values and selectively applying them.
Before delving into the political controversy, it’s crucial to clarify the nature of the ‘Erasmus+’ program, which has sparked such debate. Launched in 1987, it’s a European program for student and academic exchange aimed at enabling students and researchers to study and train at universities and research institutions outside their home countries. This fosters scientific cooperation and builds bridges of cultural understanding. Millions of European students have benefited from the program over the decades, making it a symbol of academic openness and knowledge integration.
Extending this program to include countries in the Southern Mediterranean, including Algeria, isn’t a ‘privilege,’ as Bellamy suggests, but rather an investment in building regional scientific networks that serve long-term stability and development. Turning this academic initiative into a political bargaining chip distorts its essence and objectives.
The first question that arises is: why Algeria specifically? The program includes ten Mediterranean countries, some with well-known varying human rights records. It even includes Israel, which faces international accusations of war crimes in Gaza. Yet, Bellamy chose to focus his criticism solely on Algeria, using the imprisonment of writer Boualem Sansal and journalist Christophe Gleyse as a pretext.
This selective objection reveals a political, rather than human rights-based, motivation. If the standard is respect for human rights and freedom of expression, why haven’t we heard Bellamy’s voice with the same intensity regarding other countries included in the program? Or are European values applied selectively based on specific political contexts? This raises concerns about the instrumentalization of human rights for political gain. The situation requires careful analysis to understand the underlying motives.
