Colonialism didn’t end with independence – for many African countries, the damage is still ongoing, and they now want the world to finally treat those abuses as real, prosecutable crimes. And this is the part most people miss: they’re not just asking for apologies, but for concrete legal recognition, accountability, and reparations.
At a major gathering in Algiers, Algeria, African leaders and diplomats came together to push a bold agenda: have the crimes committed during the colonial era formally recognized, criminalized, and addressed through a system of reparations. They are building on a resolution adopted earlier this year by the African Union, which calls for justice and compensation for people and nations harmed by colonial rule. In other words, this is not just a symbolic conversation – it is an attempt to turn historical grievances into legal and political action.
Algeria’s foreign minister, Ahmed Attaf, used his opening address to highlight how Algeria’s own painful history under French domination illustrates why compensation and the return of stolen assets are seen as essential. From his perspective, reparations should not look like charity or goodwill gestures from former colonial powers, but rather like overdue obligations. In a legal framework, he argued, restitution must be understood as neither a “gift” nor a “favor,” but as something Africa is entitled to demand.
Why recognition matters so much
Attaf stressed that African countries have the right to insist on explicit, official recognition of the crimes committed against their peoples during the colonial period. In his view, this acknowledgment is the critical first step before the world can meaningfully deal with the long-term fallout of colonialism. Without that step, he argued, African societies will continue to bear the costs in the form of exclusion from global power structures, ongoing marginalization, and persistent underdevelopment.
Many of the practices that defined colonial rule – such as slavery, torture, and systems resembling apartheid – are already banned under widely accepted international conventions and statutes. The United Nations Charter also prohibits taking territory by force. However, it does not clearly or explicitly name colonialism itself as a crime. That gap in international law has become a central concern for African leaders who argue that, despite the end of formal empires, the legal system has never fully caught up with the reality of what colonialism did.
A push to label colonialism a crime
This missing reference to colonialism was a key topic at the African Union summit held in February. There, heads of state and government discussed a proposal to craft a unified African position on reparations and to work toward an agreed, global definition of colonization as a crime against humanity. If that idea gains traction, it could reshape how history is treated in courts, diplomacy, and international negotiations. But here’s where it gets controversial: some fear that such a move could open the door to massive claims that many former colonial powers will fiercely resist.
The financial damage associated with colonial exploitation in Africa is often described as immense, with some estimates suggesting that the value of resources taken and wealth extracted runs into the trillions. European empires enriched themselves by mining gold and diamonds, tapping rubber, and exploiting other minerals, frequently through violent and coercive methods. In the process, they built great fortunes abroad while leaving many local communities weakened, impoverished, and structurally dependent.
The fight over stolen heritage
In recent years, several African states have stepped up campaigns demanding the return of cultural treasures and artifacts taken during the colonial era and still displayed or stored in European museums. These objects are more than just beautiful artworks or historical curiosities; they are seen as pieces of identity and memory that were removed without consent. For many activists and politicians, bringing them home is a concrete, visible form of reparation and a way to reclaim history.
Attaf also underscored that there was a deliberate choice in hosting this conference in Algeria. The country endured some of the harshest forms of French colonial rule and later fought an especially bloody war to win its independence. That history gives Algeria a particular moral authority, in the eyes of its leaders, to speak on questions of colonial injustice and reparations.
Algeria’s “bitter ordeal” under French rule
During the colonial period, nearly one million European settlers in Algeria enjoyed far greater political, economic, and social privileges than the majority Indigenous population. Algeria was legally integrated into France, and Algerian men were drafted to fight in World War II. Yet, despite that legal status, they were denied equal rights and opportunities. The contradictions of being “part of France” but treated as second-class subjects helped fuel the demand for liberation.
The struggle for independence came at a huge human cost. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed in the revolution. French forces, attempting to maintain control, used torture against detainees, forcibly disappeared suspected opponents, and razed or punished villages as part of counterinsurgency campaigns. These experiences left deep scars and continue to shape how Algerians understand justice, memory, and their relationship with former colonial powers.
Attaf described Algeria’s past as a particularly extreme and rare example of colonial oppression – a kind of historical case study that still informs the continent’s wider political thinking. For many African leaders, the Algerian story is not just national history; it is a warning and a reference point when they debate how to respond to unresolved colonial-era grievances today. But here’s where opinions can split: should that painful history be mainly a basis for legal claims and reparations, or also a foundation for reconciliation and forward-looking partnerships?
Western Sahara and “unfinished decolonization”
Algeria’s own experience also shapes how it views the ongoing dispute over Western Sahara, a territory formerly controlled by Spain that is now claimed both by neighboring Morocco and by the pro-independence Polisario Front. Algerian officials argue that this situation represents a case of decolonization that never reached its proper conclusion.
At the Algiers conference, Attaf repeated that position, echoing the official line of the African Union. He called Western Sahara “Africa’s last colony” and praised the Indigenous Sahrawi people for their continued efforts to secure what he described as their legitimate and legal right to self-determination. He pointed to international legal principles and UN positions on decolonization as supporting their claims. And this is the part most people miss: within the African Union itself, some member states are increasingly siding with Morocco, which creates real tension around the notion of a unified African stance.
Balancing justice and diplomacy with France
For decades, Algeria has pushed for colonialism to be addressed squarely within international law, rather than treated as a purely moral or historical debate. At the same time, Algerian leaders have tried to avoid steps that could severely damage relations with France, where the memory of the Algerian war remains highly sensitive and politically charged. This delicate balancing act means calls for justice often have to coexist with pragmatic concerns about trade, migration, and security cooperation.
In 2017, French President Emmanuel Macron referred to parts of France’s colonial history in Algeria as amounting to crimes against humanity. However, he did not issue a full, official apology on behalf of the French state. Instead, he urged Algerians not to remain permanently focused on past wrongs. For many victims’ families and activists, that position feels like partial recognition without full accountability, and it fuels ongoing debate about what real reconciliation would require.
Symbolic versus real compensation
Mohamed Arezki Ferrad, a member of Algeria’s parliament, has argued that any compensation must go far beyond symbolic gestures or carefully worded statements. In his view, meaningful reparations need to involve tangible actions and material measures that reflect the scale of harm inflicted during colonial rule. One of his examples is the issue of cultural property and historical objects removed from Algeria.
Ferrad noted that many important Algerian artifacts taken during the colonial era have still not been returned by France. Among these is Baba Merzoug, a massive 16th-century cannon that once stood as a powerful symbol on the Algerian coast and now remains in the French port city of Brest. For Algerians who advocate for reparations, the fate of such objects is not a minor side issue but a visible test of whether former colonial powers are serious about righting past wrongs.
So here’s the big, uncomfortable question: if colonialism is finally recognized as a crime under international law, what should genuine justice look like – symbolic apologies, financial compensation, the return of artifacts, or something else entirely? Do you think former colonial powers should be legally obligated to pay reparations and return cultural treasures, or is it better to focus on building new relationships without reopening old wounds? Share where you stand – even if it’s unpopular – in the comments.
