Kabylia is not merely a geographic region of Algeria. For several decades, it has embodied a strong aspiration for cultural, democratic, and social recognition within the framework of Algerian national unity. The Kabyles, educated and politically engaged, uphold values such as freedom, pluralism, solidarity, and dignity. However, despite a common will, every unifying movement in Kabylia faces internal divisions that hinder the collective capacity to influence decisions concerning it.
At the end of the 1980s, the Berber Cultural Movement (MCB) emerged as the first force capable of bringing Kabylia together around cultural and identity demands. After the Berber Spring, the recognition of the Amazigh language and Kabyle culture gained broad popular support. Yet, internal rivalries quickly led to a split between MCB-Coordination and MCB-Commission, permanently weakening the movement and delaying the consolidation of a common project.
After the Black Spring of 2001, a return to local traditions and participatory governance manifested through the Aârchs, assemblies inspired by the Tajmaât, an ancestral model of collective management. These structures embodied hope for a horizontal organization of Kabyle society, based on consensus and respect for traditions. Unfortunately, internal disagreements and personal ambitions eventually fragmented these initiatives, limiting their long-term impact.
The emergence of the Movement for the Autonomy of Kabylia (MAK) marked a new stage in the Kabyle quest. This movement demands administrative and cultural autonomy while affirming its attachment to the Algerian state and its unity. Its rapid success reflects the popular desire for local management respectful of regional specificities. However, when MAK radicalized by advocating self-determination, a division appeared between moderates, who favor autonomy within national unity, and radicals, more inclined toward independence. This division once again weakened the movement’s strength.
These divisions cannot be understood without considering the complex political and social context surrounding Kabylia. The central government, often centralizing, perceives any Kabyle unity as a potential threat. Moreover, internal rivalries, political vision divergences, and the influence of the diaspora sustain the fractures. External actors sometimes use the Kabyle issue as a strategic lever, thereby adding to the complexity of the matter.
Despite these challenges, Kabylia represents a unique social model based on horizontal governance, community autonomy, solidarity (Tiwizi), cultural and religious pluralism, social equality, the central role of women, and freedom of expression. This model, incompatible with authoritarian centralism, explains why a united Kabylia is perceived as a political and symbolic force.
Even today, Kabylia continues its mobilization around a clear demand: to obtain reinforced autonomy that recognizes its cultural specificity while preserving the integrity and unity of Algeria. Divisions weaken movements but do not undermine the very essence of this people, capable of renewal and determined to defend their ideals.
Thus, Kabylia illustrates a paradox: a proud people, deeply attached to their roots, seeking to combine autonomy and national unity, refusing division while aspiring to recognition. Understanding Kabylia means understanding this complex dynamic where democracy, identity, and national cohesion coexist in a fragile but hopeful balance.