It’s reported this morning that Algeria will hold a referendum next month to further the process of “peace and national reconciliation,” including extending an amnesty to some Islamic militants.

Algeria doesn’t get much coverage in the Australian media, but it’s a country that John Howard could usefully study because it graphically shows how anti-democratic strategies to combat extremism don’t work.

After many years of authoritarian government, Algeria tried to liberalise in 1991, when waves of democratic reform were sweeping the world. Free elections were called, but when Islamic fundamentalist parties looked like winning, the army stepped in and, with the tacit support of the west, cancelled the second round of voting and re-imposed the dictatorship.

The resulting civil war is estimated to have cost 150,000 lives and $30 billion. Since 1999, President Abdelaziz Bouteflika has been trying to find a way out of the mess; the killing seems to have subsided, but the Islamic parties remain illegal and their supporters have boycotted elections. Now he is making a further effort to bring them within the fold.

Those who want to fight Islamic terrorism here by dispensing with basic democratic rights should take a good, hard look at Algeria. Repression of Islamists in the first place just brought them electoral support, then depriving them of its fruits brought untold bloodshed. Australia is fortunate to not be faced with consequences on anything like that scale, but the principle is the same: countering extremism with repression is counter-productive.