The national unity, which brought the French population together following the dramatic events of January, did not survive two weeks. Hence the futility of the belief among observers that much has changed in France in the last two weeks. That is not the case.
People were rightly shocked by the shameful murders, and demonstrated with the Je Suis Charlie logo. The political class behaved in the right manner, with French President Francois Hollande and Prime Minister Manuel Valls leading from the front. But a ‘national union’ rarely prevails too long in a democracy. Beyond the several political agendas pushing one or the other in different directions, many earlier questions came to the fore again.
The first set of issues concerned police inaction before the drama. The kosher hypermarket attacker Ahmedy Coulibaly had been questioned by policemen on a routine patrol 10 days before the carnage. The reaction was quite ‘professional’ once it appeared he was a dangerous individual: Policemen did not stop him as instructed in such cases, but referred immediately to their higher-ups. What happened then? Nothing — just as nothing happened when one of the journalists’ murderers stopped wearing an electronic bracelet he was supposed to, some months earlier. As Valls said, “It is clear that with 17 murders, something did not work”. Will someone someday take the blame for it?
A second set of questions logically concerned more general security matters: the financial resources to collect more information, dispatch more staff and eventually, review the prevailing law. It was a good opportunity for the opposition right to stiffen their campaign against the lax Minister of Justice Christine Taubira; and to relaunch the perennial debate about using existing tools better or adding new ones — an endless rhetoric from which very few expect any concrete outcome.
The time then appeared to be ripe to tackle “the” issue, one that nobody would address openly: Can one be French and Muslim? Can Islam mix with democracy and the Republic? To make sure the debate started well, the next issue of Charlie Hebdo would be published with a front page that would undoubtedly be considered as a provocation by many Muslims – but in the name of the freedom of speech, which some think has no limits.
In other words, a shameful action by degenerate and moronic muggers, who believe they are soldiers because they fought in Syria together with barbarians who dare to speak in the name of Islam, is constituting the basis for of a kind of controversy that requires knowledge, tact and cautiousness. Gross arguments will be exchanged without reservation, one citing a surah of the Quran “showing” how “violent” Islam is; another explaining it should not be interpreted that way; a third one displaying unrelated videos. Thus a filthy melting pot is being shaped in lieu of debate, filling up with “analysis” from self-proclaimed Islam “experts”, genuine populists and racists. On the contrary, France should start working seriously on many issues: A poor integration policy, which has drifted into communitarianism because of a lack of courage and belief in its own values; growing poverty in the suburbs, where a neglected and badly educated population has little left to believe in; a lack of means to make the French state be respected in each and every part of the territory. Also maybe, adding a little bit of Equality and Fraternity to Liberty.
Rebooting education system
Despite all this, an insane foreign policy in Libya and in Syria did not help. Isn’t it, for instance, nonsensical to believe it is possible to eradicate both Daesh (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) and Syrian President Bashar Al Assad at the same time? Why do French neoconservative diplomats not ask the question: “Who are our worst enemies?” This is not to make judgements about the necessary French move in Mali. France and its allies did not create the chaos there. They have enemies who are knocking at the door and it warranted a concrete reaction, which has little to do with new colonial ‘military adventurism’ or the so-called ‘abstract war’ against terrorism. This is why a genuine debate today in France should deal first with rebooting the education system, managing integration together with immigration flow, implementing better security and a better-suited foreign policy, which on the whole is simply restoring sovereignty. Getting into endless debates about ‘Islam and the Republic’ may look intellectually exciting, but the state should first do its job through reinstating the acceptance of common values and making the people of all religions feel safe at home — and not telling the French Jews their country is Israel.
Implementing law and order is not to be confused with discussions conducted by Islamophobes, or provoked by thugs who declare they are ‘Muslim’. Hollande has started to beef-up the security component of his action — and he is already focusing on other issues like unemployment. The French people are waiting to see whether he will or will not make a difference.
Luc Debieuvre is a French essayist and a lecturer at Iris (Institut de Relations Internationales et Strategiques) and the Faco Law University of Paris.
