Kepel blames France’s home-grown terrorism on left-wing
politicians who exploit the country’s disaffected Muslim youth. He compares
Sarkozy and Hollande (right and left) who both came to power after the 2005
Paris Riots, and the way they both used the troubles as a platform. Sarkozy
stood on a platform of dealing harshly with the rabble, while the leftist
Francois Hollande sought to attract the angry youth. Kepel then refers to the
1983 protest marches by Muslim youth, which were somewhat more peaceful than
recent events, and which President Mitterand, an old socialist, exploited.
Rather than look into the complaints by disaffected minorities, Mitterand used
the unrest as a platform to attack the conservative parties as being racist.
Gilles Kepel, a
political science professor, doesn’t take sides; on the contrary he blames the
right and left equally and doesn’t spare the media. He criticizes French papers
that headlined the riots, as well as the US and UK papers that headlined “Paris
is Burning” which really wasn’t the case. The destruction was almost entirely
in the areas where the Muslim youth lived. The roving hoodlums burned the
stores where they shopped, trashed the schools they attended, and vandalized
the transportation that they commuted on. It all bears resemblance to the LA
Riots in 1992; they burned the stores in their own neighborhoods while the
tourist areas were left intact. In Paris and LA, the rioting did not damage any
monuments.
Another issue
explored by the author is how the combative and belligerent people have no war.
Mohammed Merah’s 2012 murder spree in Toulouse (three kids and a teacher died,
filmed with his go-pro) was the work of a Franco-Algerian, too young to have
fought in the Algerian war of independence. He started his spree by killing
four French soldiers, and the irony is that three were from North Africa and
one from the West Indies. Merah was a juvenile delinquent, served time in
prison, and it was in prison that he came into contact with radical Muslims.
This is a case of an angry criminal youth, lacking a casus belli, looking for
ways to feel powerful. He ended up killing his own people.
Kepel insists that
the Muslim extremists in France are far different from the Salafists in the
Middle East (who were militant from the start.) The French Muslim radicals
began politically, according to the author, because the French government had a
“dump them there and forget about them” attitude with regard to immigration.
All the problems of the France’s immigrant housing project neighborhoods – AKA
the Banlieus – built up over time and exploded in 2005. The financial crisis
then made things worse, and Hollande took advantage of the Muslim vote,
promising radical changes. Whatever these changes were, they never happened,
and the government covered up all the problems in the immigrant communities. To
make a long story short, Hollande sought out the votes of the Muslim bloc, then
dumped them. They got played for suckers.
There is one
problem that is not discussed enough, and that is the policy of Laicite, or the banning of religious
symbols in the public schools. The big challenge was in 2004 when a Kindergarten
teacher - fired for refusing to remove her headscarf - sued and lost in the
High Court. Obviously, this wasn’t good PR for the government, at least not if
they wanted the support of the Muslims. The author doesn’t say if Jewish
teachers were forced to remove skullcaps, shave off their beards, and cut off
their payot. How are the Jews of
France treated under this policy? Furthermore, do they send their children to
their own religious schools? I also wonder what the Jews and Muslims do about
the school lunches in public schools. If pork is served, do the children return
home for lunch? I know they’re not allowed to bring pack lunches like the
Americans and the Brits.
One thing here is
for certain, France has an internal problem that’s going to get a lot worse.
But I wouldn’t be quick to blame the Muslims, for two reasons; first the
government knew this was going to happen, and second, the discriminatory
policies threw the proverbial gasoline on the fire.
No comments:
Post a Comment