[fblike]
Two weeks ago on January 7, two gunmen stormed into the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical French magazine, and proceeded to kill eleven people and a police officer. The gunmen, Cherif and Said Kouachi, were French citizens with Islamic beliefs and their grievance against Charlie Hebdo was the magazine’s cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, who cannot be depicted per the tenets of the Islam. Over the next two days, French police tracked down and killed the Kouachi brothers, while one of their accomplices, Amedy Coulibaly was killed after taking a kosher supermarket hostage. Coulibaly killed four hostages and one policewoman before being neutralized. The string of attacks shocked the French public, with many seeing the attack on Charlie Hebdo as an assault on the country’s traditions of freedom of speech and expression. On January 11, an estimated 1.3 million people went into the streets of Paris to march against the violence, which included more than forty heads of state. The attacks have presented President Francois Hollande with an opportunity to bolster his reputation among French voters, which has eroded over the last year due to a sluggish economy. However, the attacks may serve to galvanize support for the French far-right, namely the National Front (FN), which has argued for immigration controls and against what they deem as the “Islamization” of France.
This topic brief will cover the status of France’s Muslim population, discuss the French government’s response and that of its international allies to the Charlie Hebdo attacks, and assess how the attacks may affect French politics before 2017 when the country will hold its next presidential election.
Readers are also encouraged to use the links below and in the related R&D to bolster their files about this topic.
The Status of French Muslims
Following the Second World War, France began the process, albeit reluctantly, of granting independence to its former colonies. Extempers are likely aware of the French exit from Indochina in 1954, but may not know as much about France’s bloody campaign in Algeria after 1945. Algeria was the only one of France’s overseas possessions to be deemed as part of France after it was placed under colonial rule in 1830. In the ensuing decades, tens of thousands of French settlers arrived in the country, benefitting from land taken from the native Algerian population. During its occupation France did not grant sufficient political or economic powers to the country’s Muslim population, which provoked a fight for independence in 1954. The war saw the National Libertarian Front (FLN) fight French armed forces and setbacks caused the French Fourth Republic, France’s post-war government, to collapse. The French Fifth Republic under Charles de Gaulle used brutal tactics against the FLN, but failed to pacify the country and by 1962 France granted Algeria its independence. All of this matters for Islam in France because after the granting of independence, Harkis, who were loyalists of the French government, fled the country. Harkis feared that the new Algerian government would target them for reprisals. The French government eventually allowed more than 90,000 Harkis to settle in France after the war.
The number of Muslims moving into France also increased after 1960 when French industries sought cheap laborers. These laborers were drawn not only from Algeria, but other North African countries such as Morocco. In 1976, the French government allowed these immigrant laborers to settle permanently in the country, which spurred family reunification where wives and children joined their fathers in France. The Journalist’s Resource, which provides links to various pieces of research on the French Muslim population and its struggles, explains on January 16 that there are five million people of Muslim descent living in France today, which constitutes 7.8% of the country’s population (this gives France the largest Muslim population of any country in Western Europe). Of this number, only 3.3 million observe the religion, while the other share of the population are secular. If those who observe the faith are only counted as France’s Muslim population their share falls to 5.1%. This is an important fact that extempers should keep in mind for speeches because when reporters often cite the number of Muslims living in France they fail to distinguish between those who practice the religion and those who do not.
One of the tensions for Muslims in French society is that France sees itself as a secular republic. This means that it believes in a very strict separation of church and state. The country still values freedom of religious expression, but it does not want outward signs of religious observance such as crosses, skullcaps, or headscarves to appear in public places. This has caused problems with elements of the country’s Islamic population who wish to have women wear veils in public or show other public signs of their faith. As the Journalist’s Resource explains, in 2004 the French government passed a law that prohibited “conspicuous” religious symbols from public schools and a 2011 law applied this to full-face veils as well. Although many Middle Eastern governments and Islamic activists within the country opposed the legislation, more than 80% of the French public approved of it.
There is also economic tension between French Muslims and the rest of the French population. Many Islamic immigrants were placed in public housing projects in French suburbs called banlieues. Unlike the United States, where suburbs are the location for wealthy and more middle-class populations, France has the opposite phenomenon where the wealthy are located in the core of cities and the poor are pushed to the margins. These banlieues have poor infrastructure and French policymakers have often neglected the economic status of many of them. For example, The UK Telegraph explains on January 15 that Roubaix, France, which is France’s largest Muslim city, has seen its textile factories, which initially drove Islamic immigrants into France in the 1960s, go away and the city is now France’s poorest, with an unemployment rate of 30%. Far-right activists such as United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) leader Nigel Farage has argued that French police are reluctant to enter Muslim communities, thereby allowing de facto sharia law and other un-French practices to take place in the banlieues. This criticism has been challenged, but it is true that there is a lack of sufficient economic opportunity for many of France’s Muslims, which causes immigrant youth to turn to crime or become seduced by extremist views. The Journalist’s Resource notes that the unemployment rate for French immigrants is 17.3%, which is 80% higher than the non-immigrant rate of 9.7%. The unemployment problem is especially acute among young French Muslims and analysts note that this is not due to differences in education or skill levels. This lack of economic integration and opportunity for France’s growing Muslim community helps explain why some, such as The UK Independent on January 9, allege that France is not a multicultural nation. Instead of welcoming newcomers and tolerating them in the public sphere, France has instead tried an aggressive “assimilationist model,” or one could argue a model of neglect, that drives people to the margins and suppresses individual identity.
It is not surprising that a lack of economic opportunity leads to crime, which explains why 60% of France’s prison population of 68,000 is Muslim, according to The Economist on January 17. Prison is an ideal place for radicalization as inmates with extreme views are housed with other prisoners, and those who have very little background in the Islamic faith can come to see radical ideas as acceptable professions of the religion. Indeed, The Economist explains that Cherif Kouachi, one of the Charlie Hebdo gunmen, was allegedly radicalized in a French prison south of Paris between 2005 and 2006. As one can see, France has a vicious cycle that is currently at work. Immigrant populations have been pushed to the margins, ignored by elements of the French government and the economic mainstream, and this in turn is pushing immigrant youth, especially male immigrant youth, toward radical alternatives against a society that has rejected them. This is a recipe for disaster in terms of French stability.
One other source of tension between French Muslims and the French government concerns what the Charlie Hebdo incident was all about: freedom of speech and expression. For Muslims, the lewd depictions of the Prophet Muhammad in Charlie Hebdo constitute blasphemy. Radical Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary wrote in USA Today on January 8 that in Islamic countries the punishment for blasphemy is death, and he warned that liberal democracies should have limits on freedom of expression, especially those that incite hatred. Other countries such as Pakistan have seen thousands of protesters turn out against Charlie Hebdo after the attacks, especially since its first published edition following the attacks carried another illustration of the Prophet, this time crying and holding a sign reading “Je Suis Charlie” (“I am Charlie”). More moderate Muslims do not accept Choudary’s argument that the staff of Charlie Hebdo knew that they were taking a great risk in publishing its cartoons, but they have questioned why certain elements of freedom of expression and speech are limited in France, none of which seem to serve their interests. Haaretz on January 14 questions why French people stand in favor of freedom of expression, yet deny a Muslim woman the right to wear a veil in public, which is an expression of her religious identity and culture. Also, France has laws that prohibit Holocaust denial and statements of anti-Semitism, both of which are due to its troubled history in the Second World War, but it has nothing that fits what Charlie Hebdo did. The New York Times on January 15 says that the French government has said that the distinction between overt hate speech and the Hebdo cartoons is that the magazine did broad satire that covered multiple subjects and that the publication was not completely devoted to mocking Islam. Nevertheless, if the French government is going to prohibit some forms of speech then French Muslims appear to have a point in asking why other forms of speech that offend other populations cannot also be limited. This may be a situation that argues against government regulation of speech in most cases since the move to limit some speech, in this case hate speech for topics sensitive following the Second World War, provides an excuse for limiting other speech when new aggrieved groups appear.
French & International Response to the Terror Attacks of January 7-9
As stated earlier in the introduction to this brief, in the days following the terror attacks in Paris, millions of French citizens marched against violence throughout the country. The marchers showcased a diverse crowd with Catholics, Muslims, Jews, and different international leaders such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The United States failed to send a high statesman to the march, something that it was criticized for by the conservative press, which caused the Obama administration to apologize, according to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation on January 16. Secretary of State John Kerry was eventually dispatched to Paris following the march. Secretary Kerry brought musician James Taylor along to remind the French that “You’ve Got a Friend.” The playing of that song was also lampooned by conservatives. As of right now, the French public is showing signs of unity following the attacks, not having much of a stomach for leaders scoring political points against each other. This unity is unlikely to last, as the United States saw following the September 11 terrorist attacks, but millions of French citizens have taken a public stand in favor of freedom of expression and against the violence used against Charlie Hebdo.
Larger questions loom about where French security services go from here. Much like the Ottawa shootings that Canada experienced last year, French security was aware, according to Al-Jazeera on January 16, that Cherif Kouachi had been jailed for trying to fight American troops in Iraq and was also aware that Said Kouachi had traveled to Yemen for weapons training from al-Qaeda. French intelligence is concerned about the thousands of Westerners who have gone to fight for the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, some of whom have already returned home. The fear is that they will use their experience to create domestic terror cells. Al-Jazeera explains that one-third of the Westerners that have gone to fight for the Islamic State are French, so the French government is seeking greater powers to monitor the Internet and impose more severe travel restrictions on suspected radicals. The French Interior Ministry would like the option of a six-month no-fly ban for those trying to obtain militant training or engage in militant activity abroad. It also wants to require airlines to notify them if those targeted on watch lists try to get tickets. However, it is unclear whether civil libertarians will drop their opposition to these measures.
The French incident has already sparked a row in Great Britain, where David Cameron’s coalition government is seeking the power to get data from mobile applications like SnapChat that have encrypted messages. The Agence France Presse reports on January 16 that President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron have already pledged to enhance their cybersecurity defenses following the incident and will cooperate to fight domestic terrorism. This will include the National Security Agency (NSA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) teaming up with their counterparts in the British intelligence arm MI5. For the larger European Union, steps might be taken to limit the free movement of European citizens, which is provided for under the Schengen system. The UK Independent writes on January 13 that the French government will try to take a greater interest in external affairs since the weapons that carried out the attacks of January 7-9 came from outside of the country. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace also writes on January 13 that one of the collaborators of the Hebdo attacks allegedly fled from Paris to Madrid and then managed to escape to Turkey, adding a greater impetus to put checks on the Schengen system for suspected terrorists.
Still, it is not as if the French government has been negligent fighting Islamic extremism up to this point. Slate writes on January 13 that French security personnel enjoy broad powers to detain terror suspects and are closely tied in with judges, making it easy to win approval for wiretaps and searches. These broad powers were granted after France faced a wave of terrorist bombings in the 1980s. The French police have also shown very little regard for the rights or attitudes of racial or religious minorities, including Muslims, in past decades, and the country has engaged in several military offensives against jihadists abroad, whether it be in Afghanistan, Mali, or Syria. One imagines that those military offensives will continue and indeed, Hollande has made it a point to step up the bombing of terror targets abroad in light of the Hebdo attacks.
Nevertheless, France must ask itself how it intends to win over moderate Muslims and root out extremists. Hollande has warned French people against anti-Islamic beliefs and French Prime Minister Manuel Vallis has made clear that France is waging a war against terrorism and not the Islamic religion. However, CNN on January 14 explains that the Union of Islamic Organizations in France (UOIF) has said that the French government is not doing enough to protect mosques against attacks in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo shooting, arguing that there have been more than fifty such incidents since January 7. French police and security personnel have been sent to protect significant political and cultural sites, as well as Jewish synagogues, but French Muslims see a lack of protection as yet another sign of neglect. The best solution for France is to continue to work to integrate its Muslim population and provide greater economic opportunities. Providing avenues out of poverty might be the best cure against extremism. Also, the Carnegie Endowment of International Peace recommends a greater public relations initiative by the French government to educate its citizens about Islam. If France really seeks to become a multicultural society, it must do this in order to make people aware of the concerns of its Islamic minority and dispel notions that their beliefs are not compatible with the West.
The Looming Political Battle
Of course, the far-right National Front (FN) argues that Islamic beliefs pose a problem for Western civilization and point to radical preachers like Anjem Choudary as dangerous. Far-right extremists warn that the birth rates for Islamic immigrant communities are far larger than native European populations, thereby producing a demographic shift where these immigrant communities may one day become the majority in their host nations. They posit that the multicultural experiment (if one assumes that France is trying to do this, remember there is evidence that they have not) has failed because immigrants are not assimilating to French ways and European lifestyles. By tolerating other cultures, some of whom do not share the same European beliefs of secularism in public life, freedom of expression, the feasibility of democratic government, religious toleration, and/or the rights of women and homosexuals, they warn that European civilization is sowing the seeds of its own destruction. Extempers are encouraged to read our topic brief about the European far-right from last season, which discussed the success of far-right parties on the continent in the European parliamentary elections and their ideology.
It would be easy, as some European commentators have done, to write off the far-right as living in a fantasy world. After all, elements of far-right radicalism have been successfully repressed by European governments following the Second World War. However, the European Union’s (EU) economic malaise, coupled with immigration patterns that have the potential to change the demographics of member states, are beginning to make the appeals of the far-right more attractive to voters. It is likely that voters see the UKIP or FN as a vehicle of protest against a political establishment that they deem to be out of touch. For example, those aligning with far-right parties allege that the EU is a distant political institution and Marine Le Pen, the FN’s leader, tells Al-Jazeera on January 13 that France has lost the ability to patrol its borders because of the Schengen regime, thereby allowing illegal arms traffic and other illegal behaviors to proliferate. Euroskeptics, those who do not like the EU, have found a home in far-right radicalism. They question the economic benefits of the euro, something that the FN wants to abandon in France, and rebel against the intellectual elites that dominate the European project. Additionally, some voters are angry at being labeled “racist” or “neo-Nazis” for protesting against changing cultural norms. Reuters on January 12 writes that the Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West (PEGIDA) movement in Germany has been dismissed by Angela Merkel as a hate group, but its members see their concerns as legitimate. The growth of far-right parties in France and Great Britain has the potential to upset traditional political forces, with David Cameron promising to have a referendum on Britain’s EU membership if he wins re-election this year. It is unlikely Cameron would have taken such a step if polls did not show the UKIP eating into his Conservative Party’s voting base.
The next presidential election in France is two years away (France holds a presidential election every five years). Francois Hollande, the Socialist Party’s candidate, had a rough 2014. He weathered an affair with actress Juliet Gayet, which ended his relationship with partner Valerie Trierweiler. He also presided over an anemic economy, which caused his approval ratings to sink below 20%. Polls showed late last year that if Hollande was matched up against Le Pen in a runoff in 2017 that Le Pen would defeat him (according to French electoral rules a candidate must win the first round of voting with 50% or face a runoff with the second place finisher). This would be quite the radical turn for France, which has never elected a FN presidential candidate. In 2002, it sent Marine’s father, Jean, into the second round, but he was soundly defeated by President Jacques Chirac. Le Pen hopes to tie into existing French anxieties about immigration and the economy, both of which have featured prominently in new French books. The Global Post on January 16 explains some of these. Right-wing journalist Eric Zemmour’s work The French Suicide warns that France is becoming too steeped in U.S. consumerism and is losing its way with loose immigration and gay rights policies. Michael Houellebecq’s novel Submission has become a bestseller following the Charlie Hebdo attacks. It tells of a fictitious “Muslim Fraternity” Party supporting a conservative Muslim candidate in the 2022 French presidential election and defeating Le Pen. The presidential winner then goes on to legalize polygamous marriage, forces French schools to adopt an Islamic curriculum, and pushes women out of the workforce to alleviate unemployment. It is my belief that a historian or anyone looking back at the past can tell a great deal about a country by looking at its popular culture, which typically reflects its anxieties, hopes, and aspirations. For example, cultural historians have pointed to films such as “The Blob” in the 1950s that played up concerns about the growth of communism within the United States. France is currently a society in conflict with itself, becoming depressed about its place in the world, and anxious about how immigration may transform it in the coming years.
Yet all these signs of popular culture do not immediately signal a Le Pen victory. First, it is unclear whether French voters in a second round runoff in 2017 would really vote for a FN candidate. Under Marine’s father, the FN was a party of anti-Semitism and hatred toward minorities. Marine has tried to temper this and in her Al-Jazeera interview she made clear that her condemnation of Islamic immigrants was only centered on those who followed fundamentalist beliefs. She has also started more party outreach toward minority and Jewish communities and the FN does have Muslim members. Still, it is tough to convince voters that a party has completely changed and French voters, especially those who are independent, may opt for a party of the status quo rather than a radical alternative. Second, Hollande’s response to the Paris attacks has increased his approval rating. The Global Post article previously cited explains that 79% of French voters approve of Hollande’s actions in the aftermath of the attacks and his approval rating has risen from below 20% to 29%. This is still a really anemic number, but if Hollande can build on this momentum then he might be able to right his political ship. Third, a lot could take place over the next two years. The prospects for the European economy look dim in 2015, with deflation becoming a serious concern and Greece threatening to withdraw from the euro zone, but these concerns will not last forever. Also, Le Pen and the FN could err on a major domestic policy question. Already there are signs that the unity movement created after the attacks that sent people into the streets of Paris works against their interest. Hollande did not invite Le Pen or her allies to the Paris march and Jean Le Pen, according to The Global Post, called the marchers “clowns.” If the FN appears out of touch regarding the sensitivity of the recent violence, then it may weaken whatever political position it now holds until the next presidential election. Two years is an eternity in politics and extempers should not forget that.
Therefore, France is likely to pursue more aggressive security strategies in the wake of the Paris violence. Extempers should be prepared to evaluate how more aggressive French border controls or Internet surveillance measures may dovetail with EU policies and restrictions and assess how those policies could affect French politics. Extempers should also not lose sight of the treatment of France’s Muslim minority. If the French government fails to provide proper attention to them it will lose a valuable tool in its fight against Islamic extremism and may further delegitimize the status of mainstream parties, thereby sending France in a more radical political direction in two years time.