Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

France deals abruptly with Islamists

by asdf Fri Jul 29th, 2005 at 08:56:35 PM EST

America responds to terrorism with a massive clampdown on airline security, but ignores numerous other potential trouble spots. Britain responds by hand-wringing, as it's virtually impossible in U.K. law to kick somebody out of the country. France responds by summarily sending troublemakers home.

"The gulf between British and French treatment of preachers of hatred and violence was thrown sharply into focus yesterday when France announced the summary expulsion of a dozen Islamists between now and the end of August. A tough new anti-terrorism package was unveiled by Nicolas Sarkozy, the interior minister and a popular centre-Right politician. His proposals reflect French determination to act swiftly against extremists in defiance of the human rights lobby, which is noticeably less vocal in France than in Britain."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/Content/displayPrintable.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/30/ncleric30.xml&am p;site=5

Which approach is best? The individual right of everyday civilians to live their lives as they wish must be weighed against society's desire for safety. How do you reach a sensible balance?

there is a lengthy article on the topic in Foreign Affairs on this topic. I'll put up the link tonight (not at hand right now and will be offline for most of the day), as well as to some earlier diaries on the topic. Expelling imams is the least of it. Remember that we have a "political police" in France, the Renseignements Généraux.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Jul 30th, 2005 at 02:31:33 AM EST
Robert S Leiken (Foreing Affairs)

With a few exceptions, European authorities shrink from the relatively stout legislative and security measures adopted in the United States. They prefer criminal surveillance and traditional prosecutions to launching a U.S.-style "war on terrorism" and mobilizing the military, establishing detention centers, enhancing border security, requiring machine-readable passports, expelling hate preachers, and lengthening notoriously light sentences for convicted terrorists. Germany's failure to convict conspirators in the September 11 attacks suggests that the European public, outside of France and now perhaps the Netherlands, is not ready for a war on terrorism.

Contrary to what many Americans concluded during Washington's dispute with Paris in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, France is the exception to general European complacency. Well before September 11, France had deployed the most robust counterterrorism regime of any Western country. Irish terrorism may have diverted British attention from jihad, as has Basque terrorism in Spain, but Algerian terrorism worked the opposite effect in France.

To prevent proselytizing among its mostly North African Muslim community, during the 1990s the energetic French state denied asylum to radical Islamists even while they were being welcomed by its neighbors. Fearing, as Kepel puts it, that contagion would turn "the social malaise felt by Muslims in the suburbs of major cities" into extremism and terrorism, the French government cracked down on jihadists, detaining suspects for as long as four days without charging them or allowing them access to a lawyer. Today no place of worship is off limits to the police in secular France. Hate speech is rewarded with a visit from the police, blacklisting, and the prospect of deportation. These practices are consistent with the strict Gallic assimilationist model that bars religion from the public sphere (hence the headscarf dispute).

I have a number of problems with that article, including that it presents European countries as new to immigration, which is a lie which is getting really old. Even Germany, as was pointed out in another thread, has a long immigration history (with Poles for instance), and France is just as much of an immigration country as are the US. It also repeats the totally unrealistic population projections of the CIA regarding European Muslims (who are supposedly going to take over, although all serious studies show that their birth tate is little different to that of the "natives" (I will provide some links - hell, I'll probably do a diary on that soon)).

The summary says it all, actually:

Summary: Radical Islam is spreading across Europe among descendants of Muslim immigrants. Disenfranchised and disillusioned by the failure of integration, some European Muslims have taken up jihad against the West. They are dangerous and committed -- and can enter the United States without a visa.

Robert S. Leiken is Director of the Immigration and National Security Program at the Nixon Center and a nonresident Fellow at the Brookings Institution. He is the author of Bearers of Jihad? Immigration and National Security After 9/11.

Brown people with white people's passports. Ouhh, scary... Can't we have anything better?

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Jul 30th, 2005 at 06:05:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Wonder if the US could expel our Talibaptists??  Doubt anyone would take them anyway.
by HiD on Sat Jul 30th, 2005 at 03:59:14 AM EST

Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Top Diaries