"In the face of such an event France can only be strong if there is a national unity. We owe it to the victims of these cold-blooded assassinations. We owe it to our country”. Nicolas Sarkozy, urges the people of France to join together to mourn the death of seven people in Toulouse and Montauban. He then compared the ‘traumatism’ that France has suffered directly to the US and New York terrorist attacks after 11th of September 2001. Yet, in such a politically charged environment, and in a country with social, religious and racial tensions many are posing the question is national unity even a possibility? The first attack occurred on the 11th of March 2012, when Sergeant Imad Ibn-Ziaten (a Muslim French paratrooper) was shot dead outside a gym in Toulouse. The second attack followed on the 15th of March 2012, where two uniformed soldiers Abel Chennouf and Mohamed Legouad were killed in a shopping centre in Montauban. The last attack in the series took place on the 19th March 2012 at the Ozar Hatorah Jewish day school, where the victims Rabbi Jonathan Sandler and his two sons Gavriel, 3 years old, and Aryeh, 6 years old, and the headmaster’s daughter Miriam Monsonego, 8 years old, were shot in the head at close range.
These events were claimed by French officials to be the biggest manhunt in France in recent years. It was established that these incidents were the work of the same man that used the same gum, rode the same 500cc Yamaha scooter, and acted with the same cold-hearted brutality. The police later then identified the perpetrator as Mohammed Merah, a 23 year old of Algerian extraction, is said to have wanted to “teach France a lesson”. Some sources claim that he was religiously inspired by Al-Qaeda to attack, others state that it was a political cause and that he wanted to avenge Palestinian children, and attack the French army because of its foreign interventions. Yet, the religious reasoning is not sufficient as he attacked symbols: the army, and he kills Jews, Christians and Muslims without distinctions. People around his neighborhood also described his character as quiet, easy-going and nothing at all like an “extremist Jihadi Salafist”. Even Sarkozy argued: “The Islamic faith has nothing to do with the insane motivations of this man". Merah said that he was motivated by France's ban on wearing the burqa, that "the Jews have killed our brothers and sisters in Palestine”. Dan Bilefsky, a Parisian news correspondent interestingly linked Merah’s anger to the unemployment and alienation of immigrants in France, as Merah attempted to join the French army and was rejected due to his ‘petty’ crimes. Rosie DiManno, reduced his motivation to Merah being a sociopath who adopted a terror agenda as a cover for his pre-existing rage and who sought "posthumous grandeur."
Marine La Penn who ran for the right-wing anti-immigration National Front Party (who won 20% of French vote in the recent elections) stated: “the rush of fundamentalism has been underestimated in our country. Certain political and religious groups are developing in the face of certain laxness”. So what did the Merah’s actions represent? What were the roots behind these attacks, and to what extent did politics and politicians instigate them? How did this incident relate to or affect the French election campaign? After a two-day suspension of the campaign, the political atmosphere in France changed as the focus shifted ‘further to the right’. The campaign introduced more discussion for insecurity, immigration, Islamism, anti-Semitism and of Afghanistan, Israel and Palestine. Precisely where Sarkozy is comfortably at ease. In a broader context how did these shootings reflect on the new rise ‘harmful anti-multiculturalism’ rhetoric in Europe? As exampled from the Norwegian right-wing extremist Anders Breivik whose terrorist attacks killed 77 people due to his strong anti-immigration opinions.
After a 30-hour siege, on the 22nd of March, Mohammed Merah was shot dead in a gun- fight with the French special operations tactical unit in his own home. This controversial figure may have been killed, but with his death arise many questions surrounding the future of France’s deep social divisions and issues that can no longer be ignored.
No comments:
Post a Comment