The importance of France’s dark history and how it fuels the Muslim conflict today.
President François Hollande’s UN address highlighted the challenges of “ tragedy, conflict and war.” In part referring to the conflict in Syria, Hollande urged for the removal of President Assad citing him as the “source of the problem.” Despite having articulate proposals, ranging from climate change to the Syrian problem- the resonance of Hollande’s speech falls flat. Maybe it’s the unwavering self-importance Hollande places on France’s ability to mother other nations into action- instead of addressing them as equals. His scornful I-told-you-so remarks on the stalemate of the Geneva agreement were important, but who gave Hollande this authority to begin with? There’s also a hint of patronizing tension floating around in regards to Hollande and developing nations- like a kid feeling pressure from their mean step-mother. As opposed to viewing the developing nations as partners, Hollande described them as “reluctant” to engage in such talks, placing them beneath France. Conversely, Hollande’s exuded smugness is only possible if standing from a place of elevated privilege and security. Privilege is what makes Hollande’s words so cringeworthy. Let’s delve into how, and why President Hollande should stick to home base before tackling larger issues on the world stage.
The most unconvincing part of Hollande’s speech was, of course, his discussion of what do about Syria. As he listed Syria’s rising death toll, Hollande urged that “today it is Syria that is calling for [member states] to mobilize, to intervene once again,” but it is exactly this polished denial of involvement in Middle Eastern turmoil by Western nations that has sparked conflict for years. Furthermore, Hollande differentiated between Assad’s regime and Syrian civilians, arguing with conviction that, “No. They are all, those women, those men, those children,victims of the tragedy produced by an alliance of terrorism,” in order to clarify a painfully obvious point- Syrian civilians are not the Assad regime- so apparent that it begs the question of why Hollande even brought it up. As if anyone in the UN General Assembly would assume otherwise? It is exactly this position of privilege that is disturbing when discussing the possible resolve of Middle Eastern conflict- especially through France’s lens.
The hypocrisy of Hollande’s speech is no surprise, however, if one shifts their gaze to the dark history mired in cultural and religious war, invasion and outright racism distinguishing France and the Islamic world’s relationship. While the President has a booming message to terrorist groups that “massacre… and even destroy Humanity’s essential heritage,” his silence over French responsibility at home is what sends the clearest message to young Muslims in France and abroad. The message that France will not recognize problems under its nose. During the Battle of Tours in 732 A.D., Charles Martel defeated the Umayyad Caliphate, who ruled the Iberian Peninsula. This victory permanently stopped Islam from expanding into the European continent. Examples like this litter the pages of French textbooks. The divide is celebrated and as a result this common sense of brooding danger and fear of Islamization has never been far off in the French subconscious. In his failure to address France’s historical past, how can Hollande be viewed as a credible voice for the Syrian people let alone on the UN stage? Moreover, can he expect to bear weight in this conversation, when France has stood in firm opposition for over 1,300 years? No President of France has paid recognition to this history and it’s affects on the rising conflict- and Hollande- in a peak moment of history also failed to do so.
Ultimately, however, Hollande declares, “[France’s] desire is to work with all those who are willing.” To put it lightly, when looking at the 5 million Muslims living in France, the desire to work together is comedic. The growing rift between France’s far right and young Muslim activists has resulted in extreme policy, radicalization and arguably played a role in the Paris bombings. As tensions build, the isolationist mentality thrives, with the two converse populations rarely mixing- let alone ever “working together”. This history helps explain why France represents an open wound to the Islamic State. Although it is difficult to do, a reevaluation of this historic significance must be addressed. France as a nation must engage with its deep fundamental understanding of culture and diversity to make way for level conversation with the Muslim population. Hollande can begin not by making sweeping statements about Syria, but by starting with his own side-lined Muslim-French citizens. Only then, can the pain of both sides be understood and the cycle of violence be put to rest.
Comments