Monday, January 19, 2015

A Crucial Time for Islam and West – Prof Akbar Ahmed - Caravandaily.com




Link to Caravan Daily
 
Home / Comment / Akbar S Ahmed / A Crucial Time for Islam and West – Prof Akbar Ahmed

Ambassador Akbar S Ahmed is Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies at American University in Washington DC. Ahmed, who has served as Pakistan's envoy to Great Britain, is “the world’s leading authority on contemporary Islam,” according to the BBC. He has some seminal books to his credit including 'Living Islam.'

A Crucial Time for Islam and West – Prof Akbar Ahmed

The solidarity march with ‘Charlie Hebdo’ in Paris last week

It is a troubled time in Europe, and it will require wisdom, courage and compassion in both Muslim and non-Muslim leaders

PROF AKBAR S AHMED

The sense of absolute horror at the terrible tragedy that took place in Paris has not yet abated. The enormity of what happened — an attack on the foundations of the idea and practice of a free press — is unprecedented. France grieves and so should all right-thinking people who value democracy and human rights. We commiserate with the families who have suffered such tragic loss.

The president of France, Francois Hollande and his political rival and former president, Nicolas Sarkozy,  appeared together  in a show of unity to condemn what had happened in the strongest words. They faithfully reflected the defiance, anger and shock that the nation felt. World leaders from President Obama to the prime minister of the UK rallied around in a show of solidarity with France, vowing to stand by it.

Both Hollande and Sarkozy cast the attacks in Paris in terms of the Huntingtonian thesis of the clash of civilizations between the West and Islam. Hollande condemned the  ”exceptional barbarism”   and Sarkozy declared this to be a  ”barbaric”  attack on civilization itself. It was “ a war on civilization ,” said Sarkozy. Implicit in such statements was Huntington’s idea of the clash.

It was precisely to look at what is happening in Europe in the context of Islam that I, along with my research team, conducted fieldwork across Europe, which concluded this week. We were in France a fortnight ago.
During fieldwork for the research project called “Journey into Europe,” we visited about 50 towns and cities and 50 mosques, interviewed over 30 imams, across the length and breadth of Europe. We talked to students and professors, taxi drivers and shopkeepers, presidents and prime ministers, archbishops and chief rabbis.

The relevance — indeed urgency — of our project to study the Muslims of Europe was underlined as we traveled last summer. Geopolitical developments in the Middle East — and elsewhere — were linking European Muslims directly to world events. The media were reporting that several thousand European Muslims were involved with the battles raging in Syria and Iraq. Of these, the British government  claimed some 400 were from Britain .

In mid-August, when James Foley, the American journalist, was brutally beheaded by a man who spoke with a British accent and wore a mask, the media frenzy to uncover his identity was the focus of the news. American air strikes began and there was talk of greater military involvement in the Middle East. In some senses, it appeared that it was déjà vu. But this was a substantially changed situation with new players. The theater of conflict was no longer Afghanistan, and the Taliban were no longer the protagonists. The media were now talking of European Muslims being the threat, a Trojan horse. The media discussed   “Jihadi John”  as they had earlier talked of ”Jihad Jane.”

It was now a matter of life and death to understand the European Muslims. From the prime minister of Britain down to ordinary journalists, the question on people’s minds was how to convert Jihadi John to Malleable Mustafa and Jihad Jane to Loyal Leila.

The problem was that this question could not be answered without some knowledge of the Muslim community — its definition of its own identity, its leadership patterns, its religious and political players, the role of the imams, the position of mothers and women in the family in influencing the young men, and relations with government and the broader public. While few people had the answers, these were precisely the questions which needed to be addressed.

That is why our study assumed a greater topicality than had been intended when it was designed. It is an up-to-date study of the Muslim community in Europe in the context of its impact on the world. Because the study is based on fieldwork conducted in the community, it is as authentic as possible, and because it aims to present a holistic picture of the Muslim community throughout the continent, it is able to juxtapose the whole range and diversity of Muslims, from Edinburgh in the north of Great Britain down south to Melilla, a Spanish possession in North Africa, from Cordoba in the west to Xanthi in the east in Greece near the border with Turkey.

Muslims fall into three broad categories in the context of Europe today: they are indigenous or native (like the majority of Bosnians); immigrants (many of them come to the country that colonized their land so feel they have a right to be there as a fact of historical reciprocity — North Africans, especially Algerians, to France, South Asians to Britain; although exceptions include Germany as it invited “guest workers” mainly from Turkey a country that it did not colonize); and converts (especially the young seeking answers to their spiritual problems).

I suggest we examine these different categories of Muslims in Europe in three distinct phases of its history: Muslims have been in Europe since 711, which can be taken as the start of the first phase of the Muslim presence in Europe. It was a time in certain places and for certain periods of what the Spanish call La Convivencia — The Co-Existence   . This phase ended in 1492 with the fall of Granada,  the last independent Muslim kingdom , and the eventual expulsion of Muslims (and Jews) from the Iberian Peninsula.

The second phase of Muslims in Europe starts around the 15th century and lasts until the 20th century and is formed by the clashes between European Christian forces and Ottoman armies. Ideas of Islam as alien and predatory are settled in European minds as a result of this phase.

The third phase starts when European countries colonize Muslim lands in the 19th and 20th centuries and immigrants arrive in Europe to work and find better lives from the second half of the 20th century onwards. A second and third generation of Muslims is now coming of age in Europe. There are many issues around these generations that create debate, controversy, anger and even hatred in the majority population. Issues of “terror”(such as the attacks in Paris), Sharia and the hijab are broadly associated with Islam in the popular imagination.

Here are some preliminary conclusions:
  • What happened in France was shocking and tragic, but not entirely surprising. While we were in the country there were at least three incidents of Muslims committing acts of violence. Most Muslims live in ghetto-like and impoverished “rough” areas. There were entire areas in Marseille, a city in which about 30 percent of the population is Muslim, which seemed to be “no-go” areas. Gangs involving Muslims sold drugs freely. Violence therefore emanating from communities like this is not surprising.
  • The relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims across Europe also feeds into the sense of Muslims feeling under siege today. Over 17,000   Germans marched in Dresden against Islam and  three mosques  were attacked in rapid succession in Sweden. Muslims were being depicted as “non-Europeans” and “barbarians” who had no place in a “civilized” Europe.
  • Muslims throughout the continent were touched by a sense of uncertainty. While there was a significant counter push — for example, the  historic Cologne Cathedral darkened its lights  against the protests in Dresden — it did little to calm the sense of anxiety.
  • We noted a clear-cut double failure: Muslim leadership and organizations have dramatically failed because murderers such as those in Paris are coming out of the Muslim community. Without strengthening the Muslim leadership and community, these tragic incidents will continue. For example, there is no central mosque in Marseille. There is thus no focal point for social organization and action. Muslim leaders should be underlining the fact that the community lives in a different social and cultural context from the ones that they originally inhabited in Algeria or Pakistan; that Muslims everywhere would be unhappy with perceived insults to their faith and their prophet but that the way to protest is not through violence.
  • Local European administrations have also failed. Otherwise, such attacks would not be happening with such frequency. Effective strategies need to be worked out in close coordination with the Muslim community in order to check violence in the future. Violence will not be controlled unless both Muslim and non-Muslim leaders work together. The sense we had was of haphazard initiatives in one place and the excessive use of force in another.
  • We often forget in the United States how close Europe is to Africa and Asia. The continents actually meet; both in the west, with Spain and Morocco, and in the east with Turkey and Greece. This means that borders are “porous.”  Some 150,000  immigrants landed in Italy in 2014.  Some 1,300 were rescued  from the sea while we were on the island. As long as there is political chaos in North and Central Africa and the Middle East, people will flee their homes to find shelter abroad and Europe will remain a destination. A long-term policy to deal with refugees needs to be worked out as soon as possible or local resources will be overwhelmed very soon.
  • Considering the various incidents happening at the same time across Europe, it is not difficult to conclude that the issue of Muslims in Europe will pose a huge challenge to society, including the question of law and order, in the coming time. Dealing with it is a matter of top priority.
  • The president of France and the imam of the main mosque in Paris both rightly condemned the murderers, saying they would go to hell, etc. The problem is the assumption that these actions are religiously motivated. Muslims may have been using religious rhetoric, but these attacks are a consequence of the sociological environment of their lives in Europe today. Therefore, the response needs to be to prevent effectively such incidents in the future rather than getting involved in futile theological discussions. Besides, the strategy and policy to deal with the minority community needs to be set in an all-European context.
  • It is a troubled time in Europe, and it will require wisdom, courage and compassion in both Muslim and non-Muslim leaders. Fortunately, there are men and women of extraordinary vision who we were privileged to meet — from Bent Melchior, the former chief rabbi of Denmark, to Rowan Williams, the former archbishop of Canterbury, to Mustafa Ceric, the former grand mufti of Bosnia-Herzegovina. In their messages of interfaith and intercultural cooperation, dialogue, and understanding, they reflected the Jewish notion of tikkun ulam – to heal a fractured world. We should heed them.
___________________________
Prof Akbar S Ahmed’s latest book and film project is Journey into Europe: Islam, Immigration and Empire

Saturday, January 17, 2015

A tale of two ethnic cleansings in Kashmir - Written by Swaminathan Anklesaria Aiyar in Swaminomics | India | TOI

"200,000 [Muslims] killed and 500,000 displaced in Jammu" ---- to --- "ethnic cleansing of around 400,000 Kashmir Pandits" --- an ongoing saga.
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Swaminomics/a-tale-of-two-ethnic-cleansings-in-kashmir/


The Times of India

A tale of two ethnic cleansings in Kashmir

January 18, 2015, 4:46 am IST
  in Swaminomics | India | TOI

January 19 marks the 25th anniversary of the Azaadi (independence) uprising in the Kashmir Valley, leading to the ethnic cleansing of around 400,000 Kashmir Pandits. For some, this day heralded the rejection of Indian rule by protesting Kashmiris, followed by the bloody suppression of Kashmiri human rights by Indian forces (portrayed in the film ‘Haider’). For the Pandits, it heralded a reign of Muslim terror.

Rahul Pandita has written a heartbreaking first- person account of the Pandit tragedy in ‘Our Moon has Blood Clots’. He shows that ethnic cleansing was not the work of a few Islamic militants, as claimed by optimists. On January 19, Pandita’s Muslim neighbours chanted the Islamic battle cry “Naara-e-taqbeer, Allah-o-Akbar”, made famous as heralding Muslim attacks by the TV film ‘Tamas’. Pandita’s mother swore to kill her daughter and then herself if the house was invaded. The long night passed without an invasion, but many fearful Pandits quickly left.

Soon after, local Muslim boys gathered outside Pandita’s home, and discussed how they would share the houses of departing Pandits and rape their girls. One Muslim boy laughingly said to another, “Go inside and piss: like a dog you need to mark your territory.” Pandita’s terrified father decided to flee.

Official figures say only 219 Pandits were killed in the valley. But the threat of violence was so great, and the chances of curbing it so remote, that lakhs of Pandits fled. Most are now rotting in refugee camps in Jammu.

Recently, an ex-general — also a Pandit — told me the Indian media had underplayed the tragedy of his tribe. I agreed, but added that the media has also ignored the earlier mass expulsion of Muslims from Jammu. This surprised the ex-general: I’ve never heard of that, he declared.

He is not alone. Although our media pride themselves on free and bold speech, they maintain a conspiracy of silence on some issues relating to the supposed “national interest.” This includes the mass killing and expulsion of lakhs of Muslims from Jammu in 1947. That story should be recalled on this sombre anniversary.

Today, Jammu is a Hindu-majority area. But in 1947, it had a Muslim majority. The communal riots of 1947 fell most heavily on Jammu’s Muslims; lakhs fled into what became Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. That turned Jammu’s Muslim majority into a Hindu majority. In sheer scale, this far exceeded the ethnic cleansing of Pandits five decades later.

The jagir of Poonch was a semi-autonomous part of J&K till World War II. Subsequently, the maharaja took direct control and imposed high taxes, with special levies on Muslims. This sparked an anti-tax protest in early 1947, which the maharaja put down with armed force.

Poonch had 50,000 ex-soldiers of the British Indian Army, many of whom still had guns. The maharaja felt threatened by this, and in July ordered all holders of arms to deposit these in police stations. But many arms deposited by Muslim ex-soldiers were then handed out by the maharaja’s police to Hindu and Sikh families, raising communal fears. Muslims responded by purchasing fresh weapons from arms bazaars in neighbouring NWFP province. Sardar Ibrahim Khan, a prominent Poonch politician, organized an armed Muslim force that soon staged a revolt.

The official Indian version holds that the Indo-Pak imbroglio over Kashmir began with the invasion of the valley by Muslim tribesmen in October 1947, obliging the maharaja to accede to India. But many academics, including Christopher Snedden in his book ‘Kashmir: The Unwritten History’, argue that the Poonch revolt was the first step in upending the maharaja’s rule, for purely local reasons unrelated to Indo-Pak claims.

Meanwhile, the bloody partition riots in neighbouring Punjab spilled over into Jammu. Snedden cites estimates of between 70,000 and 237,000 Muslims killed. Historians Arjun Appaduri and Arien Mack in their book ‘India’s World’ give a hair-raising estimate of 200,000 killed and 500,000 displaced in Jammu. Tens of thousands of Hindus were killed and expelled from what became Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, but Muslims were by far the biggest victims.
The ethnic cleansing of Pandits from the valley was more one-sided than that of Jammu Muslims in 1947. Yet in sheer numbers and horrors, the Jammu episode was much worse. We have forgotten what happened then because it is politically and morally inconvenient.

The tragedies of J&K constitute a long, horrific tale of death and inhumanity. It has many villains and no heroes. Both sides have been guilty of ethnic cleansing. Both claim to be victims, forgetting they have also been perpetrators. On the 25th anniversary of the Azaadi uprising, the Hindu-Muslim divide is deeper, and ethnic amnesia more selective, than ever before. Some stories do not have happy endings.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.
 
 
 

Thursday, January 15, 2015

ePetition - http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/73584

ePetition

We want to know the boundaries and limits to the term "Freedom of Speech" in the UK.

When Jews are ridiculed, it's Anti-semitism. When ethnic minorities are targeted, it's racism. When Islam is defamed, it's "Freedom of Speech"?!

We call on the British Government to draw the lines for us, what's acceptable, what's not?

We want a common law for ALL.

We want to detach ourselves from these never-ending Double-standards.

It's the least we can do.


We need 100,000 signatures for it go further.

Stand up for your rights.

Get Involved + SIGN!

Forward to contacts.

Share on Social Media.


Why compensation only to victims of 1984 anti-Sikh riots: Abu Asim Azmi - By Kanchan Srivastava - DNA English Daily, Mumbai, India.





http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-why-compensation-only-to-victims-of-1984-anti-sikh-riots-abu-azmi-2052018


DNA logo


Why compensation only to victims of 1984 anti-Sikh riots: Abu Azmi

Tuesday, 13 January 2015 - 6:55am IST | Agency: dna

Launching a scathing attack on the Narendra Modi-led BJP government at the centre, state unit chief of Samajwadi Party, Abu Azmi, on Monday, said the saffron government was discriminating against Muslims in the country by announcing compensation only to kin of Sikhs who had been killed in New Delhi in 1984 in the wake of then prime minister Indira Gandhi's murder. Azmi demanded that additional compensation be paid to the victims of the 2002 Gujarat riots also.
  •  
Launching a scathing attack on the Narendra Modi-led BJP government at the centre, state unit chief of Samajwadi Party, Abu Azmi, on Monday, said the saffron government was discriminating against Muslims in the country by announcing compensation only to kin of Sikhs who had been killed in New Delhi in 1984 in the wake of then prime minister Indira Gandhi's murder. Azmi demanded that additional compensation be paid to the victims of the 2002 Gujarat riots also.

The central government had last October announced compensation of Rs5 lakh each to the kin of 1984 anti-Sikh riot victims, and has written to all states to disburse the fund as early as possible. This compensation is in addition to what the victims have so far received from the government and other agencies.

Azmi, who is a legislator from Govandi-Mankhurd constituency, said: "If Modi thinks that victims of 1984 riots need to be compensated additionally, then victims of 2002 Gujarat riots and 1992-93 Mumbai riots also deserve similar treatment."

Azmi said he would write to the prime minister seeking similar relief for victims of these two riots. He is set to mobilise the community to press his demand by organising a public meeting in Nagpada which has considerable Muslim population.

"Most of the victims in these two riots were Muslims and therefore they are being deliberately ignored by the BJP government. By such grave discrimination, Modi is polarising the country on religious grounds," said Azmi, who added that the kin of many of the victims of both these riots were yet to be compensated due to red-tape. He did not however provide any details.

Raising doubts about the intentions of the Modi government, Azmi said: "Modi is playing politics of compensation. Delhi elections are here and by paying additional compensation, he is seeking to secure Sikh votes."

Azmi blamed the prime minister for insulting the community. "Modi has always rated Muslims as second grade citizens. He never wears a skull-cap."

He also accused the state government of similar biases against the minority community. "Modi's discrimination policy is being followed diligently by the Fadnavis government which decided against granting reservation to Muslims in educational institutions even after the Bombay high court had okayed it."

Riot death toll

1984 anti-Sikh riots: 3,325 deaths; 2,733 were killed in Delhi alone; rest of the victims were from Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, etc.

1992-93 Mumbai riots: 900 deaths. 2002 Gujarat riots: 1,169 deaths and 2,548 injured.

Monday, January 12, 2015

Muslim outfits plan meet to discuss minority concerns - By Seema Chisti - The Indian Express

The convenor is Mahmood Madani, former Rajya Sabha MP The convenor is Mahmood Madani, former Rajya Sabha MP

Written by Seema Chishti | New Delhi | Posted: January 13, 2015 2:07 am

A number of Muslim organisations, which have so far preferred to remain quiet about the change of government at the Centre, are organising a daylong colloquium on ‘Country and Crossroads’ Sunday to discuss “recent developments in the country which are a source of concern to all peace-loving persons” and to discuss implications of the “unchecked activities of some people and organisations.”

The organisations hosting the colloquium include Jamiat Ulem- e-Hind, Jamat e Islami Hind, Jamiat Ahle Hadees e Hind, Muslim Personal Law Board, Milli Council and the Delhi-based Institute of Objective Studies. The outfits last came together in 2007 to start a process that resulted in the anti-terror Fatwa adopted at Deoband by Dar ul Uloom in 2008.

Of the sessions held the colloquium on Sunday, one will be on attacks on Muslims’ constitutional safeguards. There will be a session on the slogan of ‘inclusive growth’— to point out discrepencies like ignoring the Muslim claim to reservations in Maharashtra even after a court nod, but going ahead with the Maratha reservation. There will also be a session on the security of the average Muslim citizen under the new government.

The convenor is Mahmood Madani, former Rajya Sabha MP, and co-convenor is former SP leader Kamal Farooqui.

An organiser said the outfits had not come together out of fear. “It is a clear-eyed resolve to tackle what is making us uneasy so as to build bridges with groups outside ours, whether they are a minority or not. We know there are many who feel like us,” he added.

Mahmood Madani said: “We met informally recently and are concerned at what we see unfolding despite talk of Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas. This meeting is a platform for several people who are bechain (restless) at the events in recent times”.

The organisers said that in the New Year, “naked threats” from BJP MPs and the PM’s silence on them has raised concerns “either the RSS is running the show or there is a plan that the RSS weakens foundations of the country and tries to attack fundamental rights of the Minorities, while the government pretends nothing is amiss and speaks misleadingly of Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas,”

Farooqui pointed out that apart for some fringe elements amongst Muslims who have reacted or hit out, there has been silence and patience from the mainstream Muslim community. “There was a genuine feeling that the Personal Law Board also expressed, urging to not pre-judge the new government,” he said.

However, he added that the “statements going unchecked” was taking its toll on Muslim youth. “An attempt is being made to even use the unfortunate events in Paris to needle Muslims,” he said.

.

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

The Attack on Charlie Hebdo By Amy Davidson - The New Yorker Magazine

The Writer of the following article: Amy Davidson, appearing to be Jewish by her name, is reporting on Charlie Hebdo with a bit of circumspection, as the Weekly was known to be equally critical of Jews and Zionism. It is an open question, who was the mastermind behind this horrific attack, as since the attackers were named Muslims, the worldwide condemnation, in a knee-jerk reaction will focus on Muslim extremists.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ghulam Muhammed <ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 8:38 AM

Subject: From newyorker.com: The Attack on Charlie Hebdo
In 2011, just six days after the Paris office of Charlie Hebdo, a French satirical magazine under threat for having run cartoons of the prophet Mohammed, was gutted by a firebomb, the staff put out a new issue with a cover drawing of a bearded, presumably...

January 7, 2015

The Attack on Charlie Hebdo

By


Credit PHOTOGRAPY BY MARC PIASECKI/GETTY In 2011, just six days after the Paris office of Charlie Hebdo, a French satirical magazine under threat for having run cartoons of the prophet Mohammed, was gutted by a firebomb, the staff put out a new issue with a cover drawing of a bearded, presumably Muslim man kissing a cartoonist. The caption was “L’amour: Plus fort que la haine,” which translates to “Love: Stronger than hate.” The cartoon was a properly irreverent combination—an affirmation of the most universal truth, a commitment to the magazine’s own very particular identity. To be brave, one needn’t ever be saccharine. The magazine and its artists, editors, and staff believed in all of that and lived those values, in a way that few of us are ever asked to. At midday this Wednesday, ten of them were killed, along with two Paris policemen who rushed to their aid when what were reportedly two or three hooded men, armed with AK-47s—some of the details are not yet clear—went into the office, in Paris’s Eleventh Arrondissement, and started firing, apparently at anyone they could find. In addition to the dead, twenty people were injured, according to French police statements. There is a video in which the gunmen can be heard shouting “Allahu Akbar”—God is great. This was, as President François Hollande said after rushing to the scene, “undoubtedly an act of terrorism.” And, though the exact identity of the shooters will need to be determined, in these first hours there are strong signs that it is an act of Islamist terrorism.

Charlie-Hebdo-Secondary1 The dead include Stéphane Charbonnier, who used the pen name Charb and was the very brave editor of Charlie Hebdo; the cartoonists Jean Cabut (who signed his work Cabu), Bernard Verlhac (Tignous), Georges Wolinski, and Philippe Honoré; Moustapha Ourrad, a copy editor; the columnists Bernard Maris and Elsa Cayat; Frederic Boisseau, described as a building maintenance worker. Ahmed Merabet and Franck Brinsolaro were police officers. Michel Renaud was visiting the office when he was shot dead. (Vox has a list.) They were assassinated. The gunmen were not on a suicide mission; they fled and stole a car, which the latest reports suggest has been located in the Twentieth Arrondissement. (The Guardian and others have live updates; these include video clips of a shoot-out.) The gunmen were still at large in Paris, as of the early afternoon there, and presumably armed. Children were evacuated from schools near the Charlie Hebdo office, which was in the same building as at least one other media organization. Some workers in the building managed to hide from the shooters, but it was, reportedly, a production day at the magazine, busy and crowded. This was an attack on a publication and a neighborhood, a country and its press, and on any journalist, in any city. The magazine made fun of people—of many faiths, for many follies, which we all need to be reminded that we have. Some of the cartoons were blatantly, roughly sexual, and not designed to endear them to Jews or Christians. Satire was Charlie Hebdo’s mission, and a necessary one. There were times when the French government asked the magazine to hold back, but the magazine kept being itself, which is what one wishes for in a free press. Wednesday’s crime should not cause anyone to second-guess Charlie Hebdo’s editorial decisions. Silence is not where the answers to an incident like this lie.
Charlie-Hebdo-Secondary2 Recently, the magazine had mocked the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS. The last tweet on the magazine’s account before news of the attack was of a cartoon of the group’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. As the BBC noted, there are questions about its exact timing and provenance. But making fun of al-Baghdadi is not recklessness; it’s how one knows that ISIS has not won, and never will. There ought to be more tweets that do so.* (Whether ISIS in particular had a role in this attack is a question that can’t be answered at this stage; its members are, sadly, not the only ones in the terrorism business.) The current issue of Charlie Hebdo, published the day of the shooting, featured a caricature of the novelist Michel Houellebecq on the cover. Houellebecq’s new novel, “Submission,” also out Wednesday, according to the Times, “predicts a future France run by Muslims, in which women forsake Western dress and polygamy is introduced.” The drawing of Houellebecq, accompanied by a joke about Ramadan, is not flattering. The French police have added the protection of Houellebecq to their list of priorities on what is, by all accounts, a traumatic and disorienting day for the entire country. He deserves safety, and not chastisement. Barack Obama, David Cameron, and Angela Merkel have all quickly condemned the attack and the wider assault on the press. The rector of Paris’s Grand Mosque added his voice, saying, according to the Times, “We are horrified. … Our community is stunned by what just happened. It’s a whole section of our democracy that is seriously affected.”
France, it will be said in the next days, has failed, in a profound way, when it comes to making sense of its own diversity. What will be strongly debated is the nature of that failure, and what its opposite might look like. Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Front, will, inevitably, offer one set of answers, with her characteristic, glossy coat on her much uglier injunctions that often add up to the same thing. Who in France, and in other countries, whose policies and commitment to a free press were, again, targeted in the attack on Charlie Hebdo, is going to come forward with other, better answers? This is a dangerous moment for France, both in the frighteningly immediate sense—there are armed terrorists loose in the capital—and because the decisions that a nation makes at a time of terror are not always the best ones, for anybody. “L’amour: Plus fort que la haine,” as Charlie Hebdo put it years ago—and what makes that line meaningful, and not some trite filler of empty air in a shot-up office—is remembering who you are.
*Clarification: The reference to the tweet has been revised to reflect questions about it.



  • Email
  • Print
amy davidson
Amy Davidson is a New Yorker staff writer. She is a regular Comment contributor for the magazine and writes a Web column, in which she covers war, sports, and everything in between.

Tuesday, January 6, 2015

Mumbai ‘touch-and-go’ situation kept cops on toes - Written by Zeeshan Shaikh - THE INDIAN EXPRESS, MUMBAI