On Jan. 7, 2015, Islamists carried out an attack on the editorial office of the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, killing more than a dozen people. In the aftermath of the attack, France demonstrated its unity, but in many ways it was illusory. This is particularly evident today, when both the magazine itself and religious politics are the subject of fierce disputes.
This text has been auto-translated from Polish.
Not only did the terrorist attack on a weekly newspaper mocking religion go down in French history, but also the nationwide mobilization that followed. There was widespread condemnation of the attack, not only because of the human casualties, but also the attempt to undermine the principle of freedom of speech, so important especially for the satirical press. Multimillion-dollar demonstrations swept through the country under the banner of defending republican values, but the decade that followed was to demonstrate the ephemeral nature of this consensus. The "Charlie Hebdo" itself also did not free itself from criticism, coming from various sides of the political spectrum.
Shortly after the attack, when the solidarity campaign under the slogan "Je suis Charlie" was in full swing, Jean-Marie Le Pen declared without hesitation that he did not identify one bit with the leftist and anti-religious magazine, perhaps having in mind the petitions initiated by it to ban the National Front. On the other hand, far-right hooligans, in reaction to the Islamist attacks, proceeded to Islamophobic assaults on Muslims and mosques, heralding a deepening of divisions within France's diverse society.
Borders of national unity
The religious tensions and Islamist extremism behind the attack on the editorial also left a mark on attempts to memorialize the victims across the country. In some schools, Muslim students refused to participate in the minutes of silence dedicated to the authors of the iconoclastic graphics, and opinion polls conducted several years after the attack showed the scale of the problem - one in ten French people and also one in five French Muslims did not condemn the attack on "Charlie Hebdo". The younger the respondent, the more likely that answer was. That's a clear minority, of course, but the trend is troubling and calls into question the effectiveness of efforts to integrate minorities.
It would be a mistake, however, to reduce the problem to a question of radicalization of young Muslims. According to the aforementioned survey, their Christian or atheist peers are also more likely than older generations to criticize "Charlie Hebdo," accusing the anti-religious graphic of overstepping the bounds of decency. For example, support for publishing caricatures of Muhammad was declared by 60 percent overall. French, but among those under 25 years of age, only one in three respondents held the same opinion. Young French people, on the other hand, show more understanding of those outraged by jokes about the prophet.
Indeed, disassociating oneself from "Charlie Hebdo" is not only the domain of the National Front and Islamists, but also an attitude present in parts of the left, an environment theoretically closer to the satirical magazine, which was created decades ago in opposition to the rule of the right and often took nationalists as its target. Again, one can see the generational difference - while for the elderly the right to ridicule religion is rather obvious, regardless of political affiliation, younger people are more likely to see Islamophobia, racism or simply "boomerism" in "Charlie Hebdo" caricatures. Especially on the left, increasingly sensitive to mocking minorities.
The Americanization of French politics?
Even if disputes over religious identities are not new on the Seine, they have grown in importance in recent years and are igniting public opinion more often, as the controversy over "Charlie Hebdo" well illustrates. The bone of contention here is at the direct level of iconoclastic caricatures, but in the debate over them different interpretations of secularism clash. Although as a slogan it has grown in France to the status of sanctity (some, adding laïcité, complete the revolutionary triad of "liberty, equality and fraternity"), its practical implementation is understood differently.
I once already wrote about how "Charlie Hebdo," the issues of religion and republicanism have divided the left. In the classic sense, the latter concept means a commitment to a Republic "one and indivisible," treating all citizens equally, and therefore blind to ethnic or religious identities, at least. Hence, the French state does not collect any data on the religion of its citizens, nor does it recognize the existence of races. What is gaining popularity, however, is the view that such a policy perpetuates the dominance of privileged groups, erases minorities and ignores the existence in society of groups that deserve recognition of distinctiveness within the national community and respect for their customs (such as wearing the hijab).
In France, this approach is sometimes referred to (usually by critics) as communitarianism, understood as an attitude that runs counter to universalist republican values and is accused of fostering Islamist "separatism" because it is supposed to lead to the building of counter-societies along racial, ethnic or religious lines. For many commentators from across the Seine, it represents an importation of ideas and ways of doing politics from the US, threatening traditional French republicanism.
In this context, the role of opponents of Americanization is often claimed by the conservative or nationalist right-which is quite ironic, given how much it copies the rhetoric and strategy of its American counterparts-while speaking out against the "woke" or "islamoleft" movement. It works quite well as a political tool, but it doesn't help very much in trying to tame the ideology behind the attack on "Charlie Hebdo."
How (not) to fight Islamism
With the 2015 attacks, terrorism became France's No. 1 enemy, and the country stepped up efforts to contain religious extremism. This had an internal dimension, but also an external one. France has traditionally pursued an active military policy in Africa, with the fight against jihadists as one of its goals - even before the Paris attacks, the intervention in Mali began, and military operations in Africa continued in the following years. So the attack on "Charlie Hebdo" can hardly be considered a turning point in the French war on terror. It certainly did not have the same significance as September 11 for the US, if one can speak at all of a change in French military policy under its influence. Rather, military involvement has been extinguished over the ongoing decade, but not through lack of desire, but questionable effectiveness and growing resentment by African governments against the former colonizer.
Similar reservations can be raised about the success of the fight against "Islamic separatism," hyped by President Macron in the context of Samuel Paty's death - the teacher was murdered after showing students caricatures from "Charlie Hebdo." Of course, the long-term effects are hard to talk about, but the liberal president's record is already debatable. The ruling camp is accused of talking a lot about secularism, but using it only as a bludgeon on Muslims, while breaking secular rules in dealing with the Catholic Church or Jewish organizations. This does not help convince the former to trust the Republic, which, with its right-wing turn, increasingly treats the descendants of immigrants as a problem and an object, rather than fellow citizens participating in public life.
Perhaps this is partly why as many as three out of four young Muslims place religious values above Republican values, a rate as much as three times higher than that of their parents. Less discussed is the fact that this attitude is also gaining popularity among young Christians, which would suggest not only a defeat in the clash with Islamism, but at the same time a general weakening of universalist republicanism among a generation of French people just entering adulthood.
Under such circumstances, there is a commemoration of the victims of the attack on "Charlie Hebdo," and the weekly itself issued a special issue with a larger circulation. The terrorists failed to silence the satirical magazine, but a decade after the attack and the subsequent show of national unity, the latter seems like a distant dream, while sectarian (partly) conflicts continue to plague the Republic. This will not change in the near future.
