| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| In war on terror, France outfights UK |
| 2005-07-13 |
| THANKS to the war in Iraq, much of the world sees the British government as resolute and tough, the French one as appeasing and weak. But in another war, the one against terrorism and radical Islam, the reverse is true: France is the most stalwart nation in the West, even more so than the United States, while Great Britain is the very most hapless. Consider: # Counterterrorism. U.K.-based terrorists have carried out operations in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kenya, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Israel, Morocco, Russia, Spain and the United States. Many governments — Jordanian, Egyptian, Moroccan, Spanish, French, and American — have protested London's refusal to shut down its Islamist terrorist infrastructure or extradite wanted operatives. In frustration, Egyptian president Hasni Mubarak publicly denounced Britain for "protecting killers." One American security group has called for Britain to be listed as a terrorism-sponsoring state. Counterterrorism specialists disdain the British. Roger Cressey calls London "easily the most important jihadist hub in Western Europe." Steven Simon dismisses the British capital as "the Star Wars bar scene" of Islamic radicals. More brutally, an intelligence official said of last week's attacks: "The terrorists have come home. It is payback time for . . . an irresponsible policy." While London hosts terrorists, Paris hosts a top-secret counterterrorism center, code-named Alliance Base, whose existence was just revealed by The Washington Post, where six major Western governments since 2002 share intelligence and run counterterrorism operations. (The latter makes it unique.) More broadly, President Jacques Chirac instructed French intelligence agencies just days after 9/11 to share terrorism data with their U.S. counterparts "as if they were your own service." This cooperation is working: former acting CIA director John E. McLaughlin calls this bilateral intelligence tie "one of the best in the world." The British may have a "special relationship" with Washington in Iraq, but the French have one in the War on Terror. France accords terrorist suspects fewer rights than any other Western state, permitting interrogation without a lawyer, lengthy pre-trial incarcerations and evidence acquired under dubious circumstances. Were he a terrorism suspect, says Evan Kohlmann, author of Al-Qaida's Jihad in Europe, he "would least like to be held under" the French system. # Radical Islam. The myriad French-British differences in this arena can be summarized by the example of what Muslim girls may wear to state-funded schools. Denbigh High School in Luton, 30 miles northwest from London, has a student population about 80 percent Muslim. It years ago accommodated the sartorial needs of their faith and heritage, including a female student uniform made up of the Pakistani shalwar kameez trousers, a jerkin top and hijab head covering. But when Shabina Begum, a teenager of Bangladeshi origins, insisted in 2004 on wearing a jilbab, which covers the entire body except for the face and hands, Denbigh administrators said no. Their dispute ended up in litigation and the Court of Appeal ultimately decided in Begum's favor. As a result, by law U.K. schools must now accept the jilbab. Not only that, but Cherie Booth, wife of British prime minister Tony Blair, was Begum's lawyer at the appellate level. Booth called the court's judgment "a victory for all Muslims who wish to preserve their identity and values despite prejudice and bigotry." In contrast, also in 2004, the French government outlawed the hijab, the Muslim headscarf, from public educational institutions, disregarding ferocious opposition within France and among Islamists worldwide. In Tehran, protestors shouted "Death to France!" and "Death to Chirac the Zionist!" The Palestinian Authority mufti, Ikrima Sa'id Sabri, declared that "French laws banning the hijab constitute a war against Islam as a religion." The Saudi grand mufti, Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh, called them a human rights infringement. When the "Islamic Army in Iraq" kidnapped two French journalists, it threatened their execution unless the hijab ban was revoked. Nonetheless, Paris stood firm. What lies behind these contrary responses? The British have seemingly lost interest in their heritage while the French hold on to theirs; even as the British ban fox hunting, the French ban hijabs. The former embraced multiculturalism, the latter retain a pride in their historic culture. This contrast in matters of identity makes Great Britain the Western country most vulnerable to the ravages of radical Islam, whereas France, for all its political failings, has retained a sense of self that may yet see it through. Daniel Pipes (www.danielpipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and author of "Miniatures." |
| Posted by:Glaique Hupinert9616 |
| #6 Notice the subtle hints, never said outright but assumed, that the fight in Iraq doesn't have anything to do with terrorism. Well, the terrorists believe otherwise. And I'm not even going to venture forth on the subject of whether banning the hijab is all that much... |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-07-13 21:18 |
| #5 Phil, how true. Even the French can't be wrong all the time. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-07-13 18:18 |
| #4 There are a number of areas where France shows us there is a better way, not just the multicultural idiocy. Nuclear power for one. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-07-13 17:53 |
| #3 Wow, JFM. I'm grateful your daughter arrived safely. I give France credit for trying to keep Al-Manar (aka Hezbollah) TV off their satellite carrier... |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2005-07-13 12:31 |
| #2 THe key is that the French are less impressed by multicultism than the British. We have of course, our own idiots who way that Islam means peace and that we should let them oppress their girls and tolerate genital mautiliation. But at the same time we have a tradition of hostility towards religion who in this case helps, we have what we call republicans who are persuaded of the excellency of French civilization and who think France's duty is make from its migrants (yesterday it was Spanish and portuguese, today is Algerians) French people like the other not let them rot in their cess pool. Of course it is harder with Muslims and it is harder with when those Muslims are watching Al Jazeera but the will of making them normal French is there. Here in France we don't have moonbats, at least not so prominent as Cherie Blair who goes to court to defend a Muslim family who wanted their daughter wear not hijab but burkha. And she was proud of having helped a famaily to not assimilate and to hell with the girl's freedom. I guess next time she would be defending female genital mutilation. Given, she would not be the mutilated... The republicanism explains why in France we are not that tolerant with fundies (because they discourage assimilation) and imams preaching death to western countries. That and the fact that Chirac was in first line (once as prime minister, the other one just after having being elected president) during two waves of Islamic terrorism so even him understands they are evil and dangerous. During the second one the Islamists tried to derail the high speed train (180 mph). The carnage would have been staggering. Oh and my daughter was in one of the trains who passed over the bomb without detonating it at a time where the British government was refusing the extradition of the suspects and sheltering the propagandists who were recruiting bombers. I will never forgive that multi-culti bastard called John Major. Could he rot in hell. |
| Posted by: JFM 2005-07-13 12:20 |
| #1 come on Daniel - what say we let them bury their dead before we start with the serves ya right cause it's your own fault stories. I certainly think the British need, and will welcome help in establishing facts to see where their government has failed them. But nah, nah-ing that their limp wristed ancient rival has down a better job ....it's just not the right time. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-07-13 08:41 |