A REFLECTION ON THE CHARLIE HEBDO EVENTS

The latest edition of Charlie Hebdo features the prophet Mohammed and reads:'All is Forgiven', 'Je Suis Charlie'.

Reflecting on the event following the Charlie Hebdo Attack in Paris, there were outpourings of defiance against the attackers, which culminated in the Paris rally last Sunday. The rally was not only a defiant stance against the Charlie Hebdo attacks but also an affirmation of support for the integral principles, which have become emblematic of the values that heavily symbolize what Western civilization stands for. However, these attacks must be placed in some context beyond the tabloid details so widely reported. Whilst many have spoken out to defend their liberties, there has been less focus on why the event occurred in the first place.

This question does not refer to tabloid questions such as, ‘why was there not more police protection’. It goes deeper than the short term vision of the tabloids and asks the fundamental question of why the attackers, born and raised in Paris, were then radicalised. What really caused the Charlie Hebdo attacks?

Less than three quarters of a century ago, Paris celebrated their liberation from Nazism. The poignant comparison of the images below highlights how, as a civilisation, we have repeatedly stood up to defend our liberties.  However, what will the legacy of the Paris rally achieve? Whilst it will be enshrined in history as yet another example of Europeans defending their rights and liberties will it address the root causes of the issue?

Allied forces liberate Paris, 25 april 1944, Palace de la République.

Over one million march through Paris showing strength and solidarity following the Charlie Hebdo attacks. 

The Paris rally was a mark of defiance and a display of solidarity, but in the long term what will this solidarity achieve? Whilst the media widely reported the show of solidarity displayed at the Paris rally, they also naively accepted the presence of ‘hypocritical’ politicians without question. The charity Reports Without Borders accused some politicians of ‘spitting on the graves’ of the Charlie Hebdo victims for their participation in the rally. Did the meadia not pick up on this for fear of being seen as ‘politically incorrect’? Well, surely the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo is ‘politically incorrect’ but that is not the point. These politicians were representatives of nations that do not uphold the same liberties and freedoms as France. In fact, these countries have been seen to be suppressing these very principles. Reporters Without Borders accusation of these nations ‘systematically persecute[ing]’ journalists. Christophe Deloire, the Reporters Without Borders secretary-general, outlined any hypocrisy by stating:

“It would be unacceptable if representatives of countries that silence journalists were to take advantage of the current outpouring of emotion to try to improve their international image and then continue their repressive policies when they return home.”

For example, whilst Egyptian foreign minister Sameh Shoukry represented Egypt at the rally, three al Jazeera jounrnalists remained imprisoned in Egypt on charges of terrorism. Their crime: practicing their profession, which requires media report of both political opposition and government. Peter Greste, one of three al Jazeera journalists accused of ‘terrorism’, spoke of the importance of a free press:

'You can't have a free society without a free press. In Egypt today you know that you can't provide balance as long as you can end up in prison like us.'

Interestingly, Reporters Without Borders ranks Egypt 159^th out of 180 countries in their press freedom index.

If over one million people can stand up to defend their rights and liberties, then why do we still allow a hypocritical approach to politics. Why is it that a nation that tolerates satirical journalism, fights for freedoms of speech and the press, will not seek to question hypocrisy? Surely, if a passive approach is always adopted this is as much a threat to freedoms of speech?

So why did Sameh Shoukry represent Egypt at the Paris rally if not to improve Egypt’s international image? Since Egypt is a predominantly Muslim country, perhaps his representation symbolises the fact the majority of Muslims do not condone Islamic extremism. However, this is a huge point which deserves and requires more than a brief reference.

Nevertheless, back to my first point: there has been little to no focus on the root causes of the Charlie Hebdo attack in the first place. Whilst Nigel Farage’s views are often as controversial as Charlie Hebdo is satirical, politicians of all parties were wrong to accuse him of ‘exploiting’ the Paris attacks. Michael Farge had told Channel 4 news that he believed there was strong evidence to support the argument the Charlie Hebdo attacks were a product of ‘multiculturalism’. Whilst he omitted to use the term ‘failed’ multriculturalism, for once Farage had a point. Whilst politicians of all parties were quick to condemn Farage for ‘exploiting’ the Paris attacks, they were slow, if not failed, to address the causes of the Charlie Hebdo attack.

A campaign such as ‘Je Suis Charlie’ is great at highlighting solidarity and providing a platform for discussion. However, showing solidarity and defiance against the attacks will only go so far. It will not help prevent other attacks. If people really want to stand in solidarity against terrorism, the root cause of the problem, whatever that is, must first be addressed. 

More recently, demonstrations among some Muslim countries following the newest publication of Charlie Hebdo only reflect the urgency of the need to address the root cause of the problems. Whether you side with Jon Snow, who tweeted: "Paris: brutal clash of civilizations: Europe's belief in freedom of expression vs those for whom death is a weapon in defending their beliefs" or Nigel Farage's opinion that the attacks were a product of 'multiculturalism' or believe something else, this is the issue that needs to be explored, discussed and reported next. - What are your opinions and thoughts?

THE MOST THOUGHT PROVOKING CHARLIE HEBDO REPORTS

Peter Hitchens: The sinister, screeching mob who want to kill free speech (And no, I DON'T mean the Islamist terrorists in our midst)

Rod Liddle: Islam had nothing to do with this (and other fibs you’re likely to hear)

Amid Khan: Obama Was Right to Skip Paris. By lionizing Charlie Hebdo, Europe is empowering Al Qaeda.

Caroline Wyatt: Paris attack highlights Europe's struggle with Islamism

RWB Condemns Presence Of “Predators” In Paris March, Calls For Solidarity With “All Charlies”

Jessica Elgot: 11 Troubling World Leaders At The Paris Charlie Hebdo Rally

Amnesty International: Egypt: Al Jazeera staff jailed for journalism