2015 is perhaps one of those year that France would like to forget. The two terrorist attacks that hit Paris have marked the year and will definitely influence political actions in the coming one.

 

A walk in Place de la Republique gives a sense of things that have been changing. Since the beginning of the year, this place has become an iconic symbol of resistance. More than being just a memorial to commemorate the victims of terrorism, it has now evolved into a place of interaction, cultural exchange, and ultimately protests. The state of emergency, which imposes the constant presence of police in the square, does not prevent people from getting together every day. A group of Afghani refugees has put their tents there.

 

Although most of those people in the square share a positive spirit of tolerance and solidarity, fear, frustration and disappointment are very much visible. After all, Place de la Republique epitomizes the mixed attitude of European peoples in a transforming and complex age. An awkward cocktail of paranoia and solidarity that ultimately damages refugees and Muslim citizens. Always in a limbo between hopes of progressive policy-making and quite securitarian proclaims.

 

According to the UN Refugee Agency and the International Organization of Migration (IOM), one unprecedented million refugees fled to Europe this year, with over 3700 estimated deaths. Driven by hope of more security and freedom, the majority of them escaped from countries such as Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Nigeria, all affected by persecutions, civil wars, repressive governments and ultimately terrorism.

 

In this context, national interests and small political gains have dramatically affected crisis management. In late September, European leaders finally endorsed a proposal from the European Commission to redistribute 160,000 asylum seekers, which were already staying in the EU. Germany and France committed to take the majority of them, 31443 and 30000 people respectively.

 

Still, disagreement emerged again last November. Paris Attacks open an already fertile space for Right-Wing Parties in Europe. According to Markus Sode, a German politician from the conservative Christina Social Party, Paris changed everything: “not every refugee is an Islamic State terrorist, but to believe that there is not a single fighter among the refugees is naïve”.On the same line, Mr Fico, Slovak Prime Minister, declared that Muslims in his country represent a potential threat to the society, due to cultural differences. Similarly, Poland stepped back from the EU redistribution plan and closed the borders against the arrival refugees.  In France, the Le Pen-guided National Front, has been reinforcing its popularity while tasting the smell of victory in the last regional elections.

 

What is the lesson for policy-makers and the international development community?

 

Uncontrolled immigration is not a sustainable strategy. Targeting refugees and Muslims either.

 

According to Oliver Roy, a world-known French expert on Islam and geopolitics in the Middle East, the current French-made jihadist are part of a globalised jihadism, which is neither the product of a clash of civilization nor the long lasting effect of colonisation. Jihadism, he says, reflects the symptoms of a generational nihilistic radicalized youth revolt that is more about the Islamization of radicalism than the radicalization of Islam. For him, jihadists are young “rebels without a cause”, not integrated into the Muslim community, in France or anywhere else. Feeling excluded, disenfranchised and marginalized, they get radicalized on the internet by extremist groups that give them a cause to fight for.

 

With this reading in mind, strategies against the terrorist challenge would definitely prioritize the fight against radicalization at home. This implies a holistic vision that designs strategies to avoid social alienation and a better monitoring of propaganda in the internet. So far, France has been missing the point.

 

A too strong emphasis on domestic security has produced controversial consequences. Paris has followed three main directions: more security, seizing Muslim communities and a rudimental monitoring of the web.

 

First, balancing freedom with security has proved to be an unsuccessful compromise, especially when only certain groups are taken to be the main target. State of emergency gave in fact exceptional powers to the authorities, including the possibility to set curfews, limit the movement of people, forbid mass gatherings, establish secure zones and close public space. Similarly, security services and the police force can conduct house searches at any time, enforce house arrest, all without judicial oversight. Since the attacks, more than 3,000 raids have taken place – mostly targeting Muslim business, homes and place of worship – and leading to 360 house arrests and 51 people in jail.

 

Second, the existing policy agenda has been looking directly at the practice of religion. According to Yasser Louati – the spokesman of the Collective against Islamophobia in France: “In France, the Muslim minority feels like it’s being treated as the public enemy’. Counter-terrorism actions, such as shutting down Salafist mosques, imposing licenses for Muslim Imams or considering banning sermons in Arabic, deliver a dangerous message to the society.

 

Third, there is the internet, with the “Stop-Djihadisme”national campaign, launched after Charlie Hebdo. With the aim of preventing vulnerable people from radicalization, the campaign has constructed an interactive tool that explains the meaning of jihadism and what France does in this respect. Ultimately, this helps to map jihadists or wanna-be jihadists. Criteria are quite debatable:  stopping listening to music, diet changes, surfing on jihadist website. Once more, despite good intentions, the risk of bolstering a stereotypical and comical image of the other is quite close. As this were not enough, this encourages a system of constant suspicion and mistrust.

 

Together these three point make the state of emergency a controversial situation for civil society organizations. The French Human Rights League, together with the Collective against Islamophobia and more than 100 civil society organizations, have recently issued a statement asking French government to lift the state of the emergency.

 

The temporary derogation of several civil liberties, they say, such as freedom of movement, right to privacy, the right to manifest and the disproportioned and discriminating use of the extra powers by the security forces, are unacceptable and counterproductive.

 

All in all, these measures are making some cosmetic changes without getting at the heart of extremism. What they surely brings about is a normalization of suspicion and paranoia as well as stigmatization and alienation, probably some of the main vectors that make radicalization so appealing for many people.