|
|
Latest Column:
A
Terrible (But Important) Reminder
Even after the London Bombings, “We’re Not Afraid”...
..........
CaliforniaRepublic.org
opinon in
Reagan country
..........
Dubious
Sources
Curious
and suspect documents...
..........
Michael Ramirez
editorial cartoon
@LA Times
..........
Do your part to do right by our troops.
They did the right thing for you.
Donate Today 
..........  ..........
tOR Talk Radio
Contributor Sites
Laura
Ingraham
Hugh Hewitt
Eric
Hogue
Sharon
Hughes
Frank
Pastore
[Radio Home]
..........
Current
Headlines
..........
|
|
Contributors
Daniel Pipes- Contributor
Daniel
Pipes is director of the Middle
East Forum, a member of the
presidentially-appointed board of the U.S.
Institute of Peace,
and a prize-winning columnist for the New York Sun and The
Jerusalem Post. His most recent book, Miniatures:
Views of Islamic and Middle Eastern Politics (Transaction
Publishers) appeared in late 2003. His website, DanielPipes.org,
the single most accessed source of information specifically
on
the Middle East and Islam, offers an archive and a chance
to sign-up to receive his new materials as they appear. [go
to Pipes index]
 Weak
Brits, Tough French
A PC home for terrorists...
[Daniel
Pipes] 7/15/05
Thanks to
the war in Iraq, much of the world sees the British government
as resolute and tough and 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 America, while Britain is the most
hapless.
British-based
terrorists have carried out operations in Pakistan, Afghanistan,
Kenya, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Israel, Morocco, Russia,
Spain, and America. 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, Egypt's president Hosni
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, the existence of which was recently reported by the Washington
Post. At Alliance Base, six major Western governments have
since 2002 shared intelligence and run counterterrorism operations
- the latter makes the operation unique.
More broadly,
President Chirac instructed French intelligence agencies just
days after September 11, 2001, to share terrorism data with
their American counterparts "as if they were your own service." The
cooperation is working: A former acting CIA director, John
E. McLaughlin, called the bilateral intelligence tie "one of
the best in the world." The British may have a "special relationship" with
Washington on Iraq, but the French have one with it 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, the author of Al-Qaida's
Jihad in Europe, Evan
Kohlmann, says he "would least like to be held under" the
French system.
The myriad
French-British differences in treatment of radical Islam can
be summarized by the example of what Muslim girls may wear
to state-funded schools.
Denbigh High
School in Luton, 30 miles northwest of London, has a student
population that is about 80% Muslim. Years ago, it 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 a
teenager of Bangladeshi origins, Shabina Begum, insisted in
2004 on wearing
a jilbab, which covers the entire body except for
the face and hands, Denbigh administrators said no.
The dispute
ended up in litigation and the Court of Appeal ultimately decided
in Ms. Begum's favor. As a result, by law British schools must
now accept the jilbab. Not only that, but Prime Minister Blair's
wife, Cherie Booth, was Ms. Begum's lawyer at the appellate
level. Ms. Booth called the ruling "a victory for all Muslims
who wish to preserve their identity and values despite prejudice
and bigotry."
By contrast,
also in 2004, the French government outlawed the hijab, the
Muslim headscarf, from public educational institutions, disregarding
ferocious opposition both within France and among
Islamists worldwide. In Tehran, protesters shouted "Death
to France!" and "Death to Chirac the Zionist!" The Palestinian
Authority mufti, Ikrima Sa'id Sabri, declared, "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. 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: As the British ban fox hunting, the French ban hijabs.
The former embrace
multiculturalism, the latter retain
a pride in their historic culture. This contrast in matters
of identity makes Britain the Western country most vulnerable
to the ravages of radical Islam whereas France, for all its
political failings, has held onto a sense of self that may
yet see it through. tRO
This piece
first appeared in the New York Sun
copyright
2005 Daniel Pipes
§
|
|
