Strife

The Academic Blog of the Department of War Studies, King's College London

You are here: Home / Archives for Bataclan

Bataclan

France’s State of emergency- fight against terror or liberty?

by

By: Nicolas Seidman

bdsfgnfgn
A man is searched by police a few days after the Bataclan attacks. Source: Christian Hartmann/Reuters

“The end may justify the means as long as there is something that justifies the end.” -Leon Trotsky ‘Their morals and ours’

The 13th of November will, for many years to come, mark a day of remembrance in France. Where on that night in 2015 one hundred and thirty Frenchmen and women, along with hundreds of others, were either wounded or killed in six different locations in Paris.[1] That same night French President François Hollande implemented a nationwide state of emergency. A move that has not been seen since the Algerian war in 1961[2]. This decision was taken by the state to improve its capabilities to tackle terrorism. Clearly prior initiatives in counter-terrorism policy failed, such as the intrusive surveillance laws post-Charlie Hebdo attack[3]. However the state of emergency suspends vital key human rights for French citizens. Rights that ensure a fair democratic rule; basing itself on the crucial three foundations of liberty, equality and fraternity. Currently citizens lacking ties to radical Islamic jihadism are collateral damage in the fight against terrorism.[4] They are subject to raids, house arrests and mass surveillance.[5] State of emergencies are meant to be a temporary band-aid while the State finds a more suitable, less radical, long-term solution. Despite this men like Prime Minister Manuel Valls strive to extend and even implement it in the constitution.[6] The French government should therefore understand that continuing with the state of emergency is not the way forward for a stabilized France.

This State of emergency is going to permanently leave its mark on French society. The government has allocated extraordinary powers to law enforcement without judicial oversight[7]. It includes the ability of the police to conduct mass raids, press suppression, dismantle groups threatening public order, detain and put under house arrest all those deemed potential threats to the State.[8] This capability of the police has both great merits, as well as flaws. 10 Mosques have been closed due to incriminating evidence of weapons and explosives. 578 guns have been seized, 400 people have been put under house arrest and 395 people have been detained by the police[9]. The state of emergency has made the state safer and neutralized many potential threats to human life. But at what cost? Since the beginning of the State of emergency in November over 3,000 raids have been conducted[10]. Many of the raids concerned Islamic religious moderates[11]. A considerable number of raids that reflect the extent at which the government will go to capitalize on its power. The authorities were able to engage in these activities without the necessity of a warrant. In this manner law enforcement base themselves off of negligible concrete evidence and most of the time solely on suspicion[12]. According to Human Rights Watch, the majority of raids on homes, businesses and mosques were unlawful[13]. Raids not only causes physical damage to private and religious property, but also to the individual[14]. More times than not damaging both their personal as well as social lives. Many lost their jobs, experienced anxiety and understandably sparked a sense of betrayal by the government[15].

The state of emergency is showing itself to be inefficient by indirectly dragging individuals, not involved with extremism, into the fight. Between the months of November to January there had been 563 judicial proceedings concerning offences against the state[16]. Despite the focus on counter-terrorism only 28 out of these 563 offences were considered terror related[17]. A far cry from prosecuting terrorists. The majority of these offences were related to everyday organized crime. Over 300 those prosecutions were drug or arms trafficking related[18]. The government has also used its power directly in non-terror related ways. During the COP21 climate conference in Paris 27 environmentalist activists were put under house arrest.[19]This was done despite their lack of jihadi radicalism terrorist intentions[20]. The Prime Minister explicitly expressed that the state of emergency would stay in place until Daesh is no longer a threat .[21] The real target are therefore individuals connected to this so called Islamic State. Hence, can the cause be considered just if those most targeted don’t fit in this description? The power allocated to the government can be seen as inefficient and a cause for extensive collateral damage. Therefore, on the short run, these policies may allow to detain current ‘radicals’ and seize weapons, but what does the future hold?

A future of split French identity

If a state no longer considers you as a citizen and does not respect your rights, then what is the point of abiding by its rules? What if the State does not keep its promise of a fair society? The religious moderates, who find themselves in the crossfire of the law, might be less inclined to empathise with the State. They are, however, are not the only ones that may feel betrayed. The ‘Projet de loi constitutionnelle de protection de la nation’[22] is a bill aims to strip French citizens, with dual-nationality, of their French citizenship if convicted of terrorism[23]. This would create, for lack of a better word, a second-class citizen. Someone that has been deprived of a certain right due to her/his position in society. This is not the view sprouting only from human and civil rights groups, but also from policymakers too. Christiane Taubira, the Minister of Justice, resigned due to her unwillingness to implement such a discriminatory bill[24]. She served four long years regardless of political instability in her party, racial remarks from the far-right for being black[25] and fought against major parties to pass the bill for the right to same-sex marriage[26]. Despite her dedication she would rather walk away from a position she dedicated herself to than implement a bill. This is a tell-tale sign the government is treading into waters it should not be in.

Do the ends justify the means?

The State of emergency is an effective tool in preventing terrorist attacks in the short term. However, the government is shooting itself in the foot if it is trying to maintain its ideological freedom and democracy. The freedom of privacy offered to their citizens is diminishing. Continuous raids, house arrests and mass surveillance offer no prospect of securing personal affairs from the government. The freedom of displacement can no longer be ensured when suspects are needed to report to the police three times a day to ensure authorities they have not left the country. Equal rights no longer persist as citizens are being targeted for their religious faith and especially when some of them are considered second class citizens. Unrest is beginning to stirrup amongst many who find the acts of the government non-democratic[27]. Protests broke-out at the end of January, spanning 70 towns, involving thousands of protesters. The Fraternity of many citizens, who once felt unified, is beginning to waver. The democratic cornerstone that has propped-up the Republic of France since its formation is crumbling. The Republic can no longer ensure a standard of rights for its citizens. President Hollande is attempting to amend the constitution to facilitate the extension of the state of emergency ‘until the threat of Daesh is gone’[28]. This could suggest indefinitely.

An end in sight?

The State of Emergency extension has been agreed upon, mid-February, to extend to May 26th. This happened despite recommendations from the UN, stating that France should not extend it[29]. The UN claimed that France has engaged in ‘excessive and disproportionate’ restrictions on key rights[30], attempting to dissuade them from extending past February. In the eyes of President Hollande and Prime Minister Manuel Valls the State of emergency is a necessary evil if in order to obtain security. The people of France must therefore ask themselves. What price must we pay?

 

 

Nicolas Seidman is a first-year War Studies student at King’s College London.

 

 

 

Notes:

[1] “Paris Attacks: What Happened on the Night.” BBC News. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34818994.

[2] “Mise En œuvre De L’état D’urgence Sur Le Territoire National / L’actu Du Ministère / Actualités – Ministère De L’Intérieur.” Http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/Actualites/L-actu-du-Ministere/Mise-en-aeuvre-de-l-etat-d-urgence-sur-le-territoire-national. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/Actualites/L-actu-du-Ministere/Mise-en-aeuvre-de-l-etat-d-urgence-sur-le-territoire-national.

[3] “Le Projet De Loi Sur Le Renseignement Massivement Approuvé à L’Assemblée.” Le Monde.fr. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2015/05/04/que-contient-la-loi-sur-le-renseignement_4627068_4408996.html

[4] “Muslims in France Say Emergency Powers Go Too Far – The New York Times.” The New York Times – Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/world/europe/frances-emergency-powers-spur-charges-of-overreach-from-muslims.html?_r=0.

[5] “France – Hollande seeks to extend state of emergency despite critics – France 24.” France 24. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.france24.com/en/20160126-france-state-emergency-hollande-civil-liberties-security-terrorism.

[6] “France Considers Extending National State of Emergency | World News | The Guardian.” The Guardian. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/22/france-considers-extending-national-state-of-emergency.

[7] “France – What does a ‘state of emergency’ mean in France? – France 24.” France 24. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.france24.com/en/20151115-what-does-france-state-emergency-mean.

[8] “Mise En œuvre De L’état D’urgence Sur Le Territoire National / L’actu Du Ministère / Actualités – Ministère De L’Intérieur.” Http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/Actualites/L-actu-du-Ministere/Mise-en-aeuvre-de-l-etat-d-urgence-sur-le-territoire-national. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/Actualites/L-actu-du-Ministere/Mise-en-aeuvre-de-l-etat-d-urgence-sur-le-territoire-national.

[9] “Le Sénat Prolonge De Trois Mois L’état D’urgence | Public Sénat.” Public Sénat. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.publicsenat.fr/lcp/politique/senat-prolonge-trois-mois-l-etat-d-urgence-1230235.

[10] Ibid.

[11] “France: Abuses Under State of Emergency.” Human Rights Watch. Accessed March 9, 2016. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/02/03/france-abuses-under-state-emergency.

[12] “My House Was Searched Because of France’s State of Emergency | United Kingdom.” VICE. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/house-search-state-of-emergency-france-paris-terrorism-bataclan-876.

[13] “France: Abuses Under State of Emergency.” Human Rights Watch. Accessed March 1, 2016. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/02/03/france-abuses-under-state-emergency.

[14] “Muslims in France Say Emergency Powers Go Too Far – The New York Times.” The New York Times – Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/world/europe/frances-emergency-powers-spur-charges-of-overreach-from-muslims.html?_r=0.

[15] “Upturned Lives: The Disproportionate Impact of France’s State of Emergency.” Amnesty International USA. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/upturned-lives-the-disproportionate-impact-of-france-s-state-of-emergency.

[16] “Le Sénat Prolonge De Trois Mois L’état D’urgence | Public Sénat.” Public Sénat. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.publicsenat.fr/lcp/politique/senat-prolonge-trois-mois-l-etat-d-urgence-1230235

[17] Ibid.

[18] “État D’urgence: 488 Procédures Judiciaires.” Le Figaro. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/12/16/97001-20151216FILWWW00127-etat-d-urgence-488-procedures-judiciaires.php.

[19] “Le Sénat Prolonge De Trois Mois L’état D’urgence | Public Sénat.” Public Sénat. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.publicsenat.fr/lcp/politique/senat-prolonge-trois-mois-l-etat-d-urgence-1230235

 [20] Ibid.

[21] “France – Hollande seeks to extend state of emergency despite critics – France 24.” France 24. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.france24.com/en/20160126-france-state-emergency-hollande-civil-liberties-security-terrorism.

[22] Constitutional bill to protect the nation

[23] “Déchéance De Nationalité : Qui Serait Concerné Par Le Projet De Loi Constitutionnelle ?” Le Monde.fr. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2016/01/04/decheance-de-nationalite-qui-serait-concerne-par-le-projet-de-loi-constitutionnelle_4841434_3224.html.

[24] “Upturned Lives: The Disproportionate Impact of France’s State of Emergency.” Amnesty International USA. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/upturned-lives-the-disproportionate-impact-of-france-s-state-of-emergency.

[25] “The Justice Minister and the Banana: How Racist is France?” The New Yorker. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-justice-minister-and-the-banana-how-racist-is-france.

[26] “How the Maverick Christiane Taubira is Transforming French Politics | Agnès Poirier | Opinion | The Guardian.” The Guardian. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/14/christiane-taubira-french-politics.

[27] “Etat D’urgence : « Ce N’est Pas Tous Les Jours Qu’on Touche à Notre Constitution ».” Le Monde.fr. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2016/01/31/manifestation-contre-l-etat-d-urgence-ce-n-est-pas-tous-les-jours-qu-on-touche-a-notre-constitution_4856665_3224.html.

[28] “France – Hollande seeks to extend state of emergency despite critics – France 24.” France 24. Accessed March 1, 2016. http://www.france24.com/en/20160126-france-state-emergency-hollande-civil-liberties-security-terrorism.

[29] “United Nations News Centre – UN Experts Urge France to Protect Fundamental Freedoms While Combatting Terrorism.” UN News Service Section. Accessed March 9, 2016. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=53045.

[30] Ibid.

The Paris terror attacks and their geopolitical implications

by

By: Deborah Asseraf

US Marines and French Gendarmie inspect weapons as part of a 2014 training exercise. US Marines and French Gendarmerie exercise
US Marines and French Gendarmie inspect weapons as part of a training exercise. Source: Wikimedia.

Six coordinated terror attacks, involving seven terrorists took place in East Paris and near the Stade de France at Saint Denis on the evening of Friday, November 13. In Saint Denis, three terrorists blew themselves up near the stadium, while supporters inside attended a friendly France – Germany football match. Among the five attacks in East Paris, one was a suicide bombing, at the Boulevard Voltaire, and four others were shootings. This included the Bataclan concert hall hostage crisis, during which as soon as police launched the assault the four attackers detonated the bombs they were carrying. At least 132 people were killed and 350 wounded.

Islamic State responsibility

Islamic State claimed responsibility soon after in a statement that defined the attacks as the ‘first of the storm’. Indeed, France is likely to be a primary target for the terrorist group. For example, a video released in September 2014 attributed to Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, known as an ISIS spokesperson, instructed followers around the world to kill citizens of the countries involved in the coalition: ‘If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be.’

Using the same rhetoric in another video released in October 2014, a French ISIS militant warned France that ‘as many bombs you dropped in Iraq and Sham [Syria], you will have as many murders, as many killings, like our brother Mohammed Merah did. You are afraid of one brother, there will be thousands and thousands in the future’. The call for attacks in France has become a key element of ISIS propaganda directed towards French potential recruits.

France is a main pool of recruitment for Islamic State. Among the 30,000 ISIS ‘soldiers’ in Syria and Iraq, most are foreign fighters, and in 2014 about 1,200 were said to be French. According to a 2015 report by a French Senate investigation committee dedicated to countering jihadist networks in France and Europe, 1500 French citizens who fled to Syria have been identified by the intelligence services. Accurate policy responses to handle the cases of those who return to France are yet to be found. The antiterrorism bill passed on November 13, 2014 modifies statutory law regulating the entry of foreigners but does not tackle the issue of French fighters coming back from Syria. The first article of the bill only allows authorities to prevent a suspected ‘jihadi candidate’ from going abroad.

At present, the intelligence administration has registered 4,000 people in ‘fiches S’, administrative memos compiling information about persons who are known for their ‘Islamic radicalization’ on French territory. One of the Bataclan terrorists, Omar Ismaïl Mostefaï was registered in a ‘fiche S’ for ‘radicalization’.

Internal responses to the crisis: a national emergency plan

President François Hollande, who was rushed out of the Saint Denis stadium as soon as the explosions were heard, immediately addressed the Nation that night. He called for an emergency ministerial meeting and announced two measures. President Hollande first declared a state of emergency, and second announced the closing of French borders. If these domestic responses to the crisis are mainly consensual in France, the issue of external action in Syria remains the subject of fierce debate.

The state of emergency is an exceptional legal situation in which French State authorities are allowed to take special action outside of the framework of ordinary law. Prefects (state representatives in regions) are allowed to impose bans on traffic, curfews, large gatherings, and allow searches and raids without warrants. The state of emergency is based on a 1955 law, passed in response Algerian National Liberation Front terror attacks in 1954. It was first used three times during the Algerian War of Independence. A state of emergency was last declared in 2005 on the occasion of the large-scale riots in the Parisian suburbs. In 2015, the state of emergency is not only applied at the local level, but to the entire national territory. It allows for the cancellation of cultural events, gatherings, the closure of public monuments and museums, and increased levels of security and surveillance. Accordingly, 1,500 soldiers were deployed in the capital and nearly as many police officers. In order to implement efficient border controls, customs staff were reinforced.

As part of the state of emergency, 168 antiterrorist raids took place on Sunday, November 15 and overnight into Monday, November 16, in the homes of potential terrorists registered in a ‘fiche S’ and 23 people were arrested. The raids were conducted in Bobigny (Northern Paris), Toulouse, Grenoble, Strasbourg, Lille-Roubaix, Marseille and Lyon, where a rocket launcher was discovered. In Villefranche-sur-Saône, close to Lyon, heavy weaponry was found, including a Kalashnikov assault riffle, a rocket launcher, pistols, and bullets. Aside from the current investigation that led to identify French and Belgian terrorist cells, raids current searches aim to dismantling other networks. Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve stated: ‘It is just the beginning’.

External response: is France at war?

In an official address on November 14, President Hollande stated that: ‘What happened yesterday in Paris and in Saint Denis close to the Stade de France was an act of war. Faced with war, the country has to take appropriate decisions. An act of war that was committed by a terrorist army, Daesh, a jihadist army against France, against the values we defend throughout the world, against who we are, a free country that speaks to the whole world’. The use of the expression ‘act of war’ is a crucial step for France. It suggests the terrorist attacks carried out on French territory have external belligerent outcomes. Designating ISIS as an ‘army’ seems very delicate considering the situation on the ground. Islamic State may have its own institutions, control territory, and a population, but it is not recognized as a state on the international scene. Hence, ISIS is not in control of a regular army but rather comprises a various range of actors from former Saddam Hussein officials to jihadist terror groups including the former Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI).

Declaring war against ‘the Caliphate’ is no less than declaring a war against terror. If the very term resembles G. W. Bush’s rhetoric, it can also be feared that such a war is already lost. Regarding the fact that terrorists carrying out such so-called ‘acts of war’ are French citizens, it seems impossible to consider ISIS as a defined enemy in the form of an army.

It is not clear whether President Hollande is really declaring war based on a use of international law. At the moment the French and US-led coalition against ISIS launched in 2014 includes Western countries (Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands) as well as Arab and Middle-Eastern countries (Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Turkey, United Arab Emirates). Nevertheless, the coalition intervention, consisting of airstrikes as well as arming and training support to the Kurds is completely informal. Western action could hardly be an UN-backed intervention, as a unanimity vote at the Security Council, would be likely impossible considering Russia’s pro-Assad agenda.

Nonetheless, the use of the term ‘act of war’ by President Hollande could be a way to legitimize an intervention under NATO provisions. Indeed, the 1949 Washington Treaty (article 5) states: ‘The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.’

Moreover, in 1999 NATO members recognized acts of terror as armed attacks that possibly bound allies to collective defence: ‘Any armed attack on the territory of the Allies, from whatever direction would be covered by Articles 5 and 6 of the Washington treaty. However, Alliance security must also take account of the global context. Alliance security interests can be affected by other risks of a wider nature, including acts of terrorism’.

As an act of war opens the legal possibility for a use of force under international law, France could call for its NATO allies to support and retaliate against ISIS and escalate the conflict. However, legitimizing war against ISIS through international law might also lead the nations involved to acknowledge that the earlier coalition was illegal. On the night of November 15, ten French fighter jets dropped twenty bombs in their biggest raid in Syria so far. They targeted Islamic State’s strongholds in Raqqa in coordination with US forces.

A strong response

While French intentions regarding the coalition against ISIS are not completely clear, it seems very unlikely that troops would ever be dispatched to the ground. However, the latest attacks will no doubt affect French foreign policy, and an escalation in airstrikes with support of the coalition may be occurring, as President Hollande vowed a ‘merciless response’ to ISIS. In order to strengthen French air force in Irak and Syria, the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier will leave Toulon for the Persian Gulf on November 18. It will carry eighteen Rafale and eight Super Étendard aircrafts, and join the six Rafale and six Mirage already based in Jordan.

Yet, relevant internal solutions must be found within France. The primary threat to French security is domestic. The country’s immediate enemies are to be fought on French territory. Internal policies dedicated to tackling, preventing, and understanding radicalisation are now essential in averting future attacks.

Deborah Asseraf is a graduate student at Sciences Po, Paris, specializing in the field of public policy and law. A research student in History at the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences (EHESS Paris) she is interested in international relations and politics.