Anti-Semitic Violence in France Continues Unabated, as Does the Indifference of French Politicians

Feb. 23 2018

While a few particularly severe instances of vicious attacks on French Jews, almost always perpetrated by immigrants from Muslim countries and their descendants, have garnered attention in the U.S.—for instance the brutal murder of Sarah Halimi in her own home in April 2017—countless others go unremarked. Guy Millière surveys some of these incidents, and the shocking indifference with which they are met:

Friday, January 12, 2018. Sarcelles. A city in the northern suburbs of Paris. A fifteen-year-old girl returns from high school. She wears a necklace with a star of David and a Jewish school uniform. A man attacks her with a knife, slashes her face, and runs away. She will be disfigured the rest of her life. January 29, again in Sarcelles, an eight-year-old boy wearing a Jewish skullcap is kicked and punched by two teenagers. . . .

On January 18, 2018, six days after the knife attack in Sarcelles, one of the leaders of the Jewish community in Montreuil, east of Paris, was tortured all night by two men who broke open a window and assaulted him as he slept. . . .

Without the Jews of France, France would no longer be France, said then-Prime Minister Manuel Valls in 2016. But he did not do anything. . . . He added [on a later occasion] that in France, for at least two decades, all attacks against Jews in which the perpetrator has been identified have come from Muslims, and that the most recent attacks were no exception.

Valls, however, quickly suffered the consequences of his candor. He was elbowed to the margins of political life. Muslim websites called him an “agent of the Jewish lobby” and a “racist.” Former leaders of his own party, such as the former foreign minister Roland Dumas, said that Valls’s wife is a Jew and hinted that he was “under the influence.” . . .

Recently, the journalist Eric Zemmour [commented] that in Muslim neighborhoods, Muslims are now living “according to their own laws” and forcing non-Muslim people to leave. He was found guilty of “incitement” and fined. . . . At anti-Israel demonstrations, [by contrast], people shout, “Death to the Jews,” but those people are never arrested for “hate speech.”

Read more at Gatestone

More about: Anti-Semitism, European Islam, France, French Jewry, Politics & Current Affairs


The Danger of Hollow Fixes to the Iran Deal

March 20 2018

In January, the Trump administration announced a 120-day deadline for the so-called “E3”—Britain, France, and Germany—to agree to solutions for certain specific flaws in the 2015 agreement to limit the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. Omri Ceren explains why it’s necessary to get these fixes right:

[Already in October], the administration made clear that it considered the deal fatally flawed for at least three reasons: a weak inspections regime in which the UN’s nuclear watchdog can’t access Iranian military facilities, an unacceptable arrangement whereby the U.S. had to give up its most powerful sanctions against ballistic missiles even as Iran was allowed to develop ballistic missiles, and the fact that the deal’s eventual expiration dates mean Iran will legally be allowed to get within a hair’s breadth of a nuclear weapon. . . .

A team of American negotiators has been working on getting the E3 to agree to a range of fixes, and is testing whether there is overlap between the maximum that the Europeans can give and the minimum that President Trump will accept. The Europeans in turn are testing the Iranians to gauge their reactions and will likely not accept any fixes that would cause Iran to bolt.

The negotiations are problematic. The New York Times reported that, as far as the Europeans are concerned, the exercise requires convincing Trump they’ve “changed the deal without actually changing it.” Public reports about the inspection fix suggest that the Europeans are loath to go beyond urging the International Atomic Energy Commission to request inspections, which the agency may be too intimidated to do. The ballistic-missile fix is shaping up to be a political disaster, with the Europeans refusing to incorporate anything but long-range missiles in the deal. That would leave us with inadequate tools to counter Iran’s development of ballistic missiles that could be used to wipe Israel, the Saudis, and U.S. regional bases off the map. . . .

There is a [significant] risk the Trump administration may be pushed to accept the hollow fixes acceptable to the Europeans. Fixing the deal in this way would be the worst of all worlds. It would functionally enshrine the deal under a Republican administration. Iran would be open for business, and this time there would be certainty that a future president will not act to reverse the inevitable gold rush. Just as no deal would have been better than a bad deal, so no fix would be better than a bad fix.

Read more at Commentary

More about: Donald Trump, Europe, Iran, Politics & Current Affairs, U.S. Foreign policy