Bernard-Henri Lévy undertook to take to pieces a number of clichés that seriously compromise people’s understanding of terrorism and the uncompromising fight which needs to be waged against it. Among these clichés is the generally accepted idea that terrorism is the weapon of the poor against the superpowers, when in fact the heads of terrorist networks are at the head of vast fortunes. That terrorism is carried out by émigrés and not by educated people well integrated in the European capitals in which they live, when in fact the example of the British terrorists shows the opposite. That human bombs blow themselves up on a “bad” day under the weight of a feeling of revolt or because of a surfeit of humiliation, when in fact the training of a kamikaze takes from two to three years. The link too easily established between terrorism and Islam or even fundamentalist Islam when in fact the key to the phenomenon is not only to be found there but also in a political dimension that is fundamentally fascist.
Even the idea that terrorism would subside if a solution could only be found to the Israel-Palestine conflict shows its limits because who in Pakistan is worried about who the Palestinians are and what they are experiencing? The Palestinian issue can at the most be a kind of lever but it is absent from Pakistani imagination and reality, which are entirely focused on Kashmir. The Palestinian obsession would appear in fact to find its philosophical roots in the distant echoes of what the anti-Semitic French writer Céline said: “the people of Israel have placed us in a right mess”.
The ultimate exhortation would rather be to put an end to the culture of excuses and indulgence and, above all, to not be afraid.
After the panel session, the participants spread out in various workshop sessions, whose conclusions were summarised by rapporteurs.
Haïm Musicant, CRIF’s Managing Director and rapporteur for the workshop “Israel and Palestine: is there still any hope?”, noted that two analyses were put forward. For the first one, there are three levels of appreciation of the situation: 1/ The serious crisis both in the army and in the political sphere, the corruption, the rightist trend of the Israeli electorate, in particular with the emergence of Avigdor Lieberman and Israel Beitenou 2/ Palestinian terrorism and the risk of collapse of the Palestinian Authority 3/ The worsening of the international situation.
Two sociologists, Erik Cohen and Sonia Lipsyc successively took the floor in the workshop on “What stakes and challenges for the Jewish community?” whose moderator was Méïr Weintrater. Erik Cohen described the make-up of France’s Jewish community. What stands out is a very strong relationship with Israel. 77% of those surveyed in a poll said they have family links with Israel and 1 in 2 families say they have children who are carrying out a part or all of their studies in Israel. A study has also been carried out on the degree of religiosity of the Jewish population and as one might expect the involvement of men in religious studies is much greater than among women. As for Sonia Lipsyc, she touched on a very serious and painful subject: the obtaining of a Get by divorced women, without which future children are declared illegitimate. She reckons that in Marseille, 30% of women are waiting for the their Get over against 10% in Paris. Another sensitive issue was that of marital violence. One woman in ten is a victim of such violence. Gender equality in Jewish institutions and, more generally, the mixing of sexes in the community, were additional difficult topics that lead to animated discussions, to say the least.
Elisabeth Cohen-Tannoudji was rapporteur for the workshop “What future for State-run education?” A teacher from a middle school in a deprived suburb emphasised the emergence of a new generation of pupils who are totally disconnected, who do not master the French language, who are overloaded with television and who are incapable of positioning themselves in time and space, pupils who what’s more are conveying a reverse form of anti-Semitism. In their thinking, Jews are racists and violence is a substitute for dialogue.
Gérard Unger, rapporteur for the workshop on “The media and the war in Lebanon” recognised that in considering that the French press had been balanced in its handling of the conflict between Israel and Hizbullah he had rubbed the audience the wrong way. That being said, it’s a fact that the role of televised images played against Israel. Excesses were highlighted, such as John Le Carré’s article in Le Monde, with a front-page headline. For Didier Epelbaum, a journalist with the state television channel France 2, the perception of unbalance comes from the fact that on many occasions the press was tempted to portray the image of David versus Goliath, with Israel being seen in the latter’s role. Another image was that of the fight of the rich against the poor. However, on the whole there were less ideological presuppositions among journalists covering this conflict than in the past. It’s true, however, according to Didier Epelbaum, that this conflict is overexposed when compared to others.
Moderated by journalist Hélène Keller Lind, with the participation of researcher Marc Knobel and rabbi Michel Serfaty, the workshop “How does one live today as a Jew in the disaffected neighbourhoods?” depicted a very precise portrait of the situation of Jews in the “banlieues”, the often disaffected suburban neighbourhoods of France’s large cities. He emphasised the fact that Jews suffer from a “double sentence”. Their cars are burned and they are deprived of the freedom of worship and of schooling. Drawing a distinction between the various communities based on their location and size, rabbi Serfaty emphasised the contribution, under his impetus, of the French Jewish-Muslim Friendship Association.
Finally, Jacques Tarnero, rapporteur for the workshop “The forthcoming French elections”, moderated by Jean-Claude Lescure with Brice Teinturier, asked the question “What are we to expect from the future president of the Republic?” It was noted that 13% of French voters do not wish to have a Jewish president, which in part answers another question, “What do we not want the president to be?” Receiving hearty rounds of applause, Jacques Tarnero reckoned that it was time to put an end to incantations such as “Never again”, because, alas, “again is already on its way”.
Roger Cukierman, President of CRIF, had the honour of concluding this quite exceptional premiere.
English
Français