A teenager killed by police in a Paris suburb. A wave of anger that morphs into widespread rioting and opportunistic looting. A tough law-and-order response followed by an appeal for unity and calm — and a political call for action that fades over time.
Such is the depressing deja vu cycle of violence over the years in the French banlieues, captured in movies such as La Haine and in news footage beamed around the world over the past week. These neighborhoods built up to house immigrant workers in the 1960s and 1970s have become bywords for deprivation, ethnic conflict and military-style police tactics — and, sadly, indifference.
It would take a lot of political willpower to make today’s cycle different from the last time violence flared up in 2005. The peak of rioting seems to have passed since a deployment of 45,000 law enforcement officers and Saturday’s funeral of French teenager Nahel, shot dead by a police officer on Tuesday last week. (Nahel’s last name was not released by authorities because he was a minor).
French President Emmanuel Macron has scrapped a state visit to Germany, recognizing this is no ordinary crisis: An estimated 100 million euros (US$109 million) of damage has been dealt to stores, shopping malls, banks and more.
The omens are not great for change. Macron has no parliamentary majority and has lost political capital pushing through divisive flagship pension reform — which created its own extraordinary cycle of violence that also postponed a state visit, this time from King Charles III.
Meanwhile, the far right — positioning itself as the party of law and order and small businesses — has never been more popular. It is reminiscent of the political fallout of 2005, when tough-talking then-French minister of the interior Nicolas Sarkozy built support for a presidential run by pledging to clean the “scum” from the streets.
An online survey by Le Figaro amid the riots showed far-right leader Marine Le Pen leading with 39 percent, six points ahead of Macron. The far left, which refused to call for calm, trailed. Macron’s former center-right prime minister, Edouard Philippe, remains popular.
How did we get here, and what to do about it? There are two aspects to the violence that need addressing: One is the spark — in this case, the bullet that ended Nahel’s life — and the other a powder keg of resentment, under-education and unemployment.
On the spark, policing needs real change and would benefit from a more community-minded model. France is different from the US — it has less firearm use, a smaller prison population and a wider social safety net. Its problems stem from a lack of oversight and a disconnect from those it protects.
The force fails to police itself: A 2016 report found that in 59 cases of lethal force used over a six-year period, only two had led to a legal action. Guardrails on curbing gun use have been eroded over time, said researcher Sebastien Roche of CNRS, the national research center, citing an increase in deaths at police hands after a 2017 counterterrorism law.
That so much policing in the banlieues involves militarized crowd control and identity checks paradoxically speaks to an under-resourced, poorly trained police force.
Clichy-sous-Bois, the epicenter of the 2005 riots, had no police station until 2010 despite a higher crime incidence. Talk of color-blind republican values clashes with the evidence of numerous testimonials.
Michel Zecler, a black music producer who was badly beaten by police in his Parisian studio, told me about it in 2021.
“Don’t tell me there’s no police racism after what I went through,” he said.
As for the social powder keg, the ghettoization of rich and poor in France has persisted even as income inequality is kept low by large-scale state redistribution. Access to public services is uneven: The flip side of police shortages in the banlieues are education shortcomings. Teachers turn over at a higher rate, and discrimination persists into employment.
Paris has boomed while its environs have stagnated. Trappes Mayor Ali Rabeh calls it a “total failure of the republic.”
Inflation and COVID-19 have made things worse. Dozens of local counselors in May warned that the banlieues were in an emergency situation as higher building costs stalled vital renovation projects, rent payments went unpaid and uneven healthcare resources exposed by the pandemic had left scars.
Regeneration is seen as key to better housing, quality of life and security. Studies suggest these are neighborhoods where people’s walking speed is double that measured in other, more pleasant towns.
Alexis de Tocqueville once wrote that every generation is a new people. The young age of rioters — with an average age of 17 — suggests a people in danger of being lost. The viral video of a father dragging his son from the streets at night and throwing him into the trunk of his car was a poignant reminder of the high number of single-parent families struggling to keep control.
A woeful lack of daycare in the area adds to families’ vulnerability. Opening more kindergartens was one of 31 ideas proposed by think tank Institut Montaigne last year to revive the banlieues.
There is no magic bullet, and a lot of the violence would make some solutions even harder to accomplish — infrastructure for next year’s Olympic Games, seen as key to regenerating poor neighborhoods, has been damaged. Macron is running out of time to keep his promises to the younger generation he claims to represent — and to avoid another case of urban violence deja vu.
Lionel Laurent is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering digital currencies, the EU and France. Previously, he was a reporter for Reuters and Forbes. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS