A Fear-driven French Identity

This weeks trip to the French Embassy was perfectly applicable to class. I really enjoyed the relevance because I was able to apply the theoretical aspect of identity that was discussed in class to the specifics of French identity. The French diplomat addressed the French idea of identity: French first, everything else second.

Since visiting the embassy, I have read several articles about the recent actions of the French government, specifically the controversial actions of the French Parliament’s ban on the wearing of burqas and President Sarkozy’s law to remove the Roma from their camps. Both actions, though carried out by separate bodies within the governmental system, reiterate a fear-driven mentality to maintain a pure French identity. Whereas the United States was founded by immigrants and has, generally speaking, been rather welcoming of immigrants through its history, France has historically been much less tolerant of meshing cultures. Banning the wearing of burqas is a perfect example of French assimilation and the erasing of previous identity to become solely French. This video news report (http://online.wsj.com/video/french-parliament-backs-veil-ban/C6F48A08-7B76-4422-8458-FCFA5D92D7B7.html) states that in addition to being fined if caught wearing a burqa, attending French citizenship classes may also be required. Is this legislation passed out of fear or hatred? Its hard to say. However, I think that the French government fears it may lose its identity to the new European identity officially defined by the establishment of the European Union (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703376504575492011925494780.html).

President Sarkozy’s dedication to destroying the Roma camps and deporting the Roma from France, seems to be yet another means of protecting the French identity. Sarkozy blames the Roma for acts of violence and other criminal acts, such as trafficking. Instead of addressing the issues within the Roma population, Sarkozy has chosen to further the issue of human rights violations by ruthlessly destroying the lively hood of thousands of individuals (http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=ENGPRE201009131861&lang=e, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11243923).

Where should the line be drawn? Is identity what a population is comprised of or what a government molds the population to become? I think that the answers to these questions depend of the type of government that is ruling a country. In America, individuals can, for the most part, practice any religion, wear any clothing, speak any language, etc. This attracts many immigrants looking for a place to fit in and succeed. Many countries, however, have governments that forbid any type of personal of public identity that is not sanctioned by the government (i.e. China).

Though identity can be a complex aspect of international relations, it is vital. How world leaders, populations, governments, and organizations view themselves and other countries, is essential to how each actor will interact with all the “others” that exist in the international venue.