World

8° London Hi 11°C / Lo 6°C

France's crisis of national identity

The country's failure to come to terms with its ethnic mix has been exposed by events on the football field, says John Lichfield

French Muslims celebrate Algeria's football victory

AFP/GETTY IMAGES

French Muslims celebrate Algeria's football victory

Just before the France-Ireland football match in Paris, I met my charming, gentle, retired, 60-something, French neighbour on the stairs of our Paris apartment building. "No," he said. "I'm not watching the match. I never watch France play football. The team disgusts me because they are not really French."

What did he mean, I asked (although I knew exactly what he meant). My neighbour mumbled something about not liking the team because they didn't sing the Marseillaise before matches (something that has not been true for more than a decade). What he really meant was that there were too many non-white faces in the line-up (seven out of 11). I pointed out that every single France player in the now infamous main de Dieu World Cup qualifying team was born in France and mostly in Greater Paris. He looked embarrassed, made a "so what" hand gesture and walked away.

The match was won by a brilliant dribble by one of the players whom my neighbour does not regard as French. Unfortunately, Thierry Henry (born in Ulis, near Paris, of parents from the West Indian "overseas departéments" of France) dribbled the ball with his hand, not his foot. He has since been contrite when it suited him. He has tried, while preserving the advantage that he unfairly gained, to preserve his too-smart-and-nice-to-be-a-footballer reputation. Some people might say that his attitude was very French indeed.

That same night thousands of young people from the poorer suburbs of Greater Paris poured on to the Champs Elysées to celebrate the fact that their country had qualified for the World Cup finals in South Africa next summer. These were French kids, born in France, but they were not celebrating France's morally-challenged victory over Ireland. They were celebrating – boisterously, and at times violently – Algeria's victory over Egypt in Algiers.

In yesterday's Libération newspaper, a young French man of North African origin, a student at Sciences-Po, the Paris equivalent of the LSE, told an untold story of that night. He and many other young people left the Champs Elysées to avoid the scattered scenes of violence. They were attacked by squadrons of CRS riot police as they celebrated peacefully at Porte Maillot a kilometre away. Anyss Arbib, 21, described how he was sprayed in the face with tear gas by a riot policeman who screamed: "Get out of here you dirty Arab."

"I couldn't find a way to explain to him that I was at least as French as he was," Mr Arbib said.

President Nicolas Sarkozy has just launched a debate on "national identity" in France. He wants the nation to consider what it means to be French in 2009; what the French should be proud of; why they should regard Frenchness as an honour. He has ordered every prefect (senior national government administrator) in every departément in France to organise village and town hall meetings on this theme.

Opposition politicians have dismissed the initiative as cynical and dangerous: an attempt to shift the national conversation to Mr Sarkozy's favourite subjects – flag-waving and security – as he wallows in the mid to late 30s in the opinion polls. They point out that the President faces potentially humiliating, mid-term regional elections next spring.

Mr Sarkozy has dismissed these objections as "ostrich politics". "By trying to rub out the Nation for fear of nationalism, we have provoked an identity backlash," he said. "By abandoning what we stand for, we have ended up not knowing who we are. By encouraging self-hatred, we have closed the doors to the future."

I have lived in France for almost 13 years. I adore France and I adore the French. I have to admit, however, that I have found the events of recent days – Sarko's crusade, Henry's handball, my neighbour's comments, the celebrations by French-born Algeria fans and the brutal response of the CRS – rather unsettling.

Eleven years ago, I was one of those who wrote admiringly of the Brown-White-Black France which won the World Cup. I, and many others, suggested that their victory might soften race relations in France; that other brown and black French kids might be encouraged to feel French; that white French kids would grow up with brown and black French heroes.

Since then, we have learned better. We have had the racist Jean-Marie Le Pen's qualification for the final round of the presidential election in 2002. We have had the suburban riots of November 2005.

President Sarkozy cannot easily be labelled a racist. He is the first French President to promote politicians from racial minorities. His predecessor, Jacques Chirac, did little in this direction. Mr Chirac has been caught out on a video clip this week making an unthinkingly and mildly racist remark after shaking hands in the street with a young man of North African origin.

The opposition is probably right. National identity is a hot-button issue that Mr Sarkozy wants to exploit rather than to explore. His actions are often dictated by short-term, selfish, look-at-me motives, rather than anything more considered or profound.

And yet the events of recent days suggest that President Sarkozy is right. France needs a debate on national identity, starting with an honest debate about national identity and race. Why do all those French kids of Algerian background support the Algeria football team? After being marginalised by society and abused by police all of their young lives, it might be more sensible to ask another question. How is it that many of them, on another night, would also have cheered for France?

At the same time, Mr Sarkozy might ponder the volume and shrillness of the reaction, not just in Ireland and Britain, but all around the world, to Henry's successful hand-dribble. What annoyed many people was not just the incident itself but Henry's behaviour afterwards. He celebrated madly and then told the referee that it was foul, when it was too late to change the outcome. He commiserated with Irish players but refused to accept that the handball was deliberate. He wanted to have things both ways.

It seems to me that the Henry incident caused such a global furore partly because the team that benefited was France. Seen from abroad, rightly or wrongly, the French are viewed as a nation that likes to ignore rules (from nuclear tests to priority for pedestrians) and, at the same time, maintain a rather high-flown opinion of themselves.

They want to be the nation of human rights but to mumble under their breath about black French footballers not being French. They want, like Chirac, to be a champion of the Third World but to be mildly racist. They want the French West Indies to be French but not the French West Indians, like Henry's parents. They want to have it both ways.

There are many other, wonderful things to say about the French, just as there other, wonderful things to say about Henry. But on the evidence of the last few days, whatever my neighbour might say, Henry's national identity could only be French.

France in numbers

Ethnic minorities:

3.264m North African (5.23%)

1.080m Sub-Saharan African (1.73%)

441,000 Turkish (0.71%)

757,000 French overseas departéments and territories (1.21%)

It is illegal in France for a census to be taken on race or religion – these figures are an estimate by Solis, a marketing company. The percentages are of mainland France, which has a population of 62,400,000.

Religions:

83%-88% Roman Catholic

2% Protestant

1% Jewish

5%-10% Muslim

4% Unaffiliated

Source: CIA World Factbook

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Yilgin Burnu.
[info]ron_broxted wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 12:28 am (UTC)
Don't these problems arise in part from France's colonisation of north Africa? The Portuguese tried to be colour blind with the policy of "assimilados". Concentrating social problems in the banlieues is a recipe for disaster. Ignoring them is tanatmount to crass stupidity.
Re: Yilgin Burnu.
[info]jaded63 wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 08:30 am (UTC)

The problems arise from an idiotic policy of almost unrestricted immigration for arabs and blacks from existing and former French colonies.
Re: Yilgin Burnu.
[info]shegelu wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 01:25 pm (UTC)
Social conditions are rarely if ever caused by a single factor. At least ron_broxted had the wisdom to say "arise in part". The fact that you talk of "blacks", rather than "black people" suggests that you begrudge calling them "people".

Your misunderstanding of French politics is profound. You are probably unaware that, as departements d'outre-mer, many former colonies are actually part of France.

Tell me, were you as fiercely opposed to Zimbabweans & White South Africans returning to the UK?
"I'm not a racist but..." (then random generalization)
[info]fidelfr wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 08:48 am (UTC)
Let me summerize this article : "Let me first state that I adore the French, but THEY are racist (because my French neighbour is) and cheaters (because Thierry Henry is)".

Wait a minute... isn't this pure xenophobic rhetoric ?
Re: "I'm not a racist but..." (then random generalization)
[info]shegelu wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 01:32 pm (UTC)
John's penultimate paragraph does indulge in some anecdotal generalization & rhetorical exaggerization.

But to answer yr question: No, it is not xenophobia, because there is no indication that the author feels "an abnormal fear or hatred of foreigners".

Let's be precise with our terms of abuse, please!

Re: "I'm not a racist but..." (then random generalization)
[info]fidelfr wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 02:11 pm (UTC)
Thank you for that lecture.
Change the word if you want. Call it bigotry. To me the effect is still the same.
Nobody cares whether the author feels fear or hatred, the real point is that these generalizations are offensive.

Re: "I'm not a racist but..." (then random generalization)
[info]shegelu wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 02:58 pm (UTC)
Hey, you asked the question, I assumed you wanted an answer.

Or was it just rhetoric?
Sad...
[info]duke_11 wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 09:23 am (UTC)
The journalist who wrote this article must be really sad for living in a country he hates so much...
[info]tocquevil wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 10:13 am (UTC)
Ah John, your own national identity could only be British. For all your claims of loving the French, can't you see that this article tells more about the way the Anglosphere see the French than about the French themselves? Regarding the Henry incident, you suggest that it tells a lot about Henry and the French. In doing so, you take your part in a ad-hominem attack that, contrary to your claim, has mainly be an Irish/British press phenomenon. What if the adversary was not Ireland, but say, Georgia for instance? Do you thing all the fuss would have take place? What if the culprit was not French, but say Italian? Would Italy be in the same shameful, regretful and self-bashing mood than France currently is about the way the Bleus went through? The way France reacted to this event (with 80% of people wanting a replay) was probably more telling about France's lack of self-esteem and self-assurance than your typically British claim that France is a nation that want "to maintain a high-flown opinion of themselves".

And sorry, but using your neighbour's comment to make a general point is tantamount to bad journalism. So is the temptation to use Chirac's video or the Facebook statement of a Science-Po student (who, by the way, benefitted from affirmative action) to portray a racist France.
Francophobe...
[info]decibel2 wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 10:37 am (UTC)
How does such a blatant (racist & hostile to boot) opinion piece end up in the news section?
Re: Francophobe...
[info]shegelu wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 01:46 pm (UTC)
Yr question is one perhaps for a sub-editor.

I would like however to correct your use of the term "racist". The French are not a racial or ethnic group, but rather a nation state based on commonalities of language, geography & culture, as are most European nations. Thus, to attribute racist views to the French as a people is not a "racist" act. More accurately, at worst, it could be termed a act of cultural prejudice.

I understand that doesn't sound as snappy as "racist", but precision of terms is quite important.

In fact, if the author had said "Black people want to be champions of capitalism, but to be mildly racist", it would still have not been a "racist" opinion.

Racism is defined as the belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

Thus, if John had said "all White people are racist from birth, while Black people are naturally racially tolerant & thus superior", that would have been "racist".
[info]tocquevil wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 10:48 am (UTC)
So John, you have a neighbour that don't like his national football team, and you knew even before asking that it is because many players don't look French.

What do you make of the IFOP opinion survey "Preferred personalities of the French" that consistently ranks Frenchmen of foreign origins at the top? For 2009:

1 Yannick NOAH : Father from Cameroon
2 Dany BOON: Father from Algeria
3 Zinédine ZIDANE: Parents from Algeria
4 Gad ELMALEH: Born is Morocco
5 Patrick POIVRE D’ARVOR
6 Charles AZNAVOUR: Born in Armenia
7 Nicolas HULOT
8 Mimie MATHY
9 Jamel DEBBOUZE: Parents from Morocco
10 Michel SARDOU

Pot or Kettle?
[info]bobav wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 12:02 pm (UTC)
I am always, probably naively, a bit taken aback when a writer from one European or North American Nation scolds members of a neighbor nation for the kinds of xenophobia and class/race/language based bigotry that is prevalent in any former colonizing nation, and most certainly the writer's.
REPRESENTATIVE TEAMS?
[info]sidsnot wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 02:10 pm (UTC)
If a football teams should be a representation of the country then about half should be female maybe a couple of homosexuals plus one disabled someone under 16 and perhaps somebody over 70. Hang-on that's the English football team.
[info]nounouchuk wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 03:18 pm (UTC)
i live in france, in paris, i think thats a nice true article, but those problem are present since a long time and are relied to colonisation...the french problem is that they didnt understand that colonisation's time was finished or they are angry beacause of its end.
they have fear of everithing black or arab or others, what is "funny" is that they didnt act the same when they were occupied africa, indochine...but now they aint happy because the childrens of those people they were colonised are in france now, and was born there and are...unfortunately...french...
france nation of human rights ??? i really dont think so, neither by his history or by whats going on now, france was close to really deeply respect human rights.
a long road...
[info]revo_outpost wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 04:14 pm (UTC)
Dear Nounouchuk... I too have lived in France and am actually about to return for good after a ten year spell in the USA... I read your response to the article with the uttermost interest, especially your comments regarding French history. Yes, it has been marred by mistakes and horrors just like any other nations', YET, if you care to dig just a little bit into the lines of our History, you will discover that it is one closer to human rights than you might think (when France was in America, the Indians massively allied themselves to us, against the English because we mixed with them and more or less traded fairly with them, in World War I countless Black Americans stayed in France because they were better treated by the French than by their fellow southern Americans, Samuel de Champlain explored America with a dream to build a true and lasting partnership with the local Indians, and not push them away form their lands, and it goes on and on...). YES, we have problems, and we have had them for over 30 years, but these are the birth pangs: we are building a new nation. and it takes time and, unfortunately, hurt, for people to come together. but with hope, it is possible. and with the French "inévitable". Believe and fight for what is right, and we will prevail for justice and social peace. let's get in touch.
Re: a long road...
[info]tocquevil wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 05:08 pm (UTC)
It takes heart to reach your level of optimism. As a privileged white French who would love to make justice and social peace prevail, I'm a bit disheartened when I see so many Frenchmen of north-african origin rejecting everything French, and using the same "nasty colonizers" rhetoric as the one Nounouchuk seems ingrained with.
Racism Rears Its Grotesquely Ugly Head Again
[info]afghant wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 05:08 pm (UTC)
Yilgin Burnu - You are a vile racist. Your comment, "the problems arise from an idiotic policy of almost unrestricted immigration for arabs and blacks from existing and former French colonies", is clear evidence of that. You would rather France take in only white Christians or Jewish immigrants and all Arabs and Africans disappear off the face of this earth. You Nazis make me sick.
Re: Racism Rears Its Grotesquely Ugly Head Again
[info]tocquevil wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 05:28 pm (UTC)
Wow, what an educated comment. So advocating a restriction of immigration is being Nazi... Your attitude is part of the problem, not the solution.
Re: Racism Rears Its Grotesquely Ugly Head Again
[info]kodak321 wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 08:28 pm (UTC)
..Jewish immigrants?...poor little afgan....it's nazis and racists all round...nice to see our Asian (Indonisian??) blogger is a fervent anti-racist....as expected...
[info]guialto wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 07:37 pm (UTC)
Your article about racism and attitudes towards immigrant is also true for most rich Western countries. Didn't the son of the heir to the throne call a soldier of Pakistani origin "our little Paki friend"?
It is wrong of you to imply that it is just a French problem when any educated person (which I am sure you are) could clearly see it's not
just a thought
[info]sjymusic wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 10:52 pm (UTC)
I'm not sure that there is that much in your piece which could not equally apply in Britain, although the racism here is layered under a political correctness which stiffens and stifles. Perhaps the Brits mind their P's and Q's a little more - especially when 'on the record' - but the identity crisis of French Algerians is certainly no different to that experienced by new generations of British Pakistanis and Indians. This is become a European issue rather than a national one and Sarkozy is right to call for debate. The debate in Britain is, alas, centred mostly around the issue of immigration which only skewers the real issues.
A post-nation-state world
[info]alexweir1949 wrote:
Thursday, 26 November 2009 at 06:09 am (UTC)
A post-nation-state world

Nation states are obsolete. Nationalism of any and every kind is dangerous and leads only to war. We are one people under God. Every person on this earth is your brother or sister.

It is simple.

Get modern.

We have plenty of problems to solve - lets get on with it.

Mr Alex Weir, Baghdad and Harare

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date