INTO THE FRAY
Malevolent Macron has no claim to the moral high ground
Given France’s gruesome post-World War II colonial history, it has a feeble claim to any moral superiority and is hardly in a position to pontificate to Israel over Gaza.
A recent and somewhat undiplomatic incident occurred that set the proverbial cat among the pigeons in the stately halls of government in Paris.
It came in the form of an open letter in The Wall Street Journal written by Charles Kushner, the U.S. Ambassador to France, expressing sharp criticism of the manner in which President Emmanuel Macron has handled the burgeoning wave of antisemitism in the country.
Kushner, the father of President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, warned that antisemitic incidents in France had “exploded since Hamas’s barbaric assault on October 7, 2023” against the farms, villages and towns in southern Israel. Significantly, he suggested that Macron’s government’s criticism of Israel and his move toward recognizing a Palestinian state amid its war on Gaza had emboldened antisemitic sentiments. The US envoy warned that today, “many French Jews fear that history will repeat itself in Europe,” and urged Macron to forge a “serious plan” to root out antisemitism.
The piece sparked considerable French ire and resulted in the ambassador being summoned to the Foreign Ministry for a dressing-down. However, not only did Kushner fail to comply, sending a lower-level official in his place, but he was given stout support from Washington, with the State Department spokesman doubling down on his criticisms: “We stand by his comments … Ambassador Kushner is our US government representative in France and is doing a great job advancing our national interests in that role.”
Not unexpectedly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly condemned the intended initiative, warning: “Such a move rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became…A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launchpad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it.”
In a letter to Macron, Netanyahu charged that his call for a Palestinian state “pours fuel on this antisemitism fire”
Another condemnation of the move, even more strident and arguably of greater international significance, came from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who excoriated the decision in strong words on his X account. “The United States strongly rejects @EmmanuelMacron’s plan to recognize a Palestinian state at the @UNgeneral assembly. This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace. It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7th.”
The French rejected the accusations, claiming that any suggestion that French plans to recognize a Palestinian state explained a rise in antisemitic violence was “erroneous” and “abject.”
Proof to the contrary, however, soon appeared in the form of the glee with which the virulently antisemitic Hamas embraced the measure. Indeed, as if to expunge any doubt as to the prudence (or lack thereof) of the initiative came the warm commendation from the Islamist terror group, welcoming Macron’s decision, and praising it as “a positive step in the right direction” while urging all countries of the world “to follow France’s lead.”
Of course, France is hardly in a position to claim any moral high ground on the issue of granting independence to territories under its control.
Thus, for example, the 1954-1962 Algerian War of Independence, during which France deployed around half a million counter-insurgency troops, who engaged in systematic torture of Algerians, summary executions, abductions and collective punishment, including forced relocation of about 2 million Algerians and the destruction of thousands of villages. The overall toll of Paris’s attempt to stifle Algerian independence was 200-400,000 civilian deaths.
Indeed, prior to being elected president in 2017, Macron admitted that French actions in Algeria constituted a “crime against humanity.” Yet after his election, with the same brazen hypocrisy he displayed in his attitude toward the Jewish State, he refused point-blank to apologize for the atrocities perpetrated in Algeria, stating: “It’s [an apology] not relevant and the word [forgive] would break all bonds.”
A similar display of French colonial brutality manifested itself in Indo-China—today Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, particularly the First Indochina War (1946–1954). France’s rule in this region was marked not just by gross colonial exploitation but also by severe repression and savage atrocities. Although reliable figures for the number of total civilian deaths are difficult to come by, due in no small measure to the desire of the French to conceal/minimize the true numbers, but there is little doubt they run into the hundreds of thousands, with some estimates as high as 800,000.
Even today, France clings doggedly to its overseas possessions, such as its Pacific Islands territory of New Caledonia. It has employed a variety of “dodgy” measures to ensure Paris’s hold over these remote islands—among other things, to retain control over their rich nickel deposits. These include marginalization of the indigenous, pro-independence Kanak population, New Caledonia’s largest ethnic group, as well as impeding the strong demand for independence, by manipulating the demographic composition of the population and the results of referenda on the independence issue, as well as intimidation by means of a military presence.
By coercively strangling the desire for independence, France could well drive the Kanak population to desperate measures, which might well lead to the rekindling of the violence that took place over this issue in the 1980s.
So, in light of France’s dismal colonial history across the globe, from North Africa through East Asia to Oceania, it is hardly in a position to pontificate to Israel over Gaza. Indeed, it has a feeble claim to any high moral ground—especially because its action may well fan the flames of antisemitism threatening to engulf France.
After all, as opposed to its own colonial action aimed at holding on to its territories abroad, Israel had already handed over Gaza for the self-rule of the local population, who, instead of seizing the opportunity to develop the enclave, used it as an opportunity to amass a deadly arsenal, and as a platform, from which to launch a lethal assault against the Jewish state.
Posts
