From the September 11, 2001 attacks, to the riots of the French suburbs in 2005, to the Paris attacks of 2015, when looking back at those marking events of the Western world’s recent history, could French leaders be tempted to alter the republic’s founding principle of equality? The project to entrench in the Constitution the deprivation of citizenship for terrorists born in France with dual or multiple nationalities, would question the republican principle of equal treatment for all citizens when facing justice.
Supporters of this reform claim it won’t. That it will not open a Pandora’s box. But as soon as the announcement was made, the Front National, now first party in France for the number of votes since the last election, was ostentatiously self-congratulating the implementation of one of its emblematic measures. In an opportunistic move, the party’s Vice President even called to widen cases for deprivation of citizenship. This reform would nonetheless represent a symbolic victory in the historical confrontation of two Frances. One France, until now only supported by a minority, endorsing a national identity based exclusively on roots and jus sanguinis, or right of blood; and the other one, preaching universal values, inherited from human rights and jus soli, right of the soil.
This opposition between the two Frances has a long history. Let us remember its climax, at the end of the 19th century. Emile Zola published ‘J’accuse…’, making an ‘Affair’ of the Dreyfus case, named after an Alsatian Jew Captain of the French army and Polytechnique graduate wrongly accused of treason. At the time, France was caught up in a nationalistic and anti-Semitic atmosphere. After being defeated by the Germans in 1870, France’s main national project for the Third Republic was to rebuild the State and restore its greatness through school and the civilizing colonial mission, among other things.
The republican France prevailed nonetheless in the 20th century. The Vichy regime and the horror of World War II settled the remnants of French anti-Semitism and newly recognized women’s rights paved the way for real universality. However, half a century after decolonization and the Algerian War, colonial ways of thinking remain.
The whole collective imaginary is far from being decolonized. Dual citizens from the former colonies are more often suspected of delinquency or disloyalty to France …hence the idea of their eviction. This kind of suspicion is not the privilege of simple reactionaries as demonstrated by leaders of French football in 2011, when they considered imposing quotas of dual citizens among players.
But it hasn’t always been like this, quite the contrary. Historian Gerard Noiriel justly reminded us the context of the adoption of the 1889 citizenship law. At the time, the authors of this law used the 1881 brawls involving foreign young kids in Marseille as a pretext to enforce a double jus soli. In other terms, this law of 1889 prevented dual nationals from renouncing their French citizenship once they reach the age of majority. Moreover, sons and daughters of Belgians, Italians or Germans born themselves in France were de facto declared French citizens at birth. Access to citizenship was then not only perceived as a guarantee of loyalty to France, but also as a means to prevent delinquency. A perception that also applied to descendants of the former colonies, up until this tendency was brutally reversed at the end of the 20th century.
The violence of economic and cultural globalization certainly yields its share of ‘radical Islamists’ and boosts the number of wretched from structure-lacking territories – French suburbs, Africa and other war-torn countries – and of course, politicians globally fail to implement sustainable economic policies that can address the most alarming issue in their respective population: massive unemployment. All the pieces are in place for each society to designate its own scapegoat. It is the Western world for some, African immigrants and their descendants or suburban youth for others. Added to that is the absence of a real integration policy in France. Conclusion: dual citizenship must be abolished.
Let’s be clear on one thing: the rights of an individual are still well established in France, but fantasies and fears generated by the new ‘21st-century Muslim’ archetype make him from now on, the perfect target for far-right political parties, for a fraction of the political right and now, even for some people to the left. This Muslim’s status is strangely reminiscent of that of the Jew at the end of the 19th century. Shaken identities, pervasiveness of the media and oversimplification in trying to explain the cause of complex events all lead to reinforce the convictions of the supporters of roots and blood.
Successful in rallying ideological republicans to their so-called ‘good questions’, they are now rallying them as well to their ‘wrong answers’.
Blindfolded by short-term views, in denial of the stigma of its colonial past and without a ‘J’accuse…’ or any other pivotal text or speech, such as Jacques Chirac’s 1995 Vel d’Hiv, with the power to free France from herself by restating the truth, the country risks unfortunately and inexorably the very worst. Constitutional stigmatization of fellow citizens emanating from France’s own history will create a new landmark. By remaining lucid towards its problems and its past, while conscious of its full diversity and by standing firm by its ideals, France can find the strength to reconnect and surpass itself. May France find inspiration in this African teaching: ‘If you don’t know where you’re going, look back at where you’re coming from.’
