In a way, it would have been easier not to write about the events of last night in Paris. Add to that recent events in the Lebanon, Baghdad and Kenya and we must be be in no doubt that we are now living in very dangerous times. Dangerous on so many levels.
For one thing, the aftermath of events such as these frequently provide much needed ammunition to fuel the arguments of extremists on both sides of the debate. But putting that aside, we must now face up to the fact that the enclave which now stretches from Iraq to Syria has the potential to impact on the lives of all of us at any time. So, the question is: What to do now? When Francois Hollande today referred to the Paris atrocities as an "Act of war", he probably spoke for a great many in France and far beyond. But we would do well to remember that it was war which gave rise to this sorry mess in the first place. By logical extension, it is difficult to envisage a different outcome if we once more follow that time served method.
While it is rightly instructive to emphasise that these events have been caused by a tiny minority of people, a tiny minority is all it takes. It is equally valid to ask who sanctions actions such as these. Somebody somewhere gave the green light for the recent events to take place in the first place. Whoever that person is, we need to ask the simple question: On whose authority do you give consent for this murder and butchery? Any answer to that question referring to any religious figure as the justification would curry no favour with the vast majority around the world.
Of course, it is not so long since France was the subject of the appalling murders of staff at the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.
http://talesfromtheprincipality.blogspot.com/2015/01/a-week-for-moral-debate.html
Others have instead considered the possibility of dialogue with the senior figures behind the regime in Northern Iraq and Southern Syria. Had anybody suggested dialogue with Martin McGuiness and Gerry Adams in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I don't doubt that they would have received the sort of short shrift being dished out today to those who propose dialogue. It doesn't follow that dialogue would even work. But if we at least try, we have a chance of success. If we never try, we will never know.
It has also been established that some of those responsible for the recent atrocities had entered Europe via the Greek island of Lesbos. This has been the preferred route of entry of so may refugees in recent months and it is very difficult to to try and equate the two. The best way I can try and make sense of it all is to try and use an analogy. Imagine using a sieve to try and separate the wheat from the chaff. No matter how good the sieve and no matter what we are sieving, we almost always get a tiny amount of something getting through which we didn't want. The fact remains that for the vast majority of the refugees seen traversing mainland Europe over recent months, the perilous journey by boat from their homelands was only risked to try and escape tyranny, war, violence, rape and butchery. Nobody could be reasonably faulted for taking such action when faced with such an appalling daily reality. Wouldn't we all?
But what if we try dialogue and hit a brick wall? What if the underground network of terror and extremism across Europe is now so firmly established that it is just too late get anywhere with dialogue? That is the most scary outcome for me and millions like me. That would mean all of us living our lives against a permanent threat of random murders. Yesterday, my family welcomed a new baby in to this world. I scarcely dare to imagine what world that child will inhabit in the years to come but we must all do everything within our means to spread the message of solidarity being so powerfully executed in Paris tonight. We are not scared. For all the lives torn apart in recent days, we must stand firm against terrorism in all of it's ugly guises and remain true to the values upon which the French Republic was founded: Equality, Freedom and Brotherhood.
For one thing, the aftermath of events such as these frequently provide much needed ammunition to fuel the arguments of extremists on both sides of the debate. But putting that aside, we must now face up to the fact that the enclave which now stretches from Iraq to Syria has the potential to impact on the lives of all of us at any time. So, the question is: What to do now? When Francois Hollande today referred to the Paris atrocities as an "Act of war", he probably spoke for a great many in France and far beyond. But we would do well to remember that it was war which gave rise to this sorry mess in the first place. By logical extension, it is difficult to envisage a different outcome if we once more follow that time served method.
While it is rightly instructive to emphasise that these events have been caused by a tiny minority of people, a tiny minority is all it takes. It is equally valid to ask who sanctions actions such as these. Somebody somewhere gave the green light for the recent events to take place in the first place. Whoever that person is, we need to ask the simple question: On whose authority do you give consent for this murder and butchery? Any answer to that question referring to any religious figure as the justification would curry no favour with the vast majority around the world.
Of course, it is not so long since France was the subject of the appalling murders of staff at the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.
http://talesfromtheprincipality.blogspot.com/2015/01/a-week-for-moral-debate.html
Others have instead considered the possibility of dialogue with the senior figures behind the regime in Northern Iraq and Southern Syria. Had anybody suggested dialogue with Martin McGuiness and Gerry Adams in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I don't doubt that they would have received the sort of short shrift being dished out today to those who propose dialogue. It doesn't follow that dialogue would even work. But if we at least try, we have a chance of success. If we never try, we will never know.
It has also been established that some of those responsible for the recent atrocities had entered Europe via the Greek island of Lesbos. This has been the preferred route of entry of so may refugees in recent months and it is very difficult to to try and equate the two. The best way I can try and make sense of it all is to try and use an analogy. Imagine using a sieve to try and separate the wheat from the chaff. No matter how good the sieve and no matter what we are sieving, we almost always get a tiny amount of something getting through which we didn't want. The fact remains that for the vast majority of the refugees seen traversing mainland Europe over recent months, the perilous journey by boat from their homelands was only risked to try and escape tyranny, war, violence, rape and butchery. Nobody could be reasonably faulted for taking such action when faced with such an appalling daily reality. Wouldn't we all?
But what if we try dialogue and hit a brick wall? What if the underground network of terror and extremism across Europe is now so firmly established that it is just too late get anywhere with dialogue? That is the most scary outcome for me and millions like me. That would mean all of us living our lives against a permanent threat of random murders. Yesterday, my family welcomed a new baby in to this world. I scarcely dare to imagine what world that child will inhabit in the years to come but we must all do everything within our means to spread the message of solidarity being so powerfully executed in Paris tonight. We are not scared. For all the lives torn apart in recent days, we must stand firm against terrorism in all of it's ugly guises and remain true to the values upon which the French Republic was founded: Equality, Freedom and Brotherhood.
Comments
Post a Comment