Even if discussing the attack in Paris, by imprisoning it in the “freedom of expression” and “Islam-terror” parentheses, provides a mental comfort, it will neither give an idea about the multidimensional dynamics of the attack nor the possible results. All the orientalist readings, which are made by taking sanctuary in these types of normative statements, are serving a strategy that covers the complicated justifications and reflections of the attack. Fortunately, other than a handful of people, whose ideological positions had nibbled on its intellectual capabilities, nobody else credited these shallow comments. Even though the number of readings, which defend that there is a causality relation between Islam and terror or that there is an essential incompatibility between Islam and democracy-toleration, were low, there had been many readings, which isolate the attack from the political-sociological dynamics and turn the Muslims’ or Islamic world’s relation with terror into a problem and codifies the matter as the problem of Muslims. Muslims had been invited to curse the attack, make self-criticism and shrive.
It’s clear that the matter, before everyone else, concerned and affected Muslims due to its results. Thus, the Islamic world has also been pondering on these matters for a long time now and looking for remedies against the rise of radicalism. These types of attacks are being condemned from the most senior level, without hiding behind “but” s, the most popular idiom nowadays.
However, Muslim individuals, groups and political structures are not living in a universe that they’ve shaped. They are developing an attitude within the sociopolitical context, which they are mostly exposed to and surrounds them. Because of this, if a perspective that encompasses the political conditions, in which the Islamic world is included, and the sociocultural dynamics, which Muslims are exposed to, is not developed, the readings, which focus on turning Muslims into a problem, will be articulated to racist-segregationist normative readings.
Within this frame, it’s necessary to leave the superficial readings, which accuses Islam or invites Muslims to shrive, aside and focus on at least two dynamics of an analysis, which steers towards taking sociopolitical factors into consideration.
The first dynamic is Europe’s exam with Islam and Muslims. Despite the pluralism idea that it brags over producing, Europe doesn’t leave the impression that in the next period it will successfully pass the exam to make the differences live together, similar to how it doesn’t have the practice to live with others that are different to them. As the communal visibility of the Muslims increase, the foreigner enmity is evolving towards Islam hostility. While the perpetrators of the racist attacks, which mostly target Muslims in Europe, are yet to be captured, the right-wing parties are growing stronger and becoming a partner of rulership in many countries. Right-wingers and left-wingers are triggering Islam hostility within the axis of foreigner enmity and secularism respectively. At the intersection point of these two contrast dynamics, the European Muslim youth are becoming estranged to the country they live in due to integration problems.
The second dynamic is related with the political experience in the Islam world. A major part of the Islam geography had been exposed to invasion after World War I and to authoritative local colonial methods. Authoritative methods invited armed radical organizations by sealing off political participation and representation channels. A more recent diffraction had been experienced in 2001 with the 9/11 attack and in 2003 with the US’ Iraq invasion. Especially the US’ Iraq invasion and their policies following that had created a platform, where radical organizations can gain strength, by revealing the denominational and ethnic fault lines of the region. And finally, the Arab Spring. The Arab Spring, which mobilized a strong democratic wave in the Islamic world after a century by shaking many authoritative regimes in North Africa and the Middle East with wide participation and civil instruments, had been drowned in a short time. While many global and regional governments and actors are supporting the strengthening of old regimes in the name of drowning these movements, which possess communal support and compatible with democracy, they also supported radical Salafi organizations. It’s sufficient to remember the happenings in Egypt to see the cost produced by this wave. The matter, which had been recently exampled by the attack in Paris, is especially feeding off these two dynamics as well as many other dynamics. On one hand, this perspective, which doesn’t steer towards a fundamental confrontation with the structural dynamics, which feeds the violence by not making room for Islam in Europe and democratic political movements in the Islam world, is choosing the easy way by referring the problem to Islam and Muslims. And, on the other hand, is appealing to palliative precautions that amplify the security precautions. Thus, unfortunately, the violence is increasing incrementally.
