- Join the France 24 community here
- Log in
Latest update: 06/12/2009
- French culture - French politics - immigration - Nicolas Sarkozy
Debate on national identity stirs up passions over immigration
The government of French President Nicolas Sarkozy launched a debate on national identity last month, inviting citizens to help define what it means to be French and sparking a wider, and quite heated debate, on immigration policy.
By News Wires (text)
AFP - President Nicolas Sarkozy insists it is a noble exercise in soul-searching about what defines Frenchness, but the national identity debate gripping France has quickly exposed fears about immigration.
Sarkozy's right-wing government launched the debate last month, inviting ordinary citizens to explain what it means to be French on an Internet forum and at town hall meetings organised across the country.
On Tuesday, the debate goes to the National Assembly where deputies will provide their input before the introspection draws to a close on February 4 with a national conference allowing the government to take stock.
The initiative ignited controversy from the outset, with the left accusing Sarkozy of trying to woo far-right voters ahead of March regional elections by appealing to French pride and patriotism.
Struggling with low approval ratings, Sarkozy has defended the discussion about national identity, saying "this is a noble debate" and that those who opposed it are simply afraid of tackling complex issues.
A member of Sarkozy's party showed no fear when he told a local gathering last week that France had too many immigrants and that this problem had been swept under the carpet for too long.
"It's time we reacted because we are going to be eaten alive," said Andre Valentin, mayor of a small village in northern France. "There are already 10 million of them, 10 million who are getting paid to do nothing."
Immigration Minister Eric Besson, who is also the minister for national identity, stepped in and declared such remarks "unacceptable" within the government-sponsored debate.
He also announced that his ministry would from now on carefully monitor the posted comments on its identity debate website to remove contributions deemed racist or xenophobic.
These include such comments as "being France means being white. That's all" and "being French means learning to park your car in a garage to avoid having it torched" -- a reference to car burnings in the high-immigration suburbs.
France is home to Europe's largest Muslim minority and Islam now ranks as the nation's second religion, so opinion was rattled by the Swiss referendum vote to ban minaret construction.
Despite several local campaigns by the French far right, dozens of mosques are slated for construction in France, including a Grand Mosque in Marseille that will have a 25-metre (82-foot) minaret.
Next month, a parliamentary inquiry will produce a much-awaited report on whether to ban the full Islamic veil, and the "burqa debate" is providing yet another test of how far France is willing to go to accommodate Islam.
"This debate is being organised in a very unhealthy context," said Eugene-Henri More, the deputy mayor of the ethnically-mixed Paris suburb of La Courneuve.
"The idea is to come up with a model for being French, but who will define this model?" he asked. "It really seems to me that it's being organised to appease fears about immigration."
Among the questions raised by the debate's organisers are: Should France have "integration contracts" for immigrants imposing rules such as French language skills, and should students be required to sing the national anthem "La Marseillaise" at least once a year?
Booing "La Marseillaise" at soccer matches has become the signature form of protest by French immigrant youths.
The opposition Socialist Party is boycotting the debate, with leader Martine Aubry accusing Sarkozy of whipping up anti-immigrant sentiment and allowing the debate to become a platform for xenophobia.
As of last week, more than 40,000 comments had been posted on the debate website.




























React to the article
(1) Reaction
integration?
As a Brit, who has thoughts of moving to France, I have some thoughts on immigration and integration.
If I was to move to France, I would do so because I prefer the way of life, the social structure and how things are done in general. For me to take part in that, I have to ensure I can speak the language fluently enough to enable me to communicate effectively; I need to learn local and national customs so that I do not appear rude or offend; I need to join in the French way of life, not try and change it to something that it's not. I'd not insist on an education system for my children that's different from what's normal in France, nor would I insist on the nation pandering to any religious leanings that I might have. If you chose to move to a country, it should be because you want to live there, and enjoy what they have to offer. Moving simply to take advantage of social care and state handouts, and then imposing your own social requirements on that state is just simply wrong. If you don't like the way of life in your chosen home, then why did you chose it in the first place? Equally, if you're a second generation immigrant, and your parents were arrogant enough to impose their social structure on their new chosen home, then don't perpetuate this selfish arrogance; embrace your chose home's way of life, make the effort and maybe things might change for the better. That being said, people don't change, and the sorts of people who impose their beliefs and social structure on others are normally so indoctrined, selfish and thus self-alienated, that they can't see it, and just call "persecution" or "racism" rather than recognise that they are a significant part of the problem.