Many observers have said that the November 13 attacks in Paris that killed 129 people and left 352 injured were eerily reminiscent of the events of September 11, 2001. Also like the terrorist attacks in New York, the Paris “massacre” caught everyone by surprise. Another similarity is that with this attack, the Islamic State (IS) has destroyed the stereotype that prevailed among Western intelligence community holding that this criminal group presented no “imminent threat” to the West. Fourteen years ago, al-Qaeda played the IS’s part.
Another question is how the international community is going to join the fight against the IS, and what should be the role of Russia, which unilaterally intervened in the Syrian conflict on the side of Bashar al-Assad. This issue was discussed briefly at the November 16 economic summit of G20 leaders in Turkey. US President Barack Obama pledged to redouble efforts in the fight against IS, but it is unclear whether he was not too late to come to his senses. The whole world remembers the ignored “red lines” that Obama used to warn al-Assad not to use chemical weapons against the rebels. As a result of the US president’s passivity, the Syrian leader kept destroying the opposition, and refugees were leaving the country en masse, first for neighboring countries and then for Europe, causing a refugee crisis with the consequences we all know.
Edward LUCAS, senior vice president of the Center for European Policy Analysis, London:
“The main result of the attacks is polarization – this will benefit Islamists and also Russia, which wants the West to have a binary choice: with Russia against the terrorists or with the terrorists against Russia.”
Sketch by Viktor BOGORAD
Tatiana KASTUEVA-JEAN, head of the Russia/New Independent States Center of the French Institute of International Relations, Paris:
“Recent terrorist attacks in Paris may become a watershed in French politics. Firstly, of course, the tough rhetoric in the style of Marine Le Pen meets the expectations of the French population as it responds to the barbaric acts committed against civilians. Against this background, she may find it easy to gain extra points; however, former president Nicolas Sarkozy may benefit as well. We will know it very soon, after the regional elections in December, which the ruling Socialist Party was already predicted to lose. Secondly, it is possible that the Socialists will have to adopt a tougher rhetoric – and the ruling party is already talking about the war being waged against France and the West – and propose and take actions that will be closer in spirit to the ideology of the right instead of the usual mantra ‘we will not stigmatize Islam.’ The state of emergency allows them to move from words to actions. Thirdly, recent developments may change French policy in Syria. Until now, this policy was defined by ‘two nos’: no to Bashar al-Assad, and no to Daesh. Since the beginning of the Russian bombing campaign in Syria, we have been hearing increasingly loud voices in France, mostly on the right, saying that it is necessary to join efforts with Russia to combat terrorism and to go for at least temporarily keeping the al-Assad regime in power in the absence of acceptable alternatives and to avoid chaos. In these circumstances, Ukraine has been relegated to second place at least. So far, nobody in the ruling circles in the West is seriously discussing co-ordination between Russia and the Western coalition. Still, if the West suddenly decides to cooperate with Russia on Syria, the Ukrainian factor will not be an obstacle to this Realpolitik course. At the same time, the relations between Russia and the West will never be totally free of the memory of the events that happened in Ukraine until Putin leaves office for one reason or another. Moving aside the search for solution to the Ukrainian issue is not possible, since it was a gross violation of all the principles of international law. But in general, there is a risk that the ‘Ukrainian card’ can be for many years played intermittently, being put aside for a time, then played again with new determination, depending on the current situation and interaction between Russia and the West on other issues and gradually losing its independent significance.”
William TAYLOR, executive vice-president United States Institute of Peace:
“The horrific attacks on Paris will surely be the focus of Western leaders in the coming months – and appropriately so. The attacks, however, do not change the facts that Russia has illegally annexed Crimea and invaded Donbas. Until the Russians withdraw, the sanctions should stay.
“All civilized nations are fighting extremists who use violence, and Daesh or ISIL is the most dangerous terrorist organization on the planet today.”
Hanna HOPKO, chairperson of the Verkhovna Rada Committee for Foreign Affairs, Kyiv:
“The situation in Ukraine should stay a priority and not fade into the background. As early as 1933, British journalist Lancelot Lawton told the British Parliament that there would be no peace in Europe without solving the problem of Ukraine first. Recently, a famous French diplomat tried to persuade Ukrainian MPs to enter into negotiations with the ‘Donbas side.’ We had to dot all the i’s in the most definite manner then. There is no ‘Donbas side,’ but only Vladimir Putin... Then the diplomat changed direction of the conversation saying he wanted to help us, that if he did not he could have spent his well-deserved retirement in the tranquil south of France. Our answer was that without solving the situation in Ukraine, there would be no peace in France.”
“An effective fight against terrorism requires striking a bargain between interests and values. The attacks in Paris ought to strengthen the push for the implementation of the Minsk Agreements, and support for Ukraine ought to only grow... This is because Putin is the sponsor of terrorism in the world. Despite illusions or economic benefits of trading with Russia, despite its nuclear weapons, this fact must be recognized by those still divided between values and interests… Putin’s friend Nicolas Sarkozy called for friendship with Russia for the sake of the joint fight against the Islamic State. Putin finds it advantageous now to gain support from pro-Russian forces in the EU which are active enough, and not only in France.
“Putin-funded terrorists of the Donetsk and Luhansk ‘people’s republics’ have not been punished for killing innocent victims of the MH17 crash. It is Russia that is blocking the tribunal’s creation through its veto in the UN Security Council. Only a consolidated position of the EU and US regarding pressure on Russia and aiming to get Putin and his armed forces the hell out of Ukraine (as the Prime Minister of Canada once said at the G20 meeting in Australia) and get Russia to return Crimea, only such a policy will help to prevent new attacks. After all, it is appeasement of the aggressor that has negative consequences. The Schengen Agreement will stay in force if there is unification of the EU’s internal legislation on migrants and border guard and intelligence efforts. The EU politicians must act in the interests of the EU and not individual countries or constituencies. It is actually very similar to the situation in Ukraine, where party interests often trump those of the nation.”
