Charlie Hebdo in a context.

Charlie hebdos attacks are considered one of the most tragic events in the history of
France. The attacks have highlighted a serious and dangerous gap in the French security
agencies in the counter-terrorism strategies. Two masked men carrying automatic weapons
and an assumingly rocket launcher, started an attack on the Charlie Hebdo weekly magazine
killing over 12 people, including two police officers and four cartooners working in the
magazine along with the director of the magazine himself.
The attacks caused a wave of protests around the globe and were widely condemned by
leaders across Europe and the world. The attackers are believed to be members of Al-Qaida
group operating in Syria.
The scenario of the attack is still vague and shadowy, except for some broadcasted
interpretations which associated the attacks to Islam, considering that the magazine was
criticizing that religion and generally all political and religious ideologies. These
interpretations resulted in heightening Islamophobia across Europe and made the life of
Muslims in western countries much more difficult.
Throughout history, almost all terroristic attacks have been directly associated with Islam
and Muslims even though no evidences were put forward, aiming to banish the existence of
such a religion. However, it is generally accepted that all religions do have a radical side, a
violent version of their true nature, not just Islam, but all religions and beliefs. However, the
attacks on Charlie Hebdo can be understood quite differently when considering the political
context; that is, the position of France in the global policy.
The lower house of the French parliament passed a resolution, few days before the attack,
which symbolically recognized a Palestinian state. In the 2ed of December 2014, the French
parliament added an extra weight to push for recognition of a Palestinian state. This
symbolic move marked the refusal of a French majority to the Israeli policy in Palestine and
across Europe. Although it is unlikely for such moves to affect the foreign policy of the
country, it nevertheless carries a particular resonance coming from a country with the
largest Muslim and Jewish populations in Europe.
Israel did not accept such a move wholeheartedly for they know that passing similar
resolutions often push and lead the government of a certain country to give its final
recognition to Palestine, and thus, weakening the position of Israel in the global arena; the
thing which would, partly, put an end to the Israeli presence in the Palestinian territory.
Back to the attack on Charlie Hebdo, the attack was carried out in quite a well-planned
strategy; the thing which enabled the attackers to break into the French capital without even

being noticed. The weapons used in the plot are also a source of anxiety and the question in
view here is about how such weapons were enabled access to the country with all the
French security agencies watching?
The victims of the attack were assassinated in cold blood which makes it likely that the
attackers were militants who were well-prepared and had support from inside the country.
The attacker was a matter of revenge; the way whereby it was carried out symbolized an
obvious hater to Muslims, not love for religion; it aimed to make the world condemn Islam,
not just the attack; it aimed to passing the message that Palestinians and all Muslims around
the globe are terrorists. The attack was more like a flash to the French lawmakers to
reconsider their position in recognizing a Palestinian state. And it, as yet, worked quite well.
Those who are blindly following the Israeli-controlled channels broadcasted and how they
represent Islam and Muslims are more likely to fall victims to Islamophobia, though the
latter word should never have existed in the first place. The event should be taken and read
within a current context and not according to a certain global ideology which has always sat
Islam as a religion of violence and terrorism.