Glad to see your update/retraction in 2013, but I have a request...

Submitted by CMD (France), Jan 15, 2015 at 10:52

Dear Mr. Pipes,

I am an American and long term resident of France, having spent the past 20 years here. Moreover, I have had extensive first hand experience with what are known as ZUS's and ZSP's in France. My mother-in-law lived near Sarcelles, for example, and I went there often over a 10 year period. I've had reason to visit, and even invest, in many others. What is more, I grew up in Detroit, so I know both the American and French versions of suburban reality.

I wanted to commend you for having the courage to go visit a few such places in person, and to express regret at your initial characterization. Very few people in your position have such courage, and depend instead exclusively on hearsay. However, I have a request, which I will come back to shortly.

It is entirely regrettable that any such areas have come to be characterized as "No-Go Zones" in the American media. It is a term invented by the American media, and is certainly not used here. Moreover, the equation of ZUS's and ZSP's with this term is also an American invention. This equation does not hold, and never did. I believe the term "No-Go Zone" found its genesis in media reports about 10 years ago about a few particularly troublesome suburbs of Paris. I would underline "a few", as in 2 or 3. There were reports of firemen having to go under police escort, and even police superiors admitting that they advised their officers to stay away unless required to go in order not to incite unnecessary exchanges. That policy was pure folly, of course, and was derided in the French press. Since then, the police explicitly refute any and all notions of zones where they do not go. They go, no matter how difficult the situation, and they make arrests. (Here is the journal of one such officer: http://bit.ly/1C9yyBd An enlightening read. It's in French, but you could eventually use Google Translate to get the gist.) To summarize, those few suburbs were no different than troubled American suburbs, and indeed are and always have been much tamer than the worst gang-ridden zones in the States.

It is very very important to understand that the vast majority of ZUS's and ZSP's are of an entirely different, and even tamer, nature. Most are, quite simply, neighborhoods where income is low and crime is relatively high -- relative, that is, for France. (I would note, in passing, that crime here is systematically lower in scale and degree when compared to the States. This is important, for most Americans imagine, as you did, that a "bad" neighborhood here must look like the Bronx. In reality, they are a horse of another color, and quite simply far less violent. In fact, the entire French society is far less violent.) As such, the police have made a list of them as places deserving more "beat cops" to counter the relatively higher crime rates. This, to be sure, is a completely banal police approach seen all over the world! In fact, it is very related to the program of increased police presence in NYC that succeeded in transforming the street scene there. Moreover, such programs in France have clearly born similar fruit. In fact, that success has led to the listing of additional ZSP's. How? The petty criminals become frustrated by the increased police presence, so they take their show to neighboring communities, often middle or upper class neighborhoods. As a result, the police take note of this shift and then list the newly targeted neighborhood as also deserving more police presence. Voila, how more get added and we find a list of hundreds today. Again, this is completely BANAL police work! It's just that they have created these acronyms -- a French national sport -- and made a list, and the American press got their hands on it and have let their imaginations run wild.

To give you just another everyday example, there is a ZUS in downtown Lyon, the city where I live now, in the Guillotiere neighborhood. Listen, I go there almost daily. It's a clean, lively part of the city -- No issues! No threats! Nothing but a neighborhood with a diverse population. If I were to blindfold you and take you to half a dozen similar neighborhoods, afterwards you would find it impossible to guess which was the ZUS among them! Based on your latest update above, I think you know the truth of what I am saying.

In short, your 751 No-Go Zones of France never existed. There are just 751 zones where police do policing.

That the American press and so-called think tanks latched onto the term "No-Go Zones" and have, in error, equated them to the list of ZUS/ZSP's is not accidental, in my opinion. The error has been deliberate, and the original authors of it intended to use it to further incite Islamophobia. Then others have gotten on board and parroted these baseless characterizations. I would ask you, yourself: How is it that, in 2006, you wrote what you did at the beginning of this page? There are grave accusations in your words. "The French no longer have full control over its territory." How did you know those things? Excuse me for pointing it out, but those assertions were absurd. If you had visited those neighborhoods back then, you would have found them to be as you did in 2013. I know, because I was there the whole time.

Which brings me to my request: Please take your expressed regret (Jan 16, 2013 update) and make of it a preface, and add it to the very beginning of this article. Do not make people dig to the bottom to find the truth, especially since we both know that most will not read past the first few paragraphs.

THIS IS IMPORTANT. This issue -- and text such as you authored in 2006 -- is being used to incite further Islamophobia on the Internet. The original authors have finally been rewarded with what they hoped for, namely mainstream media presentation of this disinformation as fact. (I am referring to recent reports on Fox News, and elsewhere.) The diatribe has brewed long enough that it has percolated into the minds and mouths of self-appointed "experts", such as Nolan Peterson and KT McFarland -- the sources that Fox used. Neither are experts, but they regurgitated the disinformation on cue. The result is that now pseudo-journalists, such as Jennifer Van Jaar of IJReview.com, and bloggers pick up the story, consider it gospel since promulgated by Fox, and add their own hysterics. Jennifer entitled her piece, "Islamists Conquer [French] Territory Without Firing a Single Shot". The characterization in her "article" is ludicrous in the extreme, but that didn't stop her from getting 37,000 FaceBook shares. This is how Islamophobia is manufactured, magnified, and made to sweep the land.

Your updates make me feel that you are someone of intellectual integrity. If so, please do the right thing and update the beginning of your piece to reflect what you now know to be the truth. I would ask you to update the title, even, since "The 751 No-Go Zones of France" never existed. Moreover, if I have given you further insights, use them to enlighten more reporters such as the one from the Huffington Post. Call him or her back and share my comments. It is important that this fallacious wave of disinformation be brought to a halt.

In the process, I would ask you to be ever vigilant in your characterizations. For example, your latest update states that "[these areas] seethe with antagonism toward majority society". Are you sure that is an accurate rendition? My experience is that it is over-drawn. If it is accurate, then it applies to all poor neighborhoods in the States, as well, where the problems are largely the same. A more accurate picture would be to paint them as frustrated by consistently high unemployment among the young, and institutional racism against anyone of North African descent. And yet, that frustration is tempered in France by generous social programs, free access to health care, world class mass transportation, and more. Furthermore, your depiction of the areas as still being "potentially explosive and dangerous" is also an overstatement, in my opinion. The truth is that eruption of unrest is relatively uncommon and wholly less violent when compared to US instances of unrest. I would challenge you to compare, side by side, an enumeration of "riots" in both France and the US over the last 20 years, noting for each the scale, the amount of property damage caused, and the amount of concomitant violent crimes, including homicide. Such comparisons would go a long way to help people put things in perspective, something they cannot do with the kind of reporting we are seeing today.

I hope you found these comments to be useful. I assure you, they are accurate.

Kind regards,

CMD

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".