On Monday, French President Francois Hollande declared that “France is at war.” The concurrent attacks on Friday  killed 129 people and wounded 352 more. They were conducted by eight gunmen and suicide bombers, with the Islamic State claiming responsibility. On Sunday, the French defense ministry targeted an Islamic State munitions camp in Raqqa with 20 bombs destroying all targets. Hollande also called on Parliament to extend the state of emergency by three months and rally for laws that would strip the rights of those suspected of terrorism.  Since the attacks, 115,000 security personnel have been deployed to hunt down suspected militants. What do you think of France’s response to the attacks, and how do you think countries should respond to attacks of this nature?

Prof. Jytte Klausen (POL)

The European Union has failed to create an internal security structure matching the region’s open borders. The attacks on November 13 are a shocking indictment of the region’s security cooperation problems. It is a crisis that has been years in the making. Bombing Raqqa and the Islamic State will take down their homeland and release them from duty as low-level enforces for the Islamic State. It has to be expected that they will seek to go home and perpetrate terrorist attacks. Thousands of European men and several hundred women have gone  back and forth between the insurgency in Europe and their homes in Western Europe since early 2012, long before the Syrian refugee crisis. They have the capability to unleash a wave of terrorism on a scale we have not seen previously.
Prof. Jytte Klausen (POL) is the Lawrence A. Wien Professor of International Cooperation. 

Harith Hasan Al-Qarawee
France’s response is now understandably focusing on the security aspects, but in the long-term, there is need for a sustainable approach that tackles the causes that motivate radicalization, and those are usually social and economic. It is important also to dismantle the ideological networks of indoctrination used by Islamist fundamentalists, not only by focusing on sites and institutions that exist physically, but also on the internet-based outlets that are playing an increasing role in the indoctrination and recruitment of radical organizations.There is need for a coordinated global strategy in order to face the transnational nature of groups such as ISIS. So far, a group like ISIS managed to survive and expand its global network because of the failure of the international community to deal with the threat it imposes as a priority. A strategy must bring together international powers such as the USA, EU and Russia, and regional powers in the Middle East, behind the goal of defeating ISIS. The defeat of ISIS by itself might generate the needed dynamics to deal with those problems afterwards.  
Harith Hasan Al-Qarawee is a junior research fellow at the Crown Center. He is a political scientist with research that focuses on state-society relations, political transitions and identity politics in Iraq and the Middle East.

Brandon Sousa ’16
It appears “Monsieur Normal” has transform into a Gaullesque commander-in-chief with his bellicose speech at Versailles. France undoubtedly needs this in the short term. Terrorists have attacked Paris twice in the past year, so President François Hollande’s response is entirely justified. His speech and the nation’s actions in the past week have made it clear that France is determined to defend its citizens and to fight terrorism both domestically and abroad. This approach, as the United States has discovered in its own War on Terrorism, is fraught with long term risks, however. Domestically, expanding emergency powers and introducing new laws could violate civil liberties in what President Hollande rightly called the Nation of the Rights of Man. Militarily, France risks getting embroiled in a conflict without end in the Middle East. Ultimately it is up to the French to weigh both the benefits and risks of their new war.
Brandon Sousa ’16 is the president the of French and Francophone Club.

David Siddhartha Patel
The response to the attacks has two parts: 1) defeating ISIS, and 2) preventing further attacks. France already was part of the U.S.-led coalition that has been bombing ISIS and supporting local partners since August 2014. A debate is now underway about the feasibility and wisdom of an expanded war and cooperation with Russia, Iran and the Syrian government. That strategy will develop slowly and hopefully consider not just what to do, but how an expanded war might end. France is responding more quickly on the second part. Fearful French citizens, as Americans did after 9/11, acquiesced to their government taking “tougher measures.” But greater police powers, such as wiretapping and warrantless searches, are difficult to roll back. The French should be wary of surrendering theirs’ and others’ civil liberties in pursuit of security. Attacks by ISIS or al-Qaeda will not and cannot destroy France or the U.S. What can destroy France and the U.S., however, is how citizens respond — and allow their governments to respond — to such attacks. Security can be improved without surrendering freedom and tolerance, which must remain core values in dangerous times.
David Siddhartha Patel is a junior research fellow at the Crown Center.