查理周刊袭击案

　　Terror in Paris

　　恐怖下的巴黎

　　Islamists are assailing freedom of speech; but vilifying all Islam is the wrong way to counter bloody medievalism

　　伊斯兰教极端者正在攻击言论自由；但是丑化全体伊斯兰教不是一个反抗血腥中世纪主义的好办法

　　经济学人 恐怖下的巴黎 可可英语.jpg

　　THE latest issue of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical French magazine, spotlights Michel Houellebecq, author of a new novel that imagines the Islamisation of France and then the European Union. Critics had denounced Mr Houellebecq's book, which depicts a near future in which Islamists win France's presidency and compromise its freedoms, as Islamophobic scaremongering. Then, on the day of its publication, masked gunmen attacked Charlie Hebdo's offices in Paris. They yelled “Allahu Akbar” as they murdered 12 people and wounded others, in France's worst terrorist attack for half a century. The gunmen fled; police have named two brothers as suspects. As anti-immigrant sentiment—especially the anti-Muslim kind—seeps across Europe, from street protests in Dresden to English ballot boxes, the atrocity in Paris seemed ghoulishly to realise the continent's darkest nightmare; almost, in fact, to caricature it.

　　最新一期的法国讽刺杂志查理周刊聚焦在了Michel Houellebecq身上—一位创作了一本关于法国乃至整个欧盟都被伊斯兰化的新小说的作者。书中伊斯兰教徒赢得了法国总统选举并削弱了国家自由，批评者们谴责他的书是在危言耸听、散布伊斯兰恐慌。 然后，就在这本书出版的那天，蒙面的持枪者袭击了查理周刊的巴黎总部。他们一边叫喊着“真主至上”一边杀害了12人，打伤多人，这是法国半个世纪以来最为严重的恐怖主义袭击。持枪者逃走了，警察将两兄弟列为嫌犯。随着反对移民—尤其是反对穆斯林族群的浪潮横扫欧洲大陆，从德累斯顿的街头抗议到英国的投票结果，再到如今的巴黎暴行，都似乎残忍地证实了这片土地最为黑暗的噩梦；事实上，这几乎是讽刺漫画的现实翻版。

　　For all the grim, incessant warnings of terrorist threats, naturally the first reaction to this massacre, in France and elsewhere, was outrage. Yet the murders also demand a fuller response. The magazine was targeted because it cherished and promoted its right to offend: specifically to offend Muslims. That motive invokes two big themes. One is free speech, and whether it should have limits, self-imposed or otherwise. The answer to that is an emphatic no. The second is Muslim Europe—and whether episodes such as this are part of a civilisational struggle between Western democracies and extreme Islam, on a battlefield stretching continuously from Peshawar to Raqqa to the centre of Paris. Again, the answer is no.

　　对于所有冷酷的、接连不断的关于恐怖主义威胁的警告，不管是法国还是世界其他地方，面对这场屠杀的第一反应都会是自然而然地怒火中烧。凶手也期待能产生更大的反响。这本杂志之所以被列为攻击目标是因为它珍视并提倡“冒犯别人”的权利：尤其是冒犯穆斯林。这样的动机让人想起两个话题。其一是言论自由是否应该有边界限制，不管这是自我约束还是来自外部的要求。答案是毋庸置疑的“不”。其二是欧洲的穆斯林—不管像本次事件这样的插曲是否是西方民主与伊斯兰极端主义两大文明之间的挣扎，其战场都绵延不断地从巴基斯坦的白沙瓦延伸到了叙利亚的拉卡再到巴黎市区。而这个答案，也同样是“不”。

　　Cartoons versus Kalashnikovs

　　卡通漫画对战卡拉什尼科夫冲锋枪

　　Charlie Hebdo has been hit before. In 2006 its decision to reprint inflammatory cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, first published in Denmark, was described by Jacques Chirac, then France's president, as a “manifest provocation”. In 2011 the magazine's offices were firebombed after it published an issue purporting to be guest-edited by the Prophet. That did not deter it: despite pleas from some French politicians, it insisted on its right to free speech. This week, when the gunmen came, they reportedly called for the offending cartoonists by name.

　　查理周刊以前就曾遭到袭击。2006年，杂志决定重印曾在丹麦发表过的一篇关于先知穆罕穆德的煽动性漫画，这个决定被法国前总统希拉克描述为“明目张胆的挑衅”。2011年，该杂志发表了一期自称由先知作为客座编辑的刊物，其后就遭到火焰弹的攻击。这些都没能吓倒查理周刊：尽管一些法国政客多次请求，它仍坚持其言论自由的权利。本周，持枪者在闯入时点名要找那些漫画家。

　　The magazine had the right to publish everything it did, and French law is right to allow it to. There can be no “but” in that sentence. Even when a picture or opinion is imprudent or tasteless, unless it directly incites violence it should not be banned. Charlie Hebdo lampoons all religions, not just Islam—but it would have the right to single out that faith if it wanted to, just as Islamists in Europe are entitled to denounce Western decadence if they so choose. In any case, there is a world of difference, and several centuries of liberal political thought, between giving and taking offence and killing people over it. Nothing can be done with a pencil or a keyboard that warrants a reprisal with a Kalashnikov.

　　杂志有权发表任何东西，法国法律也理所当然地允许这样做，没有例外。即使所发表的图片或者观点是轻率的、没有品位的，只要它没有直接煽动暴力就不应该被禁止。查理周刊讥讽所有的宗教，不只是伊斯兰——如果它想的话，它也有权利只针对某一个宗教，同样的，欧洲的伊斯兰教徒也可以谴责西方的堕落。无论如何，这是一个存异的世界，有着几个世纪的政治自由思想，在激怒与被激怒之间无数人失去了生命。一支笔或者一个键盘无论写了什么都不能成为让伊斯兰极端主义者持枪袭击的合理借口。

　　This attack was more insidious than a random fusillade on a street or train. Part of the aim, probably, was to cow the Western media in their treatment of Islam. It must not. If the proper first response to the slaughter was outrage, after considering the argument that Charlie Hebdo made about free speech, the second response should be outrage, too.

　　这次袭击比在大街上或者火车里随意开枪扫射更加阴险。他们的目的之一大概就是恐吓并抗议西方媒体对待伊斯兰的方式。这绝对行不通。如果对于这场屠杀的第一个合理的反应是愤慨，那么在考虑到查理周刊所做的关于言论自由的表述之后，第二反应应该还是愤慨。

　　Many observers will connect this fresh footage of gun-wielding men not to cartoons but to another kind of image: chaos in northern Nigeria, the snuff videos of Islamic State (IS) and Taliban-inflicted carnage in Afghanistan and Pakistan. All can seem part of a long, ongoing conflict between the values of the Enlightenment and obscurantist barbarism. For those who see things that way, the only solution is to fight back, by cracking down at home and engaging the enemy abroad.

　　很多局外人看到这种持枪攻击的场面，会想起北尼日利亚的动乱、以及伊斯兰国（IS）和塔利班在阿富汗和巴基斯坦肆意屠杀的炮火连天的影像，而不仅仅是单纯的讽刺漫画。所有的这一切，都可以被看作是一场长期持续的、启蒙价值观与反启蒙野蛮行径之间的矛盾。如果这样来看这个问题，那么唯一的解决办法就是通过国内镇压和海外干预的方式对敌人进行反击。

　　Criminals, not clashing civilisations

　　犯罪不会冲击文明

　　They have a point: there may well be a connection between Paris and foreign jihad. Part of it is ideological: in their minds, at least, terrorists in the West are often waging a worldwide battle for their faith, powered by ideas they pick up on the internet. There is a practical link, too. Some of those involved in recent European plots—and one of the suspects in the Charlie Hebdo attack—have been radicalised and trained in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Nearby and accessible, Syria is the main destination. This reflux is a worry for security services in France (home of the European Union's largest Muslim population) and across the continent, precisely because, newly expert and inflamed, the returnees can perpetrate commando-style attacks like that on Charlie Hebdo. Involving small numbers of assailants and “soft” targets, these are much harder to detect and prevent than elaborate plans to blow up airliners.

　　他们有个观点：巴黎可能与伊斯兰圣战有联系，其中一部分是意识形态的原因。至少西方的恐怖主义者经常为了他们在网络上接受的信仰而在世界各地开辟恐怖活动战场，这相互之间也是有联系的。这些人中有一部分近期就在欧洲策划活动—查理周刊袭击案的嫌犯之一在中东、阿富汗和巴基斯坦接受训练并被极端思想影响。叙利亚由于地理位置临近、出入便捷，也是主要的目的地。恐怖组织者回国已经成为法国（欧盟中穆斯林人口最多的国家）和欧洲大陆其他国家的安全部门最为担心的问题， 因为这些人受过最新的专业训练，他们可能会带着满腔怒火发动像这次查理周刊袭击一样的突袭。由于只涉及少数行动者，且目标容易得手，这种突袭比计划周密的炸飞机更难以发现和预防。

　　But preventing them is not impossible—indeed European security services frequently do. Slow though some were to spot the danger, the French and other governments have introduced measures to stop their citizens travelling abroad to fight, and to intercept them if they come back. Still, more pressure could be applied to Turkey, notionally an ally, to help stop the flow into Syria. “Deradicalisation” programmes for returnees, which might turn some of them into reverse missionaries for the awful truth about IS, are still in their infancy.

　　但是预防也不是没有可能的——这也正是欧洲安全机构一直在做的。尽管进展缓慢，也发现了一些潜在危险。法国和其他政府已经采取措施阻止国民出国加入战斗，如果出去的人想回来也会被阻拦。我们会对土耳其这个理论上的盟友施压，让其协助阻止人们进入叙利亚。对于那些从中东回来的人要实施“去极端化”计划，尽管此项计划仍在酝酿中，仍然有可能令回国者成为宣传IS恐怖行径的亲历见证人。

　　For all that, thinking of Islamist terrorism as a single, coherent adversary is misleading and dangerous. The various groups have different backgrounds and goals, just as Muslim diasporas in the West originate in different countries and cultures. Many French Muslims, for example, have roots in north Africa; some are angered by the ban on wearing burqas in public places. Neither factor applies in, say, Britain. Thinking of Muslims overall as a homogenous group is still more foolhardy—however much some of the West's demagogues encourage voters to. Most are not extremists; fewer still support violence, as mainstream French imams swiftly pointed out.

　　尽管如此，把伊斯兰恐怖主义当作一个单一的、一目了然的对手是危险的误解。就如同西方散居的穆斯林源自不同的国家和文化，不同的恐怖组织也有着各自的背景和目的。比如，很多法国穆斯林来自北非；很多人都因为在公共场所被禁止戴面纱而感到愤怒。英国受到同样的影响。把全体穆斯林看作一个毫无差别的同质群体是莽撞的——然而很多西方的政治家正煽动选民们这么做。正如法国的主流派穆斯林阿訇很快指出的那样，大部分人都不是极端主义者，只有少数人支持暴力。

　　The terrorists themselves, of course, are often keen to prove that the West does indeed anathematise all Muslims. To see such killers as representatives of a religion, and to reduce a complex picture to their preferred caricature, would be to reward their crimes—just as circumscribing the principle of free speech would be to bow to their medieval fantasies.

　　当然，恐怖主义者通常都会急切地证明西方社会确实打算排挤所有穆斯林。将这种凶手视为宗教的代表，将如此复杂的形势简化为符合其要求的讽刺漫画，将会是对他们所做暴行的奖励—正如同为言论自由划出界限是对他们幻想将世界带回到黑暗的中世纪所做出的妥协一样。