In Iraq, the Islamic State/ ISIS was busy wiping out entire cities, killing thousands of Christians, Yazidis and fellow Muslims. However, it took a video of the beheading of American journalists to get America to take action against the Jihadist group. Stated differently, while Americans may have been appalled at knowing that thousands of innocents were being slaughtered in Iraq, the atrocities were viewed as distant. It took the attack on a single man to bring the conflict close-to-home, and therefore worthy of a response.
And so it was with the various attacks in Europe. While the French were likely sad about the killing of Jews over the past decade, they viewed it as a Jewish problem. The majority of French could consider those attacks as targeted against a small community that was not their problem or a personal threat. Jews make up 0.5% of the world’s population and 0.8% of France’s population. The French may have felt pity for 8-year old Jewish girl Miriam, but they are not Miriam; therefore no “JeSuisMiriam”.
Similarly, the Europeans were likely incensed over the decade-long attacks on policemen and servicemen too. But most Europeans were not in the military. They were angry, but they were not the military. Their military was fighting wars far away.
The large scale attacks in London and Madrid were similar to the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. Such attacks were enormous and random in terms of targets. Each nation was harmed as an entity. But the French did not march in Spain; the Germans did not march in England; and the Netherlands did not march in the USA.
Lastly, free speech had been attacked before. The murder of Theo van Gogh, bombings in Stockholm (which didn’t murder anyone) and protests against the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, in 2005 all stemmed from Muslims protesting the press’s postings of images of their prophet Mohammed. But the limited scale of those attacks compared to the Charlie Hebdo strike awakened a different sensibility in millions of Parisians and leaders of the western world that prize freedom of the press and speech. (Other countries that do not have freedom of speech and press attended the march as well, including Turkey and Saudi Arabia, to place a fig leaf over their extremist Muslim ideology, lack of freedoms and desire to ingratiate themselves with the western world ). The attack on free speech spoke to the people and leaders, as a personal attack on their way of life.
When terrorism became personal, people and countries responded with actions. When terrorism seemed remote and someone else’s problem, there was inaction.
Thanks for the Inclusion
So nations, people, papers and celebrities wore the “JeSuisCharlie” to stand by the victims, and principally to protest the assault on their own basic freedoms. Some people extended a courtesy to the other victims of the attacks, even though they did not represent a personal attack, wearing “JeSuisPolice” and “JeSuisJuif” alongside their primary banner.
The Jews of France were happy to be included in the memorial of the anti-Semitic attack and appreciated the condemnation of the French government against the attack on their community. But the Jews of France recall the lack of outrage at the various murders in the recent past of Jews being killed for being Jews.
In France and most of the world, Jews do not get starring roles in the rage on behalf of victims. However, the world will consider Jewish loss once they have expressed outrage for an attack on themselves. Like the five people who stand in the background upon receiving a trophy at an awards show, Jews were happy to be recognized, even if no one really saw them.