The two-day G-20 Summit held in Antalya, the picturesque resort town in Turkey on the Mediterranean, was overshadowed by the Paris attack. It was natural, therefore, for terror and its nearest proximate cause — the on-going war in Syria — to dominate the proceedings. In this becalming background, heads of State and government representing the most powerful nations did try to put aside their differences to try and devise a common strategy to fight the common enemy. As French President Francois Hollande told a grieving nation in a rare joint session of that nation’s Parliament, Syria was now “the greatest factory of terrorism the world has ever seen.” It was just as well that Russian President Vladimir Putin and the US President Barack Obama had the requisite wisdom and statesmanship to rise over their sharp differences over Syria and Ukraine to meet on the sidelines of the summit to discuss terror.
Russia has been controversially attacking targets in Syria from air ostensibly to neutralise the Islamic State but in effect its focus has been the West-backed Opposition which has been waging a war against President Bashir Assad for over four years. At the Antalya summit, Putin agreed not to target the Opposition forces and instead concentrate on the IS thugs. The Russian strongman too seemed to be convinced that the Russian plane with nearly 300 people on board was shot down by the IS after it had taken off from the Egyptian resort town of Sharm-el Sheikh. This was only a few days before the Paris attacks last Friday. Finding the common enemy in the IS made the task of the G-20 powers to close ranks and to go after the barbaric terrorist group easier. The IS had also been behind deadly terror attacks in Beirut, Egypt, Iraq. Indeed, on Monday, it threatened to inflict its savagery in Washington. British Prime Minister David Cameron who too met Putin on the sidelines of the summit told the media that though not all differences with the Russian leaders had been resolved, there was a broad agreement to jointly go after the IS. In fact, a compromise on Assad could not be ruled out.
A proposal for the UN to oversee a period of transition before a free and fair poll can be held to ascertain the opinion of Syrians on Assad made by some at the Summit. Indeed, Prime Minister Modi emphasised the need for the world to define terrorism and to devise a common strategy under the aegis of the UN to eliminate it. After each such Paris-like atrocity the world leaders do sit up and debate terror but they soon get preoccupied in other things. However, after Paris, and especially after the threat from IS of more such attacks not only in western Europe but in Washington as well, nobody was taking the Islamist extremists lightly. In fact, following up on his initial promise to wage a war against the terrorists, President Hollande on Monday told a specially convened joint session of Parliament, the third such in more than a hundred years, that the internal emergency would be extended by three months and special powers sought to disenfranchise those French citizens who are found to be involved in terrorist activities. It was unacceptable that after enjoying the privilege of being a French citizen you should be part of a plot to kill fellow citizens.
Meanwhile, though thus far the ordinary French people have borne the shock and grief with becoming dignity and restraint, a strong Europe-wide backlash against the tens of thousands of refugees now pouring in from Syria and other parts of West Asia cannot be ruled out. The extreme right groups would become more aggressive in opposing the intake of these refugees. In fact, West German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had courageously committed to absorb over half a million refugees, would now find it hard to fulfill that commitment. Notably, one of the Paris attackers was a Syrian refugee who had found shelter in France only two months ago. Though the precise identity of the other attackers was yet to be fully established, this much was clear that they too had entered France through the Schengen borders. However hard the authorities might want to retain their open-door system, the second barbaric attack on Paris is bound to feed a climate of suspicion and mistrust throughout Europe. Even against their will, the French and other Europeans might have to change their way of life. The safety-first rule would impair some personal freedoms and impose costs on national governments. Post-Paris, France already proposes to hire five thousand more policemen, especially for the intelligence wing.
