Why is Sarkozy to blame?

Violence has spread to Belgium, albeit on a limited scale. The reason? Mayor Philippe Moureaux cited architecture and a lack of provocative politicians:

“Our situation cannot be compared with the French one. There are no huge, high-rise suburbs like in France… moreover, we do not have an interior minister like (Nicolas) Sarkozy, who starts provoking the troublemakers.”

Sarkozy, who is named as a possible candidate in the presidential election scheduled for 2007, has been getting a lot of heat. I find bizarre. First, he’s of immigrant stock, part Hungarian and part Jewish (and is often dubbed the “American” politician). As Interior Minister, he promised zero tolerance against underground crime, to promote law and order and social integration, and the participation of legal immigrants in local elections. He has had no kind words for the riots started two weeks ago, but you’re not going to win over riots with flowery words.

Why is this man the scapegoat? Yes, he’s a hardass and hasn’t been politically correct about the riots, but the comments of some would make him sound like Trotsky in Stalinist Russia—a schoolkid parent said, “Torching a school is unacceptable, but the one who put on the fire is Sarkozy.” In what way was this main weilding napalm?

Related note: the most amusingly stupid statement of the week comes from Turkish PM ErdoÄŸan, who said the French prohibition of headscarves in schools was one reason for the upsurge of violence. (Sorry Erdy—Turkey has the same laws!)