France is in the midst of a scandal which calls into question the country's most cherished notions of "equality" and "fraternity".
Even the arrest on sexual assault charges in Manhattan of World Bank chief Dominque Strauss-Kahn, a leading French socialist politician, cannot fully drown out the more profound racism scandal that has enveloped France's national soccer team.
Several months ago, a transcript surfaced of a meeting among top French soccer officials, which openly discussed imposing quotas at leading national sports academies for young players with dual nationalities. Although a number of French citizens have dual nationality with countries such as Spain, Hungary, Germany and Italy, the officials centered very specifically on young boys whose parents or grandparents came from North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa. France has a rich colonial history in these regions, and recent years have brought to France a steady stream of immigrants from these countries.
Last week, the French Sports Minister, Chantal Juoanno, controversially cleared the national team coach, Laurent Blanc, of any legal charges under anti-discrimination laws. Even thought racial quotas were clearly and unambiguously discussed, they were not actually implemented. Regardless, Juoanno called the remarks made during the meeting racist.
France famously won the 1998 World Cup with a multiracial team, which included Blanc. Apparently, such personal experiences were not sufficient for him, in his current role of football supremo, to dismiss out of hand suggestions of racial quotas.
Under the rules of the international soccer body, FIFA, once a player has represented his country at the highest level, he is prohibited from playing for any other country. By contrast, a player who represents a country (e.g. France) at "age group" levels (eg, under 18), could go one to represent another country (e.g. Senegal) at the World Cup.
Perhaps Blanc was simply naive, and not actually racist. His focus could have been that French money should only used to benefit players who would eventually play for the French national team. Unfortunately, for a country such as France, which still seethes with violence in many ghettos where generations of immigrants remain isolated and unassimilated, such allegations can prove incendiary.
Race is still a very visible and volatile element of French political debate. Last month, the country gained global notoriety for adopting a ban on Muslim veils. The anti-immigrant National Front party is again benefiting from a surge in the polls. France remains a country with an unresolved heritage of racism, and without a clear path toward integration and ethnic stability.
In an attempt to address these issues, the French Sports Minister this week announced that a committee is being established to fight discrimination in French sport. This committee follows on from a similar panel established last year that targeted homophobia. However, wider criticisms are still being made in the French press that their national team and its management are adrift and out of touch with the realities of the 21st Century, especially after the high-profile embarrassment of a first-round elimination at the most-recent World Cup.
Soccer is the world's game. As a result, it can be a useful prism for breaking down the issues and challenges a country faces and making them comparable between countries. In France, the current controversy focused on race, but British football this month witnessed a reprise of religious-based violence in Glasgow.
Scottish football historically has sat tenuously atop longstanding Catholic-Protestant aggression. Recently, this has been expressed only in terms of songs and chants. A longer tradition of actual violence had been fading from public view. However, the line was again crossed when parcel bombs were sent to the manager of the Celtic Football club, the historically Catholic team in Glasgow, and other high-profile fans. Two men, Trevor Muirhead and Neil McKenzie, were arrested.
Clearly, the stereotypical Islamist extremist bomber has no monopoly on violence.
Race and religions remain potentially divisive issues, not only where the conflict is open and unambiguous, such as Christians against Muslims in Egypt, and Sunnis against Shia across the Islamic world, but even in Western countries. We have only relatively recently, in historical terms, been able to come to grips with the prejudices that lead to much spilled blood on either side of the Atlantic. Clearly, we continue to wrestle with these issues to this day.
So as we witness the ongoing violence across North Africa and the Middle East, and the campaigns of retribution being waged in Pakistan and Afghanistan, we need to remember that there are no easy answers to sectarian and ethic disputes. They cannot be wished away.
At most, real progress can only be made incrementally. With effort and diligence, today's violence can be replaced with more stability tomorrow, although subtle frictions and conflicts will inevitably still remain.
This process takes time and vigilance. We must have the endurance, both in our own countries and when working with citizens of other nations, to continue until the job is done.