Voltaire once wrote a play entitled Fanaticism, or Mahomet the Prophet, a satire in which religion is used as a political tool by a cynical leader. The Catholic church was the real target, and Voltaire despised all religious fanatics. But his most important contribution to French political culture was his reverence for freedom of speech.

On Friday one of the targets was the Comptoir Voltaire, a cafe in the 11th arrondissement. Most attacks happened in this bourgeois-bohemian neighbourhood, which on a Friday night is the embodiment of French insouciance and joie de vivre. But it is also the district of Charlie Hebdo and the marches that followed the attacks of last January. In fact, Friday night’s attackers followed closely the traditional itinerary of most French political demonstrations, from Place de la République to Place de la Nation, all along Boulevard Voltaire. Also targeted were the Stade de France, hosting a friendly football game between France and Germany: the very symbol and incarnation of European reconciliation and rejection of war. And a rock concert at the Bataclan, an all-purpose venue where French Jewish community meetings and rallies are often held.

This should be enough to make it clear that what was targeted on Friday night was, once again, about the very identity and soul of Paris, the “capital of abominations and perversions”, according to Islamic State. Most French people were surprised to see their uber-secular country described as the one that “carries the banner of the Cross” by Isis’s vengeful communique.

The point here is that French policies in the Middle East are a secondary rationale for armed jihadists. President Hollande said as much in his short Saturday morning address: we are targeted for what we are.

Hollande also said that France was “at war” – as he has been saying for more than a year now – against a terrorist “army”, an expression hitherto used only a couple of times by the defence minister. This is a far cry from French criticism of post-9/11 US rhetoric. Then again, when it’s getting personal, the perspective changes. For instance, most French people don’t know or don’t remember that Jacques Chirac, a major critic of the US “war on terror” and a leading opponent of the Iraq invasion, had no problem in saying “Naturally, we are at war” in 1986 – when, as prime minister, he had to face a major terrorism campaign in Paris.

Expect, therefore, that France will double its efforts to fight armed jihadism in general, and Isis in particular. There are few additional military means that Paris will be able to devote to that fight, however: most of them are already committed to counter-terrorism, from Africa’s Atlantic coast to the Euphrates. It is likely that France will ask for the solidarity of its EU and Nato allies, calling for the implementation of treaty clauses that bind the allies together if one of them is attacked. In particular, we will need more intelligence-sharing from our American friends on Syria and Iraq.

Some will also call for a combined operation in the Middle East – a debatable option in itself, but a fantasy in any case today, since none of our allies and friends in the region would be ready to follow at this point.

Others, on the contrary, will call for soul-searching and revisiting our policies in the Middle East. The choices made by France in the past decade were clear: build on traditional ties with Saudi Arabia, support state-building in Lebanon, break with the Assad regime, continue to beware of Iran.

It is a legitimate policy. It is not about choosing the Sunni versus the Shia world: the old secular country that Voltaire embodies does not care about such religion-based affinities. It’s about recognising that the old order in the Middle East is gone for good, that the Syrian and Iranian governments have been more trouble-makers than stability-builders, and that Damascus as well as Baghdad – and Tehran – had a role in the rise of Isis over the past two years.

What is the alternative? It is true that firefighters should not ally with arsonists. Yet if there had been no operation against Isis, the dark stain that illustrates its progression on maps would now cover a space from Damascus to Baghdad. And it will take years to reverse its progress.

But the military component of the fight is only part of the picture. The war will be won at home. It is a war of ideas, which will get uglier in the coming weeks and months: this time Marine Le Pen may be better placed to capitalise on the current events than she was after the January attacks. The French government cannot ask every foreigner, every member of a minority, to be a Voltaire. But there is still a chance to save our model of integration and to be faithful to his ideals of tolerance and freedom.