Politique Internationale — Over the course of your career, you have observed the major geopolitical upheavals at close quarters: the Cold War, the end of History – as it was called – the end of the end of History... And now the return of high-intensity warfare. Of all these episodes, what was predictable and what was not?
François Lecointre — Nobody can predict everything. Human creativity is too powerful and historical events too frequent to be able to make precise predictions about the consequences of certain factors. It would be stupid to try and play Nostradamus. As it happens, on 11 September 2011, I was at a meeting at the army headquarters. I still remember the absolute astonishment that reigned in that room. If someone, a few days, weeks or months earlier, had told his fellow officers that two planes were going to crash into two towers in New York as part of a terrorist attack, everyone would have taken him for a joker...
What was predictable, however, was that the war would never end. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the gradual disintegration of the Soviet ramparts, it was almost accepted that conflicts, at least in their traditional form, would become archaic and hark back to a bygone era. According to some, the world would be able to move on, people would give up war and humanity would embark on a process of general reconciliation. I never believed for a moment in this unilateral end to hostilities.
P. I. — What gave you the feeling that, contrary to the assertions of many ‘experts’, war still had a bright future ahead of it?
F. L. — We saw this on the ground. Our troops were still engaged in a large number of conflicts around the world. Admittedly, the areas were more circumscribed than in the recent past and we had to deal with groups of fighters rather than regular armies. But this context of failed states, with major disorders at the end of the day, showed that we were at the antipodes of a pacified humanity. Moreover, we must never forget the source of the feeling of security that can be experienced in most developed countries. This stability, which often coincides with economic, technological and military domination, has been hard-won and has given rise to both resentment and envy, so that other countries want to regain control. So the seeds of confrontation are not buried very deep.
P. I. — Alongside the war that is coming to an end, another idea has gained ground: that of a clean war. We are reminded of the Gulf War, with images that seem to come straight out of video games. And talk of surgical strikes, as if collateral damage didn’t exist. And as if there weren’t much risk involved in waging war. Where do we stand today with this concept of clean war?
F. L. — Barbarity is still with us. Let’s go back to Belle du Seigneur: Albert Cohen …