The modern geopolictics is a multidisciplinary approach, which takes into consideration the authorities rivalry as they concern to territories. As the controlling (or the possession) territory is a mean to exercise an authority or an influence on the people and resources, which are there. In France, two great geopolitics analysts contributed to rehabilitate this discipline, before mainly studied in Germany, in Russia and in the Anglo-Saxon countries: the general Peter Marie Gallois, for whom the geopolitics studies "the influence of the medium on the human", and the geographer Yves Lacoste, according to whom the geopolitics is "an intellectual process" have as a subject "the study of territorial rivalry of authorities and their repercussions in the opinion"1.
Samedi, 3 mars 2001
The relations of the European Union- Russia, from the Cold War until the war in Kosovo : the geopolitical and strategic approach
Therefore does the modern geopolitics analyze particularly, with a view of clarification, the "representations", "history driving forces", which from on a hand and from the other, preside to the elaboration of mobilization processes of antagonist camps, that the stumbling block is in general a rivalry of powers as to territories and resources. For Lacoste, the representations signifies "an ensemble of ideas and collective perceptions of political, religious or other order which animates social groups and which forms their vision of the world"2. Therefore the "representations" are they intended in legitimate the "desire of territory", "desire of power " of the "Friend camp", and thus to disqualify the motivations and requests of the " Enemy camp ".
If we study the war in Kosovo at the geopolitics of representations light, it means that the Yugoslavian strategists, as well as their the same as their NATO colleagues, in order to justify the air raids against Serbia or to disqualify them, led first of all to a war of representations, for which the process of mobilization that are the religion, the culture, the political-ideology, the human rights, the nationalist interpretation of the history, the patriotism, etc., were " requisitioned" maximally in order to legitimate the attack for ones, the defense for the other, as the geopolitics and " the geography, explains Yves Lacoste, " it serves firstly to wage war" (1967). As the war in Kosovo was more than a war against the authoritarian regime of Slobodan Milosevic. Under the diabolization and the media war of representations, the operation Joint Forces was at first a "western" war of the USA and NATO against the orthodox and former communist world which the basis State remains Russia. Indirectly, it carried even a war against Russia. A war planned at the beginning to lift a new Iron and Blood Curtain between the space post -Byzantine former communist and the West, which the Anglo-Saxons translate by the significant term of West (The West). We shall show how, during lines, which follow, the war in Kosovo was turned in a slight indirect manner against Moscow and in what the Anglo - American and NATO strategies did not receive the geostrategic effect hoped, namely the apparition of political anti-western reactions in Moscow, Vladimir Poutine refusing to fall into the shock trap of the East-West civilizations and opposing on the contrary the American strategy proposing to the Europeans and NATO responsible faces to cooperate with the new Russia.
More forceful than ever after the Wall of Berlin Falling, post-Eltsin Russia renews with the growth and the stability. Reasonable patriot and the supporter of a national reconciliation of Russian around their double past, before the communist and Soviet regime, Vladimir Poutine is the first chief of the new Russia to have a real geopolitical formation and to propose a geostrategic and politically global vision to make restore to his country its pride and its place inside the concert of nations.
Conscious that the Western Europe remains weakened and unable to cut umbilical cord which connects to Washington through NATO in particular, Poutine is besides conscious that the least false step, the least marks of step anti-western of the Russians, even justified, for example as reaction to the War in Kosovo, will be used the strategies of NATO to justify a new Russian-phobia, a neo- containment which does not say its name but the annual reports of Pentagon as the manuscripts of western strategists recognize. It is in the frameworks of this contra- strategy that the Russian President, formed from methods of the psychological war and of rhetoric due to a passage in KGB that it is easy for us to reproach him, but they overlooked to put in parallel with the fact" that it is equally issued from " a clan from the liberals of Saint Petersburg", formulated, soon after his election, Russia intention to integrate into NATO and to work with the Western and the Europeans in collective Euro-western Security face to new external common dangers, since Islamic sunni international based in Afghanistan and acting in Chechnya as in Bosnia or through different attempts anti-American imputed to the Saudi terrorist Bin Laden.
By this rhetorical gesture of high symbolical and psychological range, Vladimir Poutine hoped to make pass a double indirect message to the Western and to the European Union: at first, "it is not the Soviet Russia that refuses the West, but it is the last one that refuses to open the door of NATO to the Russians ", the USA being thus obliged, through their refusals, to recognize that NATO is against Russia and the Slav-Orthodox world. Then, the Europeans have the choice between two geostrategic options: " to continue to serve as glacis and as vassals to the American authority, or to co-operate with Russia to a unity and a strategic independence of Old Continent" the unique capable power to counterbalance the American unipolarity. Shortly, to build the world multipolar order inside which the Great Europe, created since the ideal axe Paris - Berlin-Moscow, will create a equilibrium pole not enemy but equal to the American pole.
It is at the light of these different strategic options that it is necessary to analyze the War in Kosovo as the war in Chechnya, these two wars, apparently very different, being two geostrategic "moments " of vital importance for the orthodox world which the Russia intends to be the Headlight State, to reinstate the statement of Zbigniew Brzezinski. In the ex- Yugoslavia as in Chechnya, Moscow played simultaneously its international credit status (zone of orthodox influence and the access to the Mediterranean sea in " the close foreigner" of Balkans) and its preservation (integrity of national Russian territory and the control of the roads of petroleum in Chechnya). In the two cases, Russia was or detached (ex- Yugoslavia) or obstracized by the industrial nations (Chechnya).
The speech does not go, certainly, to deny the extreme violence of Russian and Serbian interference in separatist provinces in Kosovo and Chechnya. The geopolitical-analyst remains a human being. He is not insensitive to the phenomena as injustice, violence, barbarity, etc. But he replaces them in the strategic and geopolitical context. He states the disproportion, the aggressions, and the injustice, from the reports of forces and the strategy point of view, not from the exclusively moral point of view. It does not mean that it places the hangman at the same level as the victim, it implies simply that he tries to moderate the discussion and to take the detachment in relation to the representations solicited from the one hand and from the other, in order to study the facts and the reports of real forces, in general latent with more or less successes. From this point of view, the use of the term "genocide" concerning the civil wars in Bosnia, Kosovo, or Chechnya, has some features of a driving rhetoric force, of a representation, more than it does not describe an intangible reality.
Parallel to the geopolitical classical procedure and to the clarification of the phenomena of "the informational war" and " the economic war ", the "paradigm of the civilizations", dear to the American professor Samuel Huntington, constitutes a grid of reading indispensable to understand some geopolitical contemporary phenomena, in this case the neo - containment against Russia and the climate of hostility diffuses of West against the Slav - orthodox civilization, major obstacles, according to us, in any political and geostrategic rapprochement between the Western Europe and Russia.
In 1868, already, the Russian geopolitical Nikolaï Danilievski, the author of Russia and Europe, expressed the thesis on which " the Europeans see in Russia and in Slavs not only a foreign corps, but still a hostile principle"3. Under the representation "the Europeans", Danilievski nominated the hegemony quasi- incontestable of Great Britain, the thesis inside of our theme of study because it is one of the main consequences of the war in Kosovo would have been revived the old "civilization identity" and Geopolicy wounds between the "West " and Russia. Also that the "Europe" meant for Danilievski or inline, the Western Europe under the Britannic hegemony, also the Russian anti-western nationalists or communists specify, today, under the statement " West ", the American hegemony or still the general "Americanization" of the Europe, and not the Europe as a plurimillenary civilization or as a geopolitical project, in which Russia played always an important party but it feels eliminated by the " western " (Zinoviev) forces, mainly Anglo- Saxons.
More than a century later, there are two American geopoliticians and Strategists, who will approve the anti-western Danilievski, their thesis constituting in some way the copy in negative of the Russian geopolitical one's. The first is the former Jimmy Carter adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski. His geostrategic doctrine, completely anti-orthodox, mainly based on the "roll back" of Russia and of its spheres of influences, has no an equal one as only in Danilievski anti-western and of his Russian modern supporters, Alexandre Zinoviev, who criticizes the " totalitarian West ", in the geopolitician and communist leader Anatoli Ziouganov, passing through the leader of the extremely - right party Vladimir Jirinovsky, the author of the geopolitical pamphlet " I spit upon the West". The Second is the American historian - geopolitical-analyst Samuel Huntington, professor in Harvard, apparently more neutral, who will restore, following to Braudel and Lacoste, his letters of nobility to the civilization identity theory of the Geopolicy but who will found the thesis of the "non- western " character and at last "oriental " of the Slav-orthodox civilization. Agreed with Danilievski, and even with the Englishman Arnold Toynbee or with the German Spengler on this point, Huntington affirms as well that Russia and the Slav world, to which belongs Serbia, being attacked by the West during the war in Kosovo, are a distinct civilization of the West.
According to Samuel Huntington, the values of the modern West are based on Christianity, pluralism, individualism and the authority of the law, as much values "having permitted to the West to invent the Modernity, to know the world extension and to impose as a model to other societies (...). The Europe is the "source", the unique source of concepts of the individual freedom, of the political democracy, of the authority of the law, of the human rights and of the cult freedom "4. By these words, the author let to be seen the strategic presuppositions, which are at the origin of the representations which he, gives to the " West". For him, the values which found the western civilization, common to the USA and the Europe, are these written in the foundation principles of the Atlantic Charter and protected by NATO: " the common faith in the role of the law and in the parliamentary democracy; in the liberal capitalism and in the freedom of exchanges; and in the cultural European common inheritance, that of Greece and of Rome, including there the adhesion to the values, to the faiths and to the civilization of our own century "5. For Huntington as for the essential of the American intellectuals and responsible faces , NATO is "the first of the western establishments", who can not be recognized as westerns those who refuse the extension of NATO in the Europe, condemn the armed interference, and reject, as it is the case "auto-managing" communists, the nationalists or other "sovereign people", the supreme values of the global free trade and of the trade capitalism, phenomena which has also the habit to name by the polymorph terms of "universality " or "globalization ".
Russia and the orthodox Block , not subordinating to the western " globalization "
Among the representations typically western, the theme of the emergence of " the planetary culture", of "a global village", of a planetary identity, even of " an international community ", the integrity being named in the generating acceptation of the " generalization " or the "Globalization", is typically western and it is often presented as the proof of the inanity of the paradigm of the civilization identity shock . The defenders of the Globalization paradigm affirm that " the shock of the civilizations" is improbable as the means of the modern communication tend to create a new form of the "planetary" membership. However, Internet and the satellites did not at all make the civilizations and the identity of peoples disappears. They have on the contrary allowed to these last to leave the limited framework and often historically artificial of the national State, to reach "a civilization identity consciousness ", transnational, certainly, but not cosmopolitan. "The explosion of the media, explains François Thual, namely the television and the visual one, allows even more than in the past to intensify the request, to exasperate the obsessions and to strengthen the threats. The internal and external conductivity of the identity themes was accelerated by the technical progress of the communication (...). The media transform the cultural identity into an emotional stream of sounds and images"6.
If the philosophic - political internationalism isn't globally divided by the Westerns themselves, the world ideology to speak in exact terms, that Samuel Huntington named "Culture of Davos", concern at last an insignificant party of the planet (1 % of humanity approximately), corresponding to the western world, which excludes however Russia and the orthodox poor post-Byzantine countries.
Therefore, from the point of view of the numerous Russian intellectuals, namely the sociologist Alexandre Zinoviev, the Globalization under discussion is perceived as a falsity and "a hypocritical mask " of the " western and American imperialism ". "Even the idea of a "global" society, is a western idea, and not universally human (...) explains Zinoviev. The driving force of this initiative is not at all the aspiration of various States and peoples of the planet to unite one with the others - such aspirations are extremely rare - but the desire of some western authorities to occupy dominant positions on the planet and to organize the humanity completely in the correspondence with their concrete interests, and certainly not according to the interests of an abstract humanity". We understood, Zinoviev nominates by "some powers" the United States of America and the Anglo-Saxon countries generally, accused to justify their hegemony inside the western world under an " illusory international community ", besides very bravely denounced by Condolezza Rice, the new secretary of the Security of the President Bush in the same way as by Samuel Huntington. "The modern West, pursues Alexandre Zinoviev, is not a simple conglomerate of States: USA, England,
Germany, France and other western communities similar from the social point of view. The speech goes about a stage of organization more complex and superior. It is a young entity from the historical point of view, which began to be formed only the next day after the second world war, and which is still under the way of formation"8. For the author "We and the West", the modern concept "of West " is today inseparable to that of global, that is of " the social phenomenon of unification of the States and of peoples of the western world in an unique entity. The historical initiative within the framework of this process was resumed by the USA ".
Therefore, the War cold declared by the USA to the Russian - Soviet world highly favored the integration of the western States around the American power, and the global Americanization of the Old Continent. The integration of the western world in an unique geopolitical or imperial entity, entity which Zinoviev calls "western Supra-society " or "pro-westerner ", conducts to the formation "a multitude of organizations, institutions and establishments of a character universally western, that is supranational. Millions of persons are henceforth involved in their activity ". These federal " international " establishments, instruments of indirect domination of the USA, under the covering of the "Atlantic community ", " international community ", " Euro-Atlantic", or " West ", are qualified by Zinoviev as "superstructures ": UNO, NATO, ORGANIZATION of economic COMPLEMENTATION And DEVELOPMENT, INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND, INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT, OMC, AMI, OMS, etc.
The infra - European civilization identity clash "strategically oriented "
We understand better in this " representative " context, why the defenders of the "Atlantis" recognize Turkey or Japan, non-European and non-western nations - in an initial sense of the term - as " western", and not the Serbs, defenders of the sovereignty of the socialist Yugoslavia, or even the Russians, accused to be "nostalgic" of the Soviet Soyuz - accusation regularly used against the President Vladimir Poutine -, or simply not subordinating to the western liberalism or to the American leadership. So it is explained the forceful propensity of the Anglo-Saxon strategists to use the term " western " in a more strategic and economic sense than of " civilization identity " or historical, Huntington as Schlesinger putting the identity cultural European factors after the economic and ideological aspects.
Certainly, the nations of Western Europe are the sisters of European Slav-orthodox nations - Russia debiting as much to the Athens, as to the Romans or to the Germans (through its ancestors Vikings founders) and certainly to the spiritual Judeo - Christian inheritance, than to the Western Europe. Undoubtedly, the Slav-orthodox world and the Europe belong to the same European civilization, even if some historians, exclusively Anglo-Saxon or German, from Spengler to Huntington, passing through Caroll Quigley, tried to prove the contrary, impregnated by a vision extremely western, anti-Latin and northern, of the European civilization.
From this side, as reaction in philosophical and psychological protestant way and to the Anglo-Saxon influence of the western Europe just as for propre reasons due to the historic - political evolutions , the Slav-orthodox world does not always consider itself a full member of the " West ", concept which is not only, for them, to the origin of the Great Schism, but which is mainly turned against Russian world after arrival Soviet communism and the cold War, which allowed a taking under control, by the, of the " western world".
As we state reading of the civilization identity concepts strategically " oriented " by Huntington, it is preferable, certainly, to not allow itself to be deceived by the " paradigm of the civilizations ": the adepts of the "civilization identity integrity " forgetting sometimes that the civilization identity and the lever of cultural identity is frequently instrumented and used as a driving force of representation justifying the struggles for power more or less occult. "The paradigm of the civilizations " does not dwell less allowable, because the "cultural identity representations ", that they are based on authentic facts or myths, give sense inside the masses and the Geopolicy actors. That we wanted or not, they thrust quantity of human beings of any civilization, since time immemorial, to accept to die for their religion, their nation, their identity or their civilization identity membership, even to destroy another civilizations presented as enemies or strangers, as it was the case during the war in Gulf and in Kosovo, not forgetting the war of silent destruction of peoples which constitutes the embargoes and other " international sanctions".
"The West", "civilization identity illusion ", the main detail of the "war of representations " against the Slav-orthodox world
In different dictionaries, one of the definition given to the West is "an ensemble of States of the Northern Atlantic agreement", at the origin of NATO. Since the second world war and by opposition to the Eastern Block, " the West " almost became a synonym of the transatlantic community, the ensemble of States-members of NATO or, by extension, the ensemble of the developed States more or less allied to the USA and adepts to the market economy and liberal democracy. Under the cold War, the West was also called " the free World ", as opposition to the "Eastern Block" located on the other part of the awful Iron Curtain. On the one hand the Welfare, the Freedom and the Richness, from the other hand the oppression, the shortage, "the Empire of Evil" of Dulles and Reagan. The connected concept, "the free World", by opposition to "the Soviet-communist world", metaphor eminently ideological and not "civilization identity ", will contribute to forge the modern representation of the " West". In this acceptance, Turkey, State situated in more than 90 % out of the limits conventionally recognized of the Europe-civilization, the Muslim countries from Caucasus and central Asia closely connected to the USA and Turkey and joined to NATO, as Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan or Kirghizia, have the vocation, following to Japan, to integrate the western system, however that the Christian nations and the ethnic- cultural or linguistic " indo - European" substrate (Dumezil), as Russia, Byelorussia,
Serbia or Armenia, are actually eliminated from the geopolitical and ideological representation of the " West ".
Therefore, when the Serbs or Russian armies undertake operations of anti-terrorist repression certainly extremely violent against the separatist elements Bosnian - Muslim, albanian-kosavars or Chechens, they are accused "to challenge the West ", the Islamic rebellions and the Chechen or Albanian terrorists as well as the peoples of Turkish-Islamic substrate being considered more "western" that the Slavs orthodox soldiers. The use forcefully symbolical of the term "Allied", in particular during the war in Bosnia, in Kosovo (the operation called "Joint Forces" for this purpose) and in Chechnya, to specify the " Good " (Bosnian - MMuslim, the Croatian Catholics or the Muslim Chechen separatists) in acceptance with the " Bad " Slav - Orthodox (the ex-communists not subordinating to NATO and to the liberal economy) who dare " to challenge the West ", shows also the desire "to roll back " Russia and the Slav-orthodox world apart from the western field in order to cut the Europe in two and thus to immortalize the American hegemony in the Europe weakening it.
United at the summit in Helsinki in November 1999, the western chiefs condemned in fact resolutely Russia, during the first air bombardments in Chechnya, calling Moscow to lift the ultimatum launched to the civilians from Grozny, and qualifying Russia persistence to continue its offensive against the Chechens "challenge referred to the West ". From its side, Brussels threatened "to suspend " some clauses from the agreement of partnership and cooperation which connects the European Union to Russia, the 15 ministers of foreign affairs of the EU condemning resolutely " the disproportionate force used" by Moscow. "The Russian forces challenged the West yesterday in Chechnya taking under control the city-symbol of Bamout and continue their bombardments on Grozny, despite the appeals to negotiations before opening of the OSCE summit", published Le Monde from the 15th of November 1999, inform the official declarations from Brussels. Better, the OSCE and the Council of the Europe was on the point to exclude Russia from their instances, accusing Moscow " to mock at the values of West". It will be necessary to wait February 2001 that, not without the Anglo - American reticence, Russia be completely rehabilitated inside these instances. From his side, the French Minister of the defense Alain Richard, reminded that the Europe had a role of political persuasion and of caution to play, advising to the Russian authority: distrust the isolation and of the delimitation and to appear more and more as an irreconcilable power with our values", the French Minister seems to dread the extension of the ideological and civilization pit separating again the " West " from Russia after the War in Kossovo. If we consider the facts from the moral point of view, independently to the awful human drama which really provoked the Russian bombardments, but from the point of view of the geopolitical analysis of the "representations", the statement "challenge the West" disclose taken party anti-Russian which is at the origin of the tarnished statement " of West ". As if it was only feeling of compassion which really animated the Westerns, these would regret as much the "dramas " or the " human catastrophes", the "absence of the human rights " which take place almost everywhere in the world and more in Indonesia and in Turkey, closely allied States to the USA, or in Africa or in Afghanistan as in Russia or Serbia.
The mark of a "Russian challenge towards the West" reveals the strategic anti-Slav-orthodox directions (neo - containment) which push the Western to reproach to the Russians their attitude in Chechnya while the mass murders of the peoples Kurds since years by Ankara and Turkey persistence to refuse to recognize the " Armenian genocide" was never qualified as "a challenge to the West "... We see, the geopolitics of representations does not consist to occult the human dramas or to whiten or to incriminate such or such camp more than other, but to clarify the geostrategic unofficial motive which push the States to seize some documents better than the others.
According to some Russian intellectuals, the " West " finished to nominate simultaneously the planetary capitalist
"Supra-society " defined by Zinoviev or by Soljenitsyn, the scarf of the American hegemony, and a philosophical liberal concept and individualistic of the world, described by Huntington or Francis Fukuyama, absolute antithesis of the Russian - Soviet totalitarianism or Asian holism. It appears at last logical that the statement West nominates today, as inflexible enemies, not the " civilization identity opponent " traditional in the Europe, namely the Islam (particularly the Turkish - Arabian East), but the entities more or less recalcitrant to the liberal capitalist model of the Anglo-Saxon society and mainly to the American hegemony-orientated which under strives it: Russia ex or neo-communist; the socialist Yugoslavia; the Maoist China, the communist Northern Korea; the " anti-imperialist" and encrypted - communist Cuba, the bassist Iraq, etc.. From a geographical and civilization identity concept confidentially connected to the history of the Europe and of the Christianity, the representation " West " evolved to an ideological and economy-orientated concept of the world indicating a supra-member neo-imperial and capitalist, dominated by the former northern- American colony of the Europe. Since the "Great Rupture" observed by Vladimir Volkoff, or Zinoviev, whence still " the cold Peace" announced by Huntington. In a more meaningful language, the French strategist Pierre Marie Gallois affirms that we assist to a new Cold War, a new Eastern- Western conflict extended this time to the entire world. It is in this context that it is convenient to replace, according to us, the recent war in Kossovo, which succeeded to reactivate the shock of the civilization between the Western Europe and the post - Byzantine area, in the strategic general purposes to hinder the edification at term of a forceful and independent Europe and in the framework of a new " cold global war " between, from one hand the USA and their western glacis and, from the other, the Rest of the world potentially concurrent and \or recalcitrant.
The Europeans entrapped by the " pro-westerner " and by the neo- containment against Russia which follows
Proclaiming themselves the members and solidarity to the " West ", that they know however under the global domination of USA, which monopolized in some way even "usurped" the appellation " West ", which has nothing in common with it initial European acceptation, the Europeans lose in some way their own identity and mainly the sense of their vital interests. After the definition which gives the French strategist Murawiec of the subversion and of the "informative war" : "to make lose the North, to disorientate", the Europeans lose gradually the sense of their own auto- identification, they "lose the North" and they fail to represent themselves according to their identity and own interests. The American hegemony-orientated "benevolent " dressing apparently representative wear more or less European of the "West". "The missile taking the name even of a purpose", sneers at Arnaud-Aaron Upinsky.
As always teach the strategists and the political-analysts, the definition of a nation or of a civilization has of itself, as well as if its "enemies " and "friends" (Julien Freund), conditions the elaboration of its strategic thought and even of its policy of defense. Therefore, it is necessary to state that during the end of the Second World War, the "West " has indicated a more planetary marine Empire of Anglo-Saxon culture and statement - supposed to grow endlessly and limitlessly of the cultural boundaries, at the discretion of Americanization - standardization of nations - that the civilization of the Europe itself.
Even if they dress the honorary status of a cultural and geographical Mother-Country of this " West" metamorphosed, the nations of the Old Continent, which persist to prefer to the Euro-Russian union the transatlantic union, have not henceforth and already relegated to a status of the USA vassals, as expresses Zbigniew Brzezinski without beating around the bush . They are "out of the History " (the general Pierre Maria Gallois) and were conquered by themselves, during the battle of representations at term of which their name, their identity, and consequently their immune system, were neutralized.
Better, the European nations serve today of force of supplement, of external glacis and of "head of the geostrategic bridge" of the USA to the Eurasia, as write in black and white the American strategist Brzezinski in the Great Chessboard. Therefore the Russian writer Alexandre Zinoviev does he state for its side that " to install the world order according to their desire, USA should mobilize the forces of the western world entirely, as they can not make this absolutely alone"12.
But the chiefs of the European states, when they realize that the Americans speak about the "the western world" and "the international Community " with the unique purpose to dilute their hegemonic motivations and their own responsibilities, do not draw the conclusions of this which result from this . Instead of realizing that the vital interests well understood by the Europeans are different - not inevitably opposed
- to those of the Americans, they are entrapped on the terrain of the legitimacy and of the representations. They can not more, in some way, step back and persist to prefer the comfort of the American protectorate at the difficulty of the strategic rapprochement with Moscow and the post-Byzantine Block.
A term probably pertinent in some epoch, as the West mixed up with the Europe, before the colonization of the Americas, the " West" is henceforth a real conceptual and semantic trap, "a civilization illusion". It returns to cut continental Europe in two and to exclude from an European field the post -Byzantine Slav- orthodox space, considered as foreign, "oriental ".
At the light of the grid of reading of the " war of civilization representations" and of the geopolitic and strategic constants and variables, they state at last that in Chechnya, as in Kosovo, it is traditional American pro-Islamic strategy and the geostrategic necessity to deprive the Russians of the hydrocarbon road (Caucasus, the central Asia) which explains in a large party the over - mediatization of the events and the fact that "the West" decided to protect the Albanian and Chechnya pro-independence insurgents, however issued the separatist terrorist - Mafioso currents for the first (UCK) and the radical anti-western Islamic for the second, connected to the Talibans and wahhabit Islamic network of Bin Laden,). " I think that the Russians are on the way to do in Chechnya that that Milosevic tried to do in Kosovo", will comment the general Wesley Clark from the first "air attacks" of Moscow on Grozny. "Such comment are absolutely unacceptable" replied the Russian minister of foreign affairs to the former NATO supreme commandant, specifying " that it would be better to abstain from making sermons, being surprised "that it was Wesley Clark, one of the main culprit of the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia which made anti-Russian declaration"13.
Anti-western renewal, the Russo- Chinese rapprochement and "The New cold War", the consequences of the wars in Kosovo and in Chechnya
The USA, since the end of the cold War, have never really stopped to pursue a major objective: to hinder the resurgence, on the European or Eurasian continent, of a power comparable to that it was the ex Soviet Union, or any other Eurasian ensemble population capable to contest the American unipolar superiority. In this perspective the New Strategic Concept of NATO (1991-1999), the spectacular augmentation of the budget of the American defense, and mainly
the different military American-western interference led - without the agreement of the non-western members of the Council of Security - from the falling of the Soviet Union (Iraq since1998, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc.), were perceived, in Moscow, Peking as in New Delhi, as genuine "declaration of the cold war" more as the warnings. The President Vladimir Poutine, once elected, did not drop in the trap of the Euroscepticism and of the anti-western, which seem justify the extension of NATO in the central and East Europe, the war in Kosovo and the western media support brought to the Mafioso and Islamic separatist Chechens (connected to the Afghanistan of Talibans and to the international terrorist web of Oussama Bin Laden) had the essential functions to revive the strategic-civilization breakage East -West, between the two Europe.
"The appeasement East-West is questioned by the American aggression in Kosovo, explains Pierre Maria Welsh, it is in such a way that widens the crack between the Americanized western world and the government of nations grouping soon a population about 3 milliards, at the level of life precisely less elevated. It could be that the crisis from Kossovo and the manner, which is treated, was the omen of a future great schism "14. It is paradoxical, the USA, which intend want to induce China (allowed recently inside WCO) and Russia to join the concert of the developed nations and which are afraid above all of the constitution of the "anti-hegemonic" alliances, seem have made everything to favor a spectacular rapprochement between the two largest nuclear Eurasian forces, China and Russia. "The diplomacy of bombardment which practices Madam Albright came to the concluded that the State department was afraid more : a spectacular rapprochement between Moscow and Peking ", states the General Gallois. Really, in hardly some months after the operation Joint Forces, on the 9-th of December 1999, Boris Eltsine departed to Peking to put an end to an old boundary disagreement and to proclaim that Russia - as China - was " until the proof of the converse a nuclear power" and that the "Westerns", refusing the competition of these two States, should nevertheless " be careful to interfere in their internal affairs": the Caucasus for Russia, the Human Rights, Taiwan, the Spratleys islands, as China concerns.
Soon after the resignation of Boris Eltsine, in January 2000, one of the first strategic decisions of the President Vladimir Poutine will revise the Russian doctrine of use of the nuclear weapon, Moscow reserving to itself henceforth the right to resort also only in case of aggression against " the only existence of the Russian Federation", but in a conflict or all other means would have failed. Parallel, Poutine decided the augmentation with 50 % of the military Russian budget...
According to Anatoli Ziuganov, the chief of the Russian communist party and the author of the geopolitical agreements, it would exist "a real geopolitical world conspiracy against the ex-USSR" and "the main threat for the Russia security " would emanate from the "progression of the Atlantic Alliance military machine to the western boundaries of our country"15. Far from considering the signature, in Paris, the 27-th of May 1997, of the basic agreement of NATO-Russia as a sign of appeasement between two former Blocks, Ziuganov affirms that the agreement of Paris "devoted legally the victory to the West at the issue of the cold War". Therefore "the simple common sense suggest us to strengthen our connections with China, India, Iran and some Arabian countries"16, pursues the author, having reminded "Mackinder appeals to destroy ' Russian domination" above the core of the Eurasia" were resumed by the "Russian- phobic as Brzezinski or Kissinger"17. In his newspaper of a writer, already, Dostoievski wrote " Russia not only European, but also Asiatic . It is better, there can be more hopes for us in Asia that in Europe. It is better, for our future destiny, Asia can be our main discovery"18.
Therefore, since the crisis in Kosovo and in Chechnya, the anti-western and anti-European feelings of the Russians considerably amplified: at the beginning of April 1999, 49 % of Russians recognized "to have a negative vision of the West and Western Europe", as Le Point from the 17-th of April 1999 reveals. But the Russian feeling according to which it exists "a geopolitical conspiracy of the West against Russia", representation deeply anchored at numerous Russian elite and intellectuals, including the former anti-Communist dissidents as Soljenitsyn or Zinoviev, do not cease to grow. Listen better to Zinoviev, declaring to the Serbs, during the war in Kosovo: " We have rescued the humanity from the most awful threat : the fascism. Now we are attacked by a new common enemy, the American imperialism, which tries to dominate the world. The same intentions are recovered against the Russians, you, the Serbs, and us: To break us by dividing our country and by dissociating people, the final purpose being to exterminate us. (...). We, the Russians, we have already capitulated before this enemy. (...). While you, you resist. You struggle for your independence. (...). You struggle also for us the Russians who have cowardly abandoned the History field of battle. You struggle for the whole Humanity which threatens the aggressive imperialism of the USA 19".
According to Zinoviev, the humanity seems really entered, under the influence of the American hegemony, in the " post-democratic era " the planet become "mono-State system" or " mono-polar system ", the USA exercising a global hegemony, incontestable for the moment . "As well as the democracy is henceforth superfluous for the leaders of the western world. Much more, that it began to hamper in their conquest of the world authority". Therefore Zinoviev does he not doubt to affirm that the West which left victoriously the cold War, is directed "to a totalitarianism of a special kind (...).The belligerent totalitarianism of the West advances under the disguise of humanism, of democracy, of the struggle for the Human rights, of justice"20.
The Slav-Orthodox world and the Western Europe, two irreconcilable world? The refusal of the intra - European civilization identity clash
In The Grand Chessboard, Zbigniew Brzezinski, after Spengler, impregnated the two of the German-Anglo-Saxon vision of the western civilization, explains that the Orthodoxy is different civilization, even antagonist to the "West". For him, as for Samuel Huntington, however, the events suddenly occurred in Bosnia and in the ex-Yugoslavia are perfectly explained after the paradigm of the civilization shock: the Moslems against the Christians, the Catholic against the Orthodox, the Bosnian Moslems or the Turks being for him more close, from the civilization point of view, to the Croat, the Hungarians or the German Catholic that these last to their orthodox brothers. To supply this thesis, Samuel Huntington explains "front line civilizations" separating the two Europe, the Catholic- Protestant from the Orthodox explains, passes, since the Grand Schism, through the Ukraine (divided between the Catholic separatists and the pro- Russian Orthodox) and the ex-Yugoslavia (Bosnia), where the Catholic and the Orthodox are identified to the Roman-German West and in the Slav- orthodox post- Byzantine area. From two parts of this boundary, two different alphabets, two different concepts of Christianity, two representations of himself and of the world, despite the membership to the same ethnic - linguistic Slav ensemble.
If it is real, this fracture is nevertheless more of an infra-civilization nature, that is opposing the two histories and the two cultures belonging to the same civilization, that inter-civilization identity. Some people make an analogy between the schism Orthodoxy/Catholicism and that which divided the Moslem Chits and Sunni. For Huntington and for the Anglo-Saxon historians in general, the fracture Catholicity / Protestantism is practically occulted, in such a way that we speak about the "western Catholic-Protestant" civilization in relation to an Orthodoxy strange and foreign. So we have really affair here with a partial "representation", strategically oriented, which historical basis is widely disputable. Really, the two large civilization identity splits advanced by Huntington: the religious Schism between the Orthodoxy and the cultural differences between the West and the Orthodoxy, belong widely to a system of representation inherent from the Anglo-Saxon world, tending to legitimize the Anglo-Saxon hegemony, since the end of the 18-th century, through the promotion supposed civilization Catholic - Protestant unity, the matrices of a "western" globalization more large, and through an exacerbation of the "civilization identity" antagonism between the Catholics and the Orthodox.
The largest manifestation of political and strategic origin of this war of representation, carried by the Anglo-Saxon thalassocracy during two centuries to strengthen artificially the western - orthodox shock, was without any doubt the ruthless struggle led by London from the Turks part against the orthodox Russia and its obstinacy to hinder Saint Petersburg and Moscow to reach the Turkish Straits and the Mediterranean sea. Therefore the episode of the war in Crimea was not it only a link among so other inside this strategy of divide et impera which aimed at the end to isolate and to cut from the European west the strategic heartland of the Old Continent, the Russian- orthodox heartland described by the Anglo-American geopolitics theoreticians opposing the marine empires to the continental authorities. As to us, we support that the European nations from the West so from the East belong to the same civilization, which geographical natural space is the Grand continental "Euro-Siberian" Europe (to see maps I and II).
It is really in a context of geopolitical rivalry between the East Roman Empire and the new "West Empire", then within the framework of accession to temporary authority of the papacy, that will emerge two large crises which will provoke a definitive rupture between the two Churches (schism Orthodoxy/Catholicism) and the two worlds, the " western" and the "eastern" (in " Byzantine " sense of the term and in reference to the civilization issued from the Roman Empire of East).
Contrary to that which is affirmed here or there, the theological contention opposing the two Churches are incomparably less important that those opposing Rome to the Protestant Churches. In fact, the faith and the theology of the "Eastern" (Orthodox) are much closer of these of "the Latin" (Catholic) that to the "reformed " concepts, which question radically not only Mary, as " the Mother of the God" (teotokos), but also, that which touches the essential, the significance even of the Christ Body and Blood during the communion (transsubstantion), without speaking about the predestination doctrines, of the sola fide and sola scriptura of the Protestants. Schematically, the two large obstacles dividing the two churches concern: at first the problem of the superiority of the Pope, secondly, the so mentioned "quarrel of the Diadic-union". We try thus to see slightly more clearly.
Concerning to rivalry between the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Roman Pope, who pretend the two to be the successors of Peter, each knows that it must act there of a detail, from the faith and theology point of view, the Credo of the two Churches being issued from the same Councils of Nicea and Constantinople. Therefore is it good to remind that, during the Council in Constantinople, in 381, bishops of Rome, Constantinople, Antakya and Alexandria dominated on the same leg of equality, that was then accepted by all. The bishop of Rome, becomes Pope much later, 23, had no more and no less then an honorary superiority. Even at the moment of scission in 1054, the Orthodox did not contest this superiority. They never stopped in exchange to denounce the excessive political power that the Popes arrogated to themselves during centuries, the pontifical States having been created by Pepin the Short, and consecrated by Charlemagne, who will hand symbolically the keys of Rome over to the Pontifical Governor.
The proof of the political crucial role played the German Charlemagne in the exacerbation of the political-theological conflict between the Latin and the Eastern, the term of Pope itself became official only at the end of the IX-th century, at the moment of crowning of the French Emperor by Leon III, the successor of the last one having been the first to carry the title of Pope. At last, at the beginning of the Christianity, the bishops were in an overwhelming majority " Eastern" - that we qualify today as Orthodox - at there were thus for a very long time conclaves mainly composed the Greek- Eastern that chose the Popes. It will be necessary eventually to wait the domination of Charlemagne - who will create the dioceses almost everywhere in Europe and will again equalize thus the composition of the conclaves in the "Western" favor, that be elected the first "western" Popes by the "suffragan" bishops. This revolution, extremely political, will be one of the main deep sources of the future Grand Schism. It thus in this context and following to the rupture engagement between Anne, the daughter of Constantine, and Charlemagne - however considered, by the Byzantine, as a "false Emperor " and "barbarous" semi-heretic German - that will emerge "the quarrel of Diadic-union". Making enter in the Credo, until then unanimously recognized by the Latin and by the Eastern, the addition to Diadic-union, adding that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the Father but "from the Father and the Son", Charlemagne hoped to provoke religiously a political rupture already consumed between two rival Empires, which required the same "Roman" inheritance .
Is it always that, briefly, the Orthodox and the Catholic recognize the validity of the apostolic succession of their respective bishops and priests, naming Pope so the greatest or one from most great bishops, the successor of Peter, that of Rome, the Orthodox not refusing that the absolute superiority of Pope on the other bishops and patriarchs; practicing the monachism, the confession near the, and accord a capital importance, in difference from the Protestants, to the role of Tradition, namely patristic (the students of the Fathers of the Church). We precise that a faithful orthodox can take communion in a Catholic church and on the contrary, that any of the two Churches do not accord to the Protestants, while, since the Council of Vatican II, the Popes and the Patriarchs recognize themselves mutually having lifted the excommunications which stroke them reciprocally since the schism. There are probably the historical traditions, which distinguish more that they divide the Orthodox and the Catholics.
In fact, the Orthodox wishes themselves the real successors of the first christian churches of Near East, Greece and Minor Asia. They remind, that Saint Peter has made sermon to the Philipiens, Colossiens and Galates, and that the initial christian associations of the Byzantian world : Minor Asia, Antioch, Alexandria, preceded those of Jerusalem. Better, the first christian associations of the Gaulle, Rome, Spain, and even Treves, in Germany, were of Greek statement, just as those from Marseilles (Massilia) or from Nice (Nikkae). From the christian point of view, Lyon is also of the Greek connection, the first christian associations of capital of Rhone being occurring from Smyrne, and the first 150 Lyon martyr, having Greek names. As we can see, disagreements are less numerous and much less deep, in effect, than the common points. As to the orthodox Russia to which we have made references during this test, Moscow is considered, from the fall of Constantinople in 1453 during which the last Byzantine Emperor Constantine was killed, as "the Third Rome", the girl of the last Emperor of the East married however the Grand Duke of Russia. Since then, Russian Kings will be named "suns" of the Byzantine Emperors, Moscow having considered itself the direct successor of Constantinople and the defender of the Orthodox in relation to Moslems.
What is it now of "the cultural and historical ditch" between the "two civilizations" described by Huntington or Pierre Behar, following Spengler? It is, just as "the theological ditch", to relatives. Let's remind nevertheless, that up to the XI-th centuries, almost set of Italy of the South Byzantian, and that some of the most beautiful masterpieces of christian art of Italy and the Balkan are the result of synthesis between the Roman and Byzantian traditions. Italian Ravenne is one of architectural miracles of the Byzantian style. Sacred Vital basil reminds very cleanly that from Sacred Sophia of Constantinople, and Ravenne's mosaic represent Byzantian empress Theodora with her servants. Actually, the big part of the European Mediterranean sea, theoretically, included in categories of "West", should as much, sometimes even more, to the Greek-Byzantian culture, that to the "western" culture in roman-german-anglo-saxon sense of the term. In Corsica, in Sardinia, in Sicily, in Naples (Nea Polis, or "New city " in the Greek language) and in Italy of the South in general, the Byzantian liturgies are shown even in local religious practices. Concerning Sicily, they speak even about religious art and about the "Normandy-Byzantian" architecture, the Catholic Norman aggressors, forcing to survive in their achievements the gréco-Byzantian culture, which they have found in the country of Cyclopes. Better, today still, at bishops of several capitals of Italy of the South there are double ceremonies, Latin and Byzantian, while the aboriginal of numerous villages of Sicily, Sardinia or Corsica remain, to present day, adherents of Orthodox Church.
As to the Russian christian - orthodox Church, it is known that there are two envoys of Pope, Cyril and Method, occurring of Greece, who will go, century before the Big Split to transform ( convert) the Russians (the Method was the Greek and Cyril Bulgare). The governor Bishop very well could send in Russia two Latin missionaries. As it is known, the Pope has approved the alphabet conceived by the Method and Cyril (Cyrillics) which becomes that of orthodox Russians, Bulgarians, Byelorussians and Serb- Macedonian etc. Therefore, if the Pope has chosen Latin missionaries, this alphabet would be Latin today. At last, the problem of the uniatism, if it is for someone the apple of discord, for mainly pastoral bases (authorities and distribution of places of a cult), does not rest less the biggest demonstration of spiritual and cult unity, Catholics Ukrainian uniats has precisely the same liturgy, the same mess, the same ceremonies, as Orthodox! The unique difference, of size, certainly, being the recognition of the Authority of the Pope and a mark
of the name uniats during the time the mess . Only the fidelity, in a result, very political instead of theological, in the "Saint-Siege", divides two Churches. We see, that "the foundation civilization identity ditch" separating Orthodoxy of the "western" world catholic - reformed, is not as important, as they say, in any case no deeper, than between Catholics and protestants. It does not result of a shock of an irreversible civilization between two enemy worlds, but faster the consequence of the split appeared inside the same initial Greek - Roman civilization. Disagreements exist, certainly. Historical wounds were reactivated even during the war of Kosovo, as regretted however the Pope Jean Paul II and Romanian orthodox Patriarch Teoctist in the joint Statement signed May, 8 1999 .
Of the civilization identity, geostrategic and political
of "Euro-Siberia" unity
From a point of view less exclusively cultural-religious and more "secularize", the two Europe, in their modern change, may be even more connected - vaguely, certainly, but very real - as in the past when theological stumbling-blocks have noted cleanly less public consciousness of secularized and industrialized societies that those of Homo religious of the last centuries. The successor of the legal and political organization of Romans, of the philosophies and sciences of Greeks, of ethnic-linguistic Indo-European properties common for Celts, for Latin, for Germans as for Slavs, and incorporated by the Jewish-Christian contribution, itself in a basis of modern secular idea and in a basis of the paramount place of the individual, the Europe is in the beginning "a big history shared ", a general destiny, requiring ethics for the needs of the equipment and the moral of the humane person. It is "a civilization of the person" as it has told Henri de la Bastide, an extraordinary civilization including creation, research, and development with high moral and spiritual requirements. Whether we want or not, and even if Russia did not at all learn how some Russian - skeptical explain, the Reform, the Revival and the French Revolution - "the three R of the West ", Russia shares completely these values and it bombard even more directly, than the Countries of the West in their Greece-Latin and Jewish-Christian sources, not speaking about Bolshevik Revolution which played in Russia the role of the second French Jacobean and terrorist revolution of 1793. Whether we want or not, the Europeans, have in common some essential characteristic features: from Britain to Siberia, from Portugal to Behring, family customs, believes, philosophical and cultural references (the Russians recognize themselves as much in Victor Hugo and Russian, as the French or Italians in Dostoïevski or Tolstoï or still any European in Plato, Leonard DA Vinci, Dante Alighieri, etc.), moral references, just as the social problems of Europeans (decrease of traditional morals, falls of birth rate, individualism etc.), are deeply similar.
The Europe, in effect, more Euro-Siberian by sense than by choice, is a "rich bourgeois family" for the best and for the worse, which various branches have certainly taken pure directions but which, such Greek settlements in relation to Barbaroï, are more than before interested - due to the circumstances (generalization, logic geoeconomic "blocks", collisions cultural civilization, threats from the Islamic South etc.) - to gather inside of what Gorbatchev has named "the European City town hall".
Various historical and politico-theological stumbling blocks of the past, mentioned earlier, seem today widely surpassed, even deprived of interests for any supporter of construction of the Big independent Europe. However, the war of Kosovo has well shown, that contrary to decades of faithless communistic ideology and the generalized downturn on religious practice, the religion, as a reality civilization identity basic more, than a theological belief, has not stopped to print the mark and to impregnate deeply public consciousness. However, they were actually rather insignificant, the stumbling-blocks civilization identity opposing the European West to the east the post-Byzantian live thoughtlessly whereas Europeans of two coasts fall in the reef of division and instrumentalisation of civilization identity shocks.
Not to doubt, the construction of an uniform and strong Europe, independent of the thalassocratic American Empire, passes thus a "civilization identity reconciliation" between the "two lungs of Europe ", the western and the post-Byzantian, a reconciliation as easily sold from the "Euro-Siberian" strategic point of view as it seems the utopian, from the "pro-west" and pro-Atlantic point of view, question of postulates of departure and desire. Europeans should be finally convinced, that the agreement with Russia and the orthodox world is at the same time easy to make, and even salutary, from the geopolitic point of view.
The necessary rapprochement European
Union - Russia or "an ideal direction"
The European union remains now a hybrid unit, "soft" (Pierre Marie Gallois), difficult to distinguish from the Atlantic project and deceived by the Globalization utopia, usurper- as well as we have explained it - of the concepts of "West" behind which appears American hegemony. So, the subordination of Europe to the USA and the support of the NATO - historically created and maintained against Russia and the Slav-orthodox Block - as the only structure of strategic European protection (Europe of Protection leaving for itself humanitarian missions and the preservations of the Peace known as the peace of "Petersberg"), is unacceptable for the several bases:
- First, it is not justified against a continental Eurasia common danger, the "Russian- Soviet" threat disappearing and the communistic China not having in mind any more, as Russia to win the West. Actually, if continental danger is present in Eurasia to repeat Zbigniew Brzezinski's statement, it may not be felt such except for the English-American strategists who always were afraid of geopolitic unity of Eurasia and of scripts of "anti-hegemonic" continental plots to the American sea empire. If a new general threat appears in Eurasia, it is the fact not of European peoples but of Islamic Totalitarianism Sunni, which Vladimir Putin specifies through sound statement of " religious fascism ", which the final purpose is to win all world, by Jihad, from Africa, Caucasus, the Central Asia and Europe, the main "soft border zones" of the Islamic continuum. So, USA, as we have explained it once in a previous context , favored - and continues to favor in some places - the expansion of the world bases of the Islam to the detriment of the European interests.
This reality of "infringement of unity of the Euro-western civilization" (Huntington) by USA, taken in pincer by their double world politics, simultaneously occidental and Islamic-petroleum, would protect even faster for the benefit of the strengthening of intra-european and continental cooperation between the European union and Russia, in the question on protection and on safety, against the same menacing and revanchist Islam of the South. This strategic cooperation, aspiring to guarantee safety of three big components making the Euro-western civilization (the Western Europe, Orthodoxy, America), the President Vladimir Putin was the first European head of the state to offer it (the cooperation) solemnly to the western colleagues, during the European summits and during the first diplomatic visits to London and in Rome.
- Second, the European subordination is unacceptable, as Europe has henceforth all advantages to equalize, even to surpass once the American power, if it have only the desire: the population adjoins to 380 million inhabitants (720 million uniting set of peoples of the European continent), against 260 for USA; the PNB combined by Europe of the Fifteen - 7800 billion dollars in 1999 - equalizes that of America (7783 billion dollars) and it surpasses already widely if consider the Western Europe as a whole (EU +AELE: Norway, Switzerland, etc.) Or if take into consideration the inevitable admission of the countries of central and East Europe (PECO), Cyprus, Malta, etc.; at last, the standard of living of two blocks is widely similar, when the PNB per capita was shaking average between 25 and 30 000 dollars from both sides of Atlantic. As to technological achievements, as to scientific and medical research, as to commercial and industrial parameters, as to an average intellectual and cultural level, and even as quality of life (social orders, vital skill, art and culinary traditions, etc.), Europe has nothing to envy to Americans. Opposite. Accept several areas, as high technologies of protection or skill of space, where it has refused to keep the first place, but where it might catch up easily the delay, Europe, with the second Russian vital strategic lung, is globally at least as powerful and advanced as USA and makes the first economic power of the world.
Also, in the case the European union would agree to go to the strategic and political independence, and thus to rise distance in relation to the NATO or at least to create a real European protection, independent of the American supreme command, that would motivate Moscow to represent at last its nominee at Brussels - the thing it could not do until then because of the natonisation of the EU - the continental Europe shaped from the ideal direction Paris-Berlin-Moscow would create the first strategic power of the planet. Not only such a Big Europe might counterbalance and soften, more than to challenge, the American unilateral action and the Uni.-polar world, occurring from the end of the cold war, factors of global infringement of balance and wars (Gulf, Kosovo, antimissile project of USA and rise of race of arms, etc.), But it would have the most important reserves of energy resources and strategic resources of the world, the best brains - in overwhelming majority European but going too frequently to find fortune in USA, where they are better remunerated, - the most enviable and the most central geographical position, and, mainly, ability of almost general economic, technological, military and political self-maintenance.
Nothing justifies thus the present full submission of the European union to America, not even the belonging to the common allied system, the hegemony of America and the NATO, being more the consequence of the European "desire of powerlessness" (Pascal Boniface) than the reason of this last. In addition, USA may not prevent Europe, the economic giant strategically weakened by its returnable division, to become the political giant, "the general power" capable to discuss equal to equal with them.
The division of two lungs of Europe, maintained by the NATO expansion in the countries of the East candidates for the entrance in the European union, as well as the vague neo - containment against Russia and the post-Byzantian world, are thus as much the result of the English - American strategy of divide and impera in Europe, as of the European "desire of powerlessness" and something like "Russian-phobia" almost congenital of the EU which rises to the bases and to the predecessors itself of the Union of Fifteen, Pro- atlantic from sources. Let's remind, that the present European Union occurring from the Contract of Rome and becoming political with contracts of Maastricht, Amsterdam and Nice, was inspired definitely by Washington and has created by European atlantistes in a context of cold war to contain Russian-Soviet empire, as well as recogniz
- “L’islam nous déteste” ou comment mal mettre le doigt sur une vraie peur de l’Occident (et pourquoi on ne devrait surtout pas laisser à Donald Trump et ses analyses primaires le monopole sur le sujet)
- Emission Grain à "moudre" de France Culture avec Alexandre del Valle, Hervé Gardette et Raphaël Liogier
- Daesh et la « srtatégie de la sidération » (Revue des Deux Mondes)
- Dans la tête de Ben Laden : ce que les documents saisis chez lui nous apprennent sur Al Qaeda et la guerre de l’islam radical contre l’Occident
- « Les racines géopolitiques de la crise ukrainienne et de la brouille russo-occidentale »