Contenu du sommaire : 1914-2014. La Grande Guerre et le monde de demain

The Great War in Theory
The First World War gave rise to the emergence of the discipline of international relations, but it was the Second World War and the Cold War that fostered its development. The first global conflict remains a rich reserve of examples and arguments regarding the causes and proceedings of war and peace. However, its central relevance in this discipline is now coming under question with the nuclear revolution, the power of nationalist forces and the new role of terrorism.

The “War to End All Wars”: Total War, Total Peace?
The Paris Peace Conference of 1919-1920 marked the end of the First World War whose purpose was to establish the conditions for enduring, if not perpetual peace. But in fact, it planted the seeds of future conflicts, in particular by burdening Germany with exceptional reparations. Lessons from the Conference were drawn, especially in the post-Second World War period. Peace treaties no longer aim to debilitate defeated parties but to facilitate their reintegration into the global community.

The Legacy of the Great War: Sovereign States, Globalization and Regionalism
The Great War has shaped many 20th century practices and norms. The economic and social pre-eminence of the State was born of it, as was the rise of new values such as universal human rights, the establishment of collective security which previously depended on bilateral alliances, and the institution of universal legal norms. From the Great War we have inherited both a reaffirmed nation-state as well as the potential to go beyond it in regional and international organization.

Does International Commerce Help Foster Peace?
Montesquieu's theory of “doux commerce” has never ceased to be debated. Its most virulent critics have been Marxists for whom commercial exchange between capitalist economies is based on exploitation of the proletariat and leads to imperialism and conflict. The collapse of the communist bloc failed to bring an end to this controversy. Today, certain economists maintain that interdependence is a stabilizing factor whereas others claim that it increases tensions.

1914-1918 and the Redefinition of War
The First World War helped redefine the notion of strategy, giving it a political dimension that it previously lacked. New institutions were created to allow civilians and members of the military a means to discuss major strategic directions. Beyond strategy, the “all-out war” of 1914-1918 transformed the very idea of war. We need to preserve the memory of this conflict; its dissuasive power could prevent such extremism from arising again.

The French Army and the Military Revolution of the First World War
In 1914 the firepower of modern weaponry produced a massacre. To limit losses, the warring parties dug themselves into trenches. The French army was forced to innovate. Infantry and artillery underwent major transformations. Military doctrine evolved to integrate new technologies – tanks and aircraft in particular – into tactical planning. By 1918 the French army, more powerful and more mobile than its opponent, eventually defeated Germany.

Europe's Continuing Demilitarization
Beginning in the 1970s, becoming solidified with the “peace dividends” in the 1990s and finally accelerated by the financial crisis of 2008, Europe's demilitarization is undeniable. Shrinking budgets have resulted in reduced armies, equipment being deployed in fractional quantities and limited military capacity. Whilst the United-States is no longer looking toward Europe, demilitarization is resulting in a weaker Europe in a world where collective violence remains a reality.

Demilitarized Europe ? An American Perspective
The criticism leveled by Americans at Europe's neglect of its commitment to defense is not new, and is often exaggerated. It has reached new levels with Europe's failure to position itself as a strategic actor and after the budget cuts brought about by the financial crisis of 2008. As unavoidable as these cuts may have been, they could nevertheless compromise Europe's capacity to act in international affairs, even for the most powerful of European states.

Europe's Place in the World: from 1914 to 2014The first wave of globalization in the 20th century triggered deep upheaval of the organization of power and an overall depreciation of European nations. As such, it left the way open for the establishment of a Europe that is largely technocratic and depoliticized. It is now time to adopt a new vision founded on the coexistence and cooperation of the nations remaining in Europe, the crucible of democracy. It is only a vision such as this that can reinstate Europe's command on the international stage.

1914–2014 : Nation and Nationalism
The increasing militarism prior to the Great War had its roots in national beliefs and ideologies constructed during the 19th century in European countries. The double trauma of the world wars brought about a decline in nationalism and established new ways of reconstructing societies. Globalization has once again brought strict national frameworks into question, but the current crisis in the European Union demonstrates that democracy is having difficulty rising above the framework of the nation.

Germany: The Past that Does not Pass
Germany's responsibility in the two global conflicts reflects, among other things, the German military's desire to free itself from political control and the depth to which the Wehrmacht was immersed into Nazi ideology and a Nazi state whose orders it never really contested. It is this double legacy that Federal Germany and its Bundeswehr is endeavoring to reject with regard to the functioning and doctrine of the latter, even if it means reducing its willingness and means to act.

Is Europe's Past Asia's Future?
There are some disturbing similarities between present-day Asia and pre-1914 Europe. China demands a role that is commensurate with its ambitions, just like Germany at the end of the 19th century. Neither Great Britain nor the dominant power, the United States, knew how to curb the expansion of the emerging power. Given the exacerbation of nationalist sentiment in Asia, lessons from the First World War must be remembered in order to avoid a dangerous escalation.

The First World War and the Balkanization of the Middle-East
The First World War had tragic consequences for the Middle-East. It led to the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire and the balkanization of the region. France and Great Britain sowed the seeds of future conflict in making contradictory promises to different communities. The instability we are witness to today has its roots in the division of the area following the Great War. Further regional conflagration is to be expected.

Turkey: the Sèvres Syndrome, or the Interminable War
For the Turks, the Treaty of Sèvres symbolizes the liquidation of the Empire and the carving up of Turkey by outside forces. The historical effect of the Treaty survives in the form of a syndrome, which explains an under-siege vision of national survival. Aside from the current trend of neo-Ottomanism, entering into new, re-contextualized dialogue with Europe could, perhaps, help the country form a new relationship with its history and overcome a syndrome that has been manipulated by all components of its political class.