Clausewitz et les conflits contemporains HGGSP - Faire la guerre, faire la paix 2 - Thème 2 bac 2025

Introduction

In this video, Manon from "La Boîte à Bac" continues the series on the theme of war and peace. This second video explores the application of Clausewitz's theory of conventional war in contemporary conflicts.

The Application of Clausewitz's Theory in Contemporary Conflicts

• The first video focused on Clausewitz's model and its application to 18th and 19th-century conflicts.

• In this video, we will examine how the theory of conventional war is tested in modern times.

• The goal is to understand if Clausewitz's model still applies to 20th-century conflicts and beyond.

• We will explore the mutations and transformations that have occurred in warfare since the 1990s.

Relevance of Clausewitz's Model in the 20th Century

This section discusses whether Clausewitz's model is applicable to conflicts in the 20th century.

• The First World War and Second World War can still be considered inter-state wars with defined territories, coalitions, and declarations of war.

• Despite their unprecedented scale, these wars align with Clausewitz's concept of conventional warfare.

• The magnitude of destruction witnessed during these wars demonstrates an escalation towards absolute war, aiming for the annihilation of the enemy.

• Close observation reveals that violence at such a large scale was already present in earlier conflicts but was intensified during these world wars.

Shift from Conventional Warfare - Cold War Era

This section explores how warfare transformed during the Cold War era.

• With the advent of nuclear weapons, direct armed conflict between major powers became less likely due to mutual deterrence.

• The Cold War shifted from traditional armed conflicts to ideological, economic, political, and scientific competitions.

• The concept of "hot war" between the United States and the Soviet Union was avoided due to the fear of nuclear annihilation.

• Conflicts during this period were often referred to as peripheral wars, such as the Korean War, Vietnam War, and Afghan War.

• These conflicts involved multiple states but were characterized by intra-state dynamics with foreign interventions.

Mutations in Warfare since the 1990s

This section discusses significant changes in warfare since the 1990s.

• After the end of the Cold War, there have been notable mutations in warfare strategies.

• Mechanically applying Clausewitz's model becomes increasingly challenging.

• New forms of warfare emerged that combine intra-state and inter-state elements.

• Wars became more irregular and asymmetrical, with interventions from external powers defending their interests.

• Notable examples include conflicts in Africa and the Middle East.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Clausewitz's model of conventional war still holds relevance for conflicts up until the 20th century. However, with significant transformations in warfare since then, including ideological competitions and irregular conflicts, its application becomes less straightforward. Understanding these mutations is crucial for comprehending contemporary conflicts.

Overview of Conflicts since 1990

This section provides an overview of conflicts that have occurred since 1990, including independence conflicts, wars in Chechnya and the former Yugoslavia, and the "decade of chaos" in Africa with civil wars in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Algeria, Somalia, and the Rwandan genocide.

Conflicts in the 1990s

• Independence conflicts and wars in Chechnya and the former Yugoslavia marked this period.

• The "decade of chaos" in Africa saw civil wars in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Algeria, Somalia, and the Rwandan genocide.

Rise of Islamist Terrorism

This section discusses the rise of Islamist terrorism as a significant element on the international political stage. It highlights the impact of the September 11 attacks and subsequent US-led war on terrorism.

Impact of September 11 Attacks

• The September 11 attacks marked a major turning point in global conflict dynamics.

• The United States declared war on terrorism and formed an international coalition to fight against Al-Qaeda.

• The US-led coalition waged war in Afghanistan (2001) to dismantle Al-Qaeda and later invaded Iraq (2003).

Changing Nature of Warfare

This section explores how warfare has evolved since the 1990s. It discusses changes in actors involved, shifting geopolitical dynamics, and new means employed during conflicts.

Shift from Inter-State to Intra-State Conflicts

• There has been a decline in inter-state wars while intra-state conflicts have become more prevalent.

• Non-state actors such as rebel groups, criminals, terrorists, cartels, militias have emerged as key players alongside states.

Transnationalization of Conflict

• Conflict objectives have become transnational rather than solely national.

• Islamist terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda and ISIS pursue ideological goals globally, while cartels engage in economic warfare across borders.

Changing Means of Warfare

• New means of warfare have emerged, including the use of private military companies (PMCs) by states (e.g., Blackwater).

• Technological advancements, such as drones, have transformed the battlefield and enabled remote warfare.

Impact of Irregular and Asymmetric Conflicts

This section focuses on the irregular and asymmetric nature of conflicts, with a specific emphasis on Islamist terrorism. It highlights Al-Qaeda and ISIS as prominent examples.

Non-State Actors in Modern Conflicts

• Non-state actors like Islamist terrorist groups (e.g., Al-Qaeda, ISIS) play a significant role in contemporary conflicts.

• Private military companies (PMCs), such as Blackwater, are hired by states to provide troops for war efforts.

Transnational Objectives

• Conflict objectives extend beyond national borders due to the decline of inter-state wars.

• Islamist terrorist organizations pursue ideological goals globally, while cartels engage in cross-border conflicts for economic purposes.

Evolution of Warfare since 1990

This section summarizes how warfare has evolved since 1990. It highlights changes in actors involved, shifting geopolitical dynamics, new means employed during conflicts, and the impact of technology and media.

Key Changes in Warfare

• Actors involved in conflicts have shifted from primarily states to non-state actors like rebel groups, terrorists, militias.

• Conflict objectives have become transnational rather than solely national.

• New means of warfare include the use of private military companies (PMCs) by states and technological advancements like drones.

Impact of Technology and Media

• Technological advancements, such as nuclear weapons and drones, have transformed the nature of warfare.

• The increasing use of the internet and social media has amplified the impact of conflicts, allowing for global dissemination of information and propaganda.

The transcript provided is in French.

Understanding Irregular Warfare and Asymmetric Conflicts

This section discusses the concept of irregular warfare and asymmetric conflicts in the context of Islamist terrorist organizations. It highlights their transnational nature, disregard for state borders, use of violent means, and exploitation of weaknesses in more powerful actors.

Irregular Warfare and Transnationalism

• Islamist terrorist organizations, such as Al-Qaeda, are transnational and operate outside traditional state boundaries.

• They advocate for strict adherence to Islamic principles and employ violent actions to achieve their goals.

• These groups utilize modern communication methods like the internet and media techniques to spread their message.

Asymmetric Conflicts

• Asymmetric conflicts involve actors with radically different natures and power levels.

• In these conflicts, weaker actors exploit the weaknesses of more powerful actors.

• The asymmetry is evident in terms of resources used; for example, the 9/11 attack cost Al-Qaeda around $500,000 but caused over $120 billion in damages for the United States.

• Ethical differences also exist as terrorists employ strategies contrary to those followed by states combating them.

Challenges Faced by State Actors

• State actors often find themselves at a disadvantage due to the irregular tactics employed by terrorist groups.

• They may resort to practices that violate international laws or ethical standards, such as torture or operating detention centers like Guantanamo Bay.

• The media coverage of these acts can turn public opinion against states engaging in asymmetric conflicts.

Characteristics of Asymmetric Conflicts

• Irregular actors operate in network structures while state actors need to control specific territories.

• Irregular actors can carry out targeted attacks and retreat quickly, while state actors must disperse their forces across multiple areas.

• Asymmetric conflicts involve regular (state) armies facing off against irregular forces that do not conform to traditional models of warfare.

Applying the Clausewitzian Model to Islamist Terrorism

This section explores the applicability of Carl von Clausewitz's model to Islamist terrorism. While the entire model may not apply, certain elements and concepts can still be relevant in understanding contemporary conflicts.

Limitations of the Clausewitzian Model

• The traditional Clausewitzian model of warfare may not fully apply to contemporary conflicts.

• However, some elements and concepts within the model can still be useful in analyzing these conflicts.

Political Dimension and State Structure

• Contemporary conflicts related to terrorism retain a significant political dimension.

• Power dynamics and state structures remain central to these conflicts.

• The attempt by ISIS (Daesh) to establish a proto-state in Syria and Iraq exemplifies this connection.

Elements of War Absolute and Extreme Violence

• Islamist terrorism can align with the concept of absolute war, aiming for annihilation rather than purely political objectives.

• Both terrorists and states combating them may resort to extreme violence without limits.

Rethinking Contemporary Conflicts

• The historical transition from "real war" to "absolute war" challenges the sufficiency of Clausewitz's theory.

• A more contemporary political perspective, such as Bertrand Bady's concept of warrior societies, may offer insights into understanding modern conflicts.

• These societies are characterized by pervasive violence that permeates all aspects of social life and internationalizes conflict.

Societies at War: A Contemporary Perspective

This section introduces the concept of "warrior societies" proposed by Bertrand Bady as an alternative framework for understanding contemporary conflicts. It emphasizes how violence becomes ingrained in society and extends beyond traditional notions of warfare.

Warrior Societies vs. Warring Societies

• Bertrand Bady suggests that we are witnessing the emergence of warrior societies rather than societies engaged in war.

• Violence becomes deeply embedded in these societies, affecting all aspects of social life.

• The notion of war becomes diffuse and challenging to define, blurring the lines between terrorism and traditional warfare.

Questioning the Notion of War

• The classification of terrorism as a form of war is debatable.

• The distinction between being "at war" and not being "at war" is subjective, with different perspectives from governments and non-state actors.

Conclusion

The transcript provides insights into irregular warfare, asymmetric conflicts, and the applicability of traditional models like Clausewitz's theory to contemporary conflicts. It introduces the concept of warrior societies as an alternative framework for understanding modern conflicts characterized by pervasive violence.