lemonde.fr
Encel: Global Conflict Unlikely Despite Regional Wars
Frédéric Encel's new book, "La guerre mondiale n'aura pas lieu," argues against the likelihood of a global conflict, citing the failure of the 'clash of civilizations' theory, the rarity of self-destructive regimes, and the significant impact of nuclear deterrence.
- What are the key geopolitical reasons cited by Frédéric Encel that make a large-scale global conflict unlikely, despite current regional conflicts?
- In his new book, Frédéric Encel refutes the notion of an imminent global conflict, arguing that while wars will continue, the risk of a widespread war is minimal. He debunks the "clash of civilizations" theory, highlighting that civilizations have never alone started wars, and that even the opposition between democracies and authoritarian regimes is just one factor among many in international power dynamics. He also points to the rarity of regimes "committing suicide", with the Third Reich and ISIS as exceptions.
- How does Encel's analysis of historical regime behavior and the role of nuclear deterrence challenge prevailing narratives of inevitable global conflict?
- Encel's analysis challenges the apocalyptic predictions surrounding current conflicts. He emphasizes that historically, few regimes have self-destructed, significantly reducing the risk of a major war. Furthermore, he argues that nuclear deterrence drastically alters the equation, limiting the risk of open conflict between nuclear powers. The "Thucydides Trap", suggesting conflict between dominant powers (US and China), is deemed unlikely by Encel.
- What are the potential limitations or counterarguments to Encel's optimistic assessment, and what factors could potentially alter the current geopolitical landscape?
- Encel's perspective suggests a more nuanced understanding of geopolitical risks. By deconstructing prevailing theories like the "clash of civilizations" and the "Thucydides Trap", he highlights the limited likelihood of a global conflict. His focus on historical patterns and the impact of nuclear deterrence suggests that while localized conflicts might persist, the risk of a large-scale war remains exceptionally low.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the reasons for optimism, presenting the author's perspective as a counterpoint to a perceived 'apocalyptic' view. The headline itself, which suggests that a world war will not occur, sets an optimistic tone. The focus on deconstructing Huntington's 'clash of civilizations' theory also steers the narrative towards a more peaceful outlook, potentially downplaying other contributing factors to conflict.
Language Bias
While largely neutral in tone, the article uses phrases like 'inepte' (inept) and 'posture apocalyptique' (apocalyptic posture) which are somewhat loaded and could be substituted with more neutral terms. The repeated emphasis on 'hope' and 'optimism' subtly influences the reader toward the author's viewpoint. More balanced language could be used, presenting different viewpoints more equally.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the geopolitical reasons for optimism, potentially omitting counterarguments or perspectives that highlight the risks of global conflict. While acknowledging some exceptions (Nazi Germany and ISIS), it doesn't delve into the complexities of these exceptions or explore other potential scenarios that might increase the risk of conflict. The piece might benefit from including perspectives that emphasize the persistent threats to peace, such as climate change, resource scarcity, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic eitheor framing by contrasting a pessimistic view of imminent global conflict with an optimistic view based on geopolitical factors. It doesn't fully explore the complexities and nuances of the current international landscape, which is a mix of cooperation and conflict. The potential for escalation of regional conflicts is minimized.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article challenges the notion of an impending global conflict, offering a counter-narrative that emphasizes the low probability of a large-scale war despite ongoing regional conflicts. It analyzes geopolitical factors such as the obsolescence of the "clash of civilizations" theory and the strong deterrent effect of nuclear weapons, suggesting that these factors contribute to maintaining international peace and security. The analysis directly relates to SDG 16, which aims to promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.