Thomas Gomart is a respected voice on international issues. Since 2019, the director of Ifri (French Institute of International Relations) has published no less than four books which recount the disruption of the world. But in recent months, when he goes to meet bosses, the head of the think tank has gotten into the habit of reading them another work: the National Strategic Review (RNS), unveiled last July by the government, which lays out the threats targeting France.
Thomas Gomart then points to article 7 of the introduction. The latter poses the “ particularly high risk of a major high-intensity war outside the national territory in Europe, which would involve France and its particularly European allies, by 2030, and would see our territory targeted at the same time by massive hybrid actions ».
Clearly, the central scenario is that of a war with Russia within 4 years on European soil in which the French army would be involved, with serious consequences (sabotage, cyberattacks, disinformation actions, etc.) on national soil.
Dissonance
« When I read this, it’s not uncommon for people to make me repeat “, smiles Thomas Gomart. A recurring situation from which he learned: “ Today, I see a strong gap between what the strategic and military community thinks and what the business world says about the evolution of the world. »
In fact, there is something of a dissonance. All over the planet, the sounds of boots echo. The latest report from the IMF (International Monetary Fund), published in mid-April, is concerned about the increase in wars. But have French business leaders taken the measure?
[…]
This contrasts with part of the Old Continent. In the Netherlands and the Baltic States, telecoms operators are working together to protect data centers in the event of missile attacks.
[…]
« Globalization of airports »
If geopolitics is back, the scenario of a major conflict nevertheless remains in the shadows. How can we understand this in-between? The reason is primarily psychological – it is never easy to bring about the end of a world.
[…]
This is also the observation made by Thomas Gomart: “ Many have experienced what I call airport globalization. “In a secure Europe, it was tempting to believe the doxa disseminated in the corridors of Davos.
« An entire prospective literature was content to extend major global trends, in a disembodied, partial and partial manner, putting aside ideological or religious questions “, summarizes the director of Ifri. In this collective imagination, Russia should not invade Ukraine because that was not its “interest”…
Companies trying to remain neutral
The temptation to “business as usual” is all the greater as multinationals have demonstrated, in recent years, a great capacity for resilience in the face of multiple crises, by diversifying their supplies and their locations on all continents.
Cybersecurity – which appears at the top of the list on the risk mapping carried out every year by large groups – is also the subject of substantial investments.
[…]
In a country which has seen the erosion of its distant tradition of hybridization between great servants of the State and captains of industry, cultural shock is therefore inevitable with the Army. The presence of soldiers in company headquarters remains limited.
[…]
> Read the entire article on the Echos website.
Â
