In the main interview of “Tout est politique,” Nathalie Saint-Cricq and Sonia Chironi welcome Jean-François Colosimo on Tuesday, April 28th. The historian of religions and director general of the Cerf editions discusses the current situation of the war in Iran and its two months of deadlock.
Sonia Chironi: Jean-François Colosimo, you mentioned that the new emperors seek the death of the West? Jean-François Colosimo: I don’t believe the West truly exists. Ultimately, I am somewhat relieved by this: Donald Trump truly highlights the fact that the United States has the same religious and fanatic construction as these new empires. Donald Trump has freed us from the illusion of the Atlantic Alliance in a way. Tapping to the West for these emperors used to mean attacking the United States and Europe. But since attacking the United States is somewhat complex, it implied attacking Europe. This rids us of a form of illusion. If we want to be independent and free, which is very important, we need to rely on ourselves and stop thinking that one day when we grow up, we will all be Americans. I believe that time is over.
Now, the cultural blindness because they did not understand that Iranians were Shiite, meaning they had a historical viewpoint that was open, waiting for the return of the hidden imam, the Mahdi, the Messiah, and hence they have a sense of martyrdom, suffering, which is a true culture for them. They also did not understand that we had to deal with Iranian leaders who all came into being in the context of the infamous Iran-Iraq war, which was always viewed in Iran as a war provoked by the West against the regime. They are all in their seventies. They all fought in the war. They were born in war and they lead a regime that is insurrectional. By this, I mean it is a regime that survives by constantly being rebellious. When you attack a regime like that with men who have nothing to lose since their lives are behind them (…) in this case, you approach it differently.
Nathalie Saint-Cricq: Does that mean you consider that we are, as democracies, disarmed because we lack the fuel that keeps others running and holding onto power? Do you think in the future we democracies, Europeans, are weak compared to the Russians, who have an iron grip on their regime, or the Chinese who don’t seek opinions, or the theocracies driven by faith we lack?
Jean-François Colosimo: All these empires were rebuilt on a totalitarian concept of religion. You see that Putin is restoring the monasteries that Stalin destroyed, Erdogan is reinstating the Muslim faith in Hagia Sophia which was a museum. As for us, we do not have this way of turning the “opium of the people” into the amphetamine of tyrants. This is what they all do.
But we still have a real problem, it is not about going to church, it is not about becoming good Catholics or good Protestants. It is about the whole issue of the foundation of human rights. Human rights exist, but to establish them, they should not only be based on the fact that it is better to have them than not. There should be a form of relationship, a form of transcendence for which one can die.
Because the question is this: The difference between them and us is that among them, there are people who are capable of dying for the ideas that we have. Look at those women in Tehran. They are willing to stand in front of guns to demand what? Life, liberty. And to be equal women. They do not want to become Californians, but they have courage. Where is ours compared to theirs?
Nathalie Saint-Cricq: I have quoted Fabien Mandon, chief of the armed forces, who was heavily criticized because he said if we were not ready to accept losing our children, or suffering economically because priorities would shift to defense production, then we are at risk.
Sonia Chironi: He said: “What we lack is the soul to accept hurting ourselves, to protect who we are. If our country fails because it is not ready to lose its children, to suffer economically because priorities will go to defense production, then we are at risk.”
Jean-François Colosimo: I think where the chief of the armed forces was right is that we no longer have that collective instinct, for the common historical being. But one would have it, for example, for their family. I think any mother would be willing to risk her life to defend her children. So at that level, it is obvious.
It is no longer obvious at the level of a shared destiny. And that is the dramatic aspect because a mother can defend her children against attackers, which is great, but when it comes from country to country when the aggressor is Russia or China or other powers, then there must be a bond, right? This bond is needed today, but it may return very quickly. I trust our youth. I think they are much more aware of the world’s dangers and much more aware of what they do not want to become – enslaved, subjugated, slaves, than what we might think.
