Neither rule of law, nor law of the jungle: Geopolitics and the common good

Monday, March 23 post drafted by Pierre de Lauzun, founding member and board member of Geopragma.

This is the title of a book I have just published by Boleine editions. What is it about? In the spirit of Geopragma, realistic geopolitics, it is about seeing how, in the current context, a political and strategic line can be positioned that fully takes into account the reality of international relations, but without abandoning the idea that if one chooses a policy, it is for the greater good, thus not disregarding the concern for what can be called the common good. It is necessary to put these two concerns into perspective.

Today more than ever, the international stage is made up of multiple actors or powers, above which there is no regulating power. Their relations are generally relatively peaceful, but occasionally one or the other resorts to force to impose its views. Faced with this, there is usually no other solution than to put up a force. This is where strategic thinking comes in. It focuses on the opposition of two wills fighting to prevail, possibly through the destruction of opposing forces. But the result of the confrontation of these reasonably intelligent wills, pursuing opposing goals, is intrinsically unpredictable. It is a major element of the indeterminacy of the future, and therefore an intellectual scandal.

To this scandal is added an ethical scandal: how to seek the common good when, on one hand, we do not really know what will result from our actions, and on the other hand we only advance by causing a certain harm, both to others and to ourselves? This question will not be answered by parachuting down and abstractly passing moral judgments a priori. It is necessary to analyze the formal logic of strategy, examine the effective conditions of its exercise in the real world, and finally see if morally satisfactory lines of conduct can be discerned. Our world is undergoing significant changes, with some powers on the rise and others in decline, and less regulated. Assessing the potential of each is changing and uncertain. Relying on law is nice, but unreliable. Trusting in one’s own strength is often misleading. Ethical conduct remains possible. But it must be based on a realistic analysis, and on a case-by-case search for the greatest good that appears possible at the time.

Hence the structure of this book, which starts from the paradoxical logic of strategy, and continues on the particular problem of our world, both multipolar and with very unequal actors, both militarily and economically. It then addresses misleading or partial solutions such as the trap of ideology, especially Western, or the simplistic idea of clashes of civilizations. It then raises the question of seeking the common good in a divided and struggling world, where resorting to the law and the UN proves to be fairly limited in effectiveness, not to mention the utopia of a generalization of Western-style democracy.

It is then confirmed that the concern for this common good is ultimately the responsibility of each actor, essentially states, based on an educated moral judgment, case by case, based on principles, but taking into account the reality of multiple, constantly changing forces. The real good is at this price.