For the first dictionary of the French Academy, the war is a “quarrel” or a “ different between two Princes, between two Sovereign states, which continues with the way of the weapons ”.
La war is an armed conflict, opposing at least two organized social groups. It results thus in armed combat, more or less devastators, and implies directly or indirectly thirds. It thus qualifies all the conflicts, having for main features, the physical force, the Armes, the Tactique, the Stratégie or the Mort of some of its participants (Soldat S, members of MLN, resistant, Franc-tireur etc) or of third (civil, employees and members of the Association S of humanitarian Aid, etc).
The common direction wants that the war is as old as humanity, but so of the indices let think that the armed conflicts are very old, it also seems that civilizations or companies knew to live a long time without war, or with shows or strategies of avoidance.
Du myth of the paradisiac and nonviolent company of Tahiti, with the analyzes of the life in the Gothul S at the Muria S, while passing by the nonviolent strategies of Gandhi, with some indices which let think that the frequent wars between tribes of Amerindians of the south date especially from the arrival of the Conquistador S, while being based on the comparative study of the strategies of payment of conflicts at the Chimpanzé and the Bonobo, the direction of the conflict and its solution is still a little explored field of research.
Certains estimates that at the Human one, the war is an extreme form of Communication, a “trade” in its significance major or exact of pooling, division and exchange (here of Agressivité), in the relation between Crise and conflict, the economic war being able then, under an appearance more socially and éthiquement acceptable, to satisfy other appetites of capacities that those which animated the authors of the ethnic wars, religions, class, etc the weapons of the new conflicts would be then the capacity to find and handle the money, the influence and information.
In the context of the International law the belligerents often replace the term war by armed conflict , great operation of police force , fight against the Terrorisme , pacification , etc
All the wars leave after-effects, sociopsychologic, economic and environmental which often constitute the germ or closes of a forthcoming war, producing a vicious circle maintained by hatred, nonthe respect, the fear of the other or the future, and the difficulty of negotiating.
Conflict and metaphors in the animal worldMany a animal Grégaire S has behaviors of aggression which, when they are expressed collectively, can evoke the war. They are generally territorial animals which have behaviors also sometimes evoking the negotiation. Thus some Insecte S social (Ant S, Termite S, etc) alive in colonies seem to form true armies, laying out individuals whom we name " soldats" charged with defending the colony. The martial arts in Asia took as a starting point much the attitudes and means of defense of the animals.
Toute anthropomorphic vision seems however inappropriate; the animals in question do not seem to develop planned strategies of attack and being able, but rather to obey simple stimuli of defense and extension of their colonies. Moreover, the durable feeling of revenge, which has at the Man maintained the wars lasting of the centuries or decades seems to them unknown.
TheoriesAccording to Theodore Funck-Brentano and Albert Sorel, “the war bursts when the States do not have any more a clear Conscience their duties, a clear intelligence their rights, an exact concept of their respective interests. They cannot arrive any more at a common agreement, they cannot any more accept the laws that the law of nations in times of peace traced to them: they are withdrawn from it. The war is the act Politique by which States, not being able to reconcile what they believe being their duties, their rights and their interests, resort to the armed struggle, and ask this fight to decide which of them being strongest will be able because of his force to impose his will on the others”. (Funck-Brentano and Sorel, Precise of the law of nations , Paris, Plon, 1900, p. 74) “When one has a hammer in the hand, all the problems become nails”
The persons in charge of the nations considered for a long time that the possibility of the wars being frequent, it was appropriate to prepare there. The preparation of these wars is generally done by the drive of one or more Armée S, and by what the media called since the Cold war the Arms race, that the formula of a theory unceasingly contradicted summarizes since thousands of years " If you want peace the guerre" prepares; . After the second world war, the states created the UNO which develops by the co-operation and the diplomacy of the strategies of preparation and maintenance of peace (with, assistance of quotas of blue helmets when the stage of the armed conflict is reached).
Since the history of the release of the India, which finished in the middle of the XX century, the Mahatma Gandhi made school near certain minority currents which think of non-violent means “” to regulate the Conflit S between Nation S. They seek to reform the ancestral reflexes of the Nation S and the Peuple S with respect to the wars.
Origins of the warIn the globality of the Anthropology, a war is the supreme form of a organized collective Agressivité , in contrast with a “general fray” where according to Rene Girard the mimetic Désir supporting would intervene a mimetic violence generalized where everyone fights against everyone, to make like everyone .
The anthropologist Marvin Harris of the Columbia University proposed a theory on the origins of the war in the not-official, tribal and village companies. The dominant ideology in our company tends to blame the individual for the war on the basis of instinct or “innate” violence supposément biological of the “human nature” (the original sin) “of death”. It is a simple and simplistic point of view which washes us of all Responsabilité in our control towards others. If the war were natural, there would not need so many efforts propaganda to draw up all and sundry with entretuer. Raising here refers so that the English names by “BASIC training” as of childhood in the family, the relationship, the school, social environment and through the most inoffensive plays and entertainments apparently, the rejection and the refusal of the other, the competition and the co-operation.
Harris indexes the four theories, according to him most common on the origin of the war:
- the war like solidarity,
- the war like play,
- the war like human nature
- the war like continuation of the policy (cf Clausewitz inter alia).
From this point of view and by covering at the same time the not-official companies and the official companies, the war appears as the form and the moment (at the same time like moment and as power struggle) of extreme violence of an organized flight whose object can be physical, imaginary or symbolic system.
The war like factor of social cohesionAs well from the point of view of the attacker as of attacked, the war seems sometimes, but provoisement, capacity to contribute to maintain or to restore the social cohesion of a group or country.
Harris does not deny this aspect of the war (those which had this experience of war and of face of “solidarity” does not forget it easily) but refutes it like origin and causes; social cohesion and solidarity can be restored by good of other means, of which the Mythe S founders ( mutos : fable, an invented history of the common ancestors and distinctive origin of the group like the Gallic ones for the French and the French for the Inhabitants of Quebec, etc), some Rite S (the culture, in the beginning, indicates the rites of the worship), the Danse S (the liturgy is the whole of the dances), the Jeu X festive (play activities), the sporting events, which are kinds of shows of war, etc.
Harris notes that in costs term/benefit, the argument of the Solidarité fails to show how and why the recourse to a fatal war and destroying is more beneficial than mortalities, morbidities and destruction due to a lower social cohesion and solidarity.
Des foreign wars, “merry and short” could be stated to divert the attention of the public of difficulties of controlling, even to avoid or delay a “ Civil war ”, by seeking the “Sacred union” intern (This attitude would be for certain rather anglosaxone). But the Histoire watch that on the contrary, a foreign war can also - in the long term - awake or strongly exacerbate the arguments partisanes. During the Second world war, the Dictatorship S hitlérienne and mussolinienne for example temporarily caused only a certain “national” consensus , which was forced by violence when the Propagande was not enough. The war can also give birth to at attacked unexpected face of resistance and solidarity, which can last only the time of the war, but confronts the attacker with new internal difficulties to justify its war.
The war like PlayHarris wants to show that people, the men especially, are high in the worship and the belief of the war like a anoblissante activity, blazing and glorious, with a substitute which is the collective competition sporting. The history shows that one can be high to take pleasure to pursue other people and to kill them, to hate them and hate them or to revolt against the results of such acts. If it is believed that the quarrelsome values are sources of the wars, then the crucial and critical problem becomes that to specify the conditions under which people are brought to develop and with révérer the war. The theory of the war as play finds its limit there. Like play activity, the play is a representation of the “theatrical” type and prepares with the war by glorifiant it and by developing it.
The war like human natureFrom the point of view of the “human nature” described by its “Impulse S” genetics, biological and/or cultural acquired, the impulse of murder could or like explain, beyond the “Death instinct” why the human one “is programmed” to kill. “Instinct”, as elsewhere “God” would be then explanatory principles pass key to justify absolutely and definitively what we do not include/understand.
The theory of the instinct of dead or Death instinct neglects (as well in the French significance “not to know” as in the English significance “not to want to know”) the bio-physico-chemical environment and the cultural, historical and social context in which slaughters and the wars take seat. The argument of the “human nature”, reincarnation of the genetic determinism of the sociobiology which as goes far as to proclaim the rape like a logical act in the interest of the “reproductive success” of the rapist, contradicts itself because war and slaughters and of all times admired and are not universally practiced by the human ones.
Moreover, there are enormous distinctions between the “laws of the war” (at various times and in various companies) and, in addition the distributed quantity of violences. The theory of universal “an instinct of murder” is insupportable even in a company in war.
The human being is of course able to become dangerously aggressive while learning how to enjoy and to be delighted by the war and the exercise by cruelty. But, “ how and when we become aggressive are rather under the control of our cultures that our genes ” writes Harris (p. 54), in the old scientific debate between the innate one and the asset (or of the genetic determinism against the cultural determinism).
The war like continuation of the policyThis theory poses that an armed conflict is “ the obvious result of an attempt at a group to protect or increase its economic prosperity, policy and social with the costs of another or other group (S) ” (Harris, p. 54). It is the definition of the imperial or official war, where the attacker would fight to raise its standard of living with the detriment of the others (the subjacent economic interests can be hidden and hidden behind and by political, racial and religious alibis). In this approach the State would exist only by its political organization - imperialist with the internal or external use - able to carry out territorial and economic fitting, wars of conquest Colonisation. This theory does not explain, according to Harris, the origin of the war in not-official, tribal and village companies.
John Foster Dulles, then Foreign Minister of President Eisenhower, declared that it was possible two to subject a country, by the force of the weapons and the control of its economy.
Jacob Bronowski - mathematician, philosopher and poet taken refuge in England and in the United States during the years 1930-40 estimated that the war was the result of the conjunction of a suitable technology and logic of plundering. Agriculture with the domestication of the animals and the plants made leave humanity the perpetual wandering. The domestication of the horse would form part then of this logic of plundering, the horse making it possible nomads to make raids at farmers fixed at their grounds, and times of the sowing and harvests and to steal the fruit of their work. Fright caused by these riders would be the source of the legend of the “Centaure”. A tradition of plundering and besides of war by riders persisted in many places and times, in Africa, America and Asia.
- Carl von Clausewitz Of the war , translation of Nicolas Waquet, Editions Shore pocket, 2006, ISBN: 2743615168 .
- Carl von Clausewitz Theory of the Combat , foreword of Thomas Lindemann, Economica (1998), ISBN: 2717837361.
- Antoine-Henri de Jomini Precise of the art of the war , Ivrea editions, 1994; wars of the Revolution , Hatchet, 1998.
Victor Davis Hanson,
Theories of the warAccording to the Prussian theorist Carl von Clausewitz (1780 - 1831): the war is the prolongation of the policy by other means. This definition joined the antiques ideas of the Chinese Civilization: the war is only one of the means to impose its will on a group or contrary resisting it. As this means is riskiest and most expensive, the most interesting victory is that which is not seen, the adversary not having not lost the face , which could be one of the definitions of the diplomacy.
By this Political continuity , the war is also an element impossible to circumvent of the human relations, and thus a thing to which it is necessary to be ready, which translates the Roman proverb : If screw pacem, para bellum (If you want peace, prepares the war), or the Aphorisme of Nicolas Machiavel: “ a foreseeable war cannot avoid, but only push back ”. One can even to consider that state of war is natural, and that it is the Paix which results from a construction, moved by greatest profit of a bad compromise that greater victory. The regulation and the treatment of the war have been one of the major subjects for the political actors and religious and for a few years by the United Nations and others international institutions and governmental organizations.
In 1933, on the initiative of the Company of the nations, Albert Einstein questioned Sigmund Freud: " Why the war? " and, at the end of a long answer, Freud concludes its mail " All that works with the development of the culture also works against the guerre" .
Théoricien S put forth the assumption that the war was also a natural need to control the human population. It is an idea which seems rather commonly divided, which would like that in spite of its “intelligence” humanity could not be controlled differently, but this theory is cancelled by at least two facts;
- the bloodiest wars even had only one very provisional and negligible impact on the human Démographie (the last world war having even caused a baby-boom ).
- When the standard of living increases, the population is stabilized, and in Europe since the period of peace (intern at least), demography was quickly stabilized.
Causes and stakes
Called upon causesIt is said sometimes that the wars have futile fundamental causes and reasons . The causes - or sometimes pretexts - of war can be inter alia :
- to conquer a territory,
- to release an occupied territory by a foreign power (Colonization, etc),
- to reach a vital resource (in particular water, outlets on the sea,…),
- to engage Domination economic (for example a reserve of Pétrole or Copper which one hopes to be made yield at an advantageous price),
- to obtain the refunding of a debt,
- to punish the non-observance of international agreements,
- to honor a treaty of alliance (concluded before or not),
- to impose a Croyance, a Religion (Marx hardly believes in this kind of explanation which according to him masks always actually material interests which do not want to be acknowledged, as the traffic of weapons for example),
- to set up one system Politique or social, presented like best,
- to obtain repair of an affront, all the more important as the capacity is personalized.
- to allow an economic revival the level of the country
Various opinions on the war
Opinion of Andre MauroisIn silences of the colonel Bramble André Maurois sees the war like as inevitable as the movements of a sleeper in his sleep: following a prolonged opposition to progress, parts of the body test concern which cumulates with the time of provisioning of resources, and the generated suffering starts a brutal attempt at reversal. After follows new calm, temporary, at the conclusion which the cycle starts again.
Opinion of Rosa Luxemburg“ the wars are a barbarian phenomenon, deeply immoral, reactionary and opposite with the interests of the people ” - Declaration in front of the court of Frankfurt, February 1914.
Some examplesA war more often has seldom a cause single, and made continuation with an accumulation of fundamental causes; the immediate cause, for example the affront, is used then as release, like the drop which makes overflow the vase .
the war is often a way of resoldering a community against a common Ennemi, to justify a strong discipline, even to acquire or preserve a glory politically necessary to a capacity wanting to be charismatic (Argentinian Junta in the Guerre of the Falklands). These reasons make the war frequent in the Dictature S and the States where the men see their certainty disturbed by a brutal political evolution (ethnic), economic or technical. It arrives however, although it is rarer, that democracies are also made the war between them (Peruvian frontier wars, for example).
the reason of a war (the group on which one wants to impose his law) is not always “opposite”, but perhaps in each camp, with the image of the Franco-German Guerre of 1870, occasion for Bismarck to seal the German unit. This interpretation was also given to the First World War by Socialiste S of each camp
When the war is particularly badly lived by the soldiers, like the First World War, the capacity accentuates the Propagande and promises (briefly) that it will be last (DER of the ders). It put an end to monarchies in all the overcome countries (three empires).
Civil warsAs in a vendetta the internal wars with a country putting at the catches part of the population against the other, are described as civil wars. Each one sees in its enemy, and even in that which would like to remain neutral, a traitor with whom it is not possible any more to cohabit and with which no territorial compromise is possible (as that would be possible with a foreign enemy). This is why the single exit considered is very often the destruction of the other and its allies real or potential (including women and children), with use of the terror, which makes these wars fatal and without thank you ( wild ). The majority of the leaders will thus not hesitate to launch out in a foreign war rather than to risk a civil war. The legal status of a civil war does not allow the foreign powers and the international institutions, like UNO to intervene, like France for the “intelligence” or Guerre of Algeria to settle the disagreements. Conversely, a foreign war is disguised in civil war to mask the foreign aggression, as France disguised its colonial reconquest in civil war with the creation of an independent Vietnamese State in 1948, during the First Guerre of Indo-China of independence and as the the United States which “helped” the République of Vietnam in fight against the Democratic republic of Vietnam during the Second War of Indo-China or Guerre of Vietnam of reunification.
It is necessary and it is simply enough to manufacture a government with its pay which requires the assistance to intervene in all legality in the interior matters of a Sovereign state.
ConventionsFollowing the First World Wars, authorities such as the UNO and its Safety advice of the United Nations sought average new means of non-violent resolution of the conflicts, resting in particular on the Polémologie and the signature and treated ratification of of peace and International conventions. But these tools remain fragile.
Les principles of the Sustainable development aims by a resource sharing, upstream and more jointly, to attenuate the tensions between groups. They however depend on goodwill and the possibilities that the capacities and the inhabitants to apply them have.
The convention of $the Hague
The Convention of $the Hague prohibits incorporation in the armies of the population of an occupied territory. The capacity Nazi thus made use of a trick: starting from August 25th, 1942, it conferred the German citizenship on a growing number of French of Alsace and the Moselle to be started with the men (In spite of us).
Conventions of Geneva of August 12th, 1949 of which the third relating one to the prisoner of war salary
right of the war (juice in bello) and war damagees
- Right of the war
- Terrorism and wars of information
- Defense and safety
- Principles of the asymmetrical war
- Civil war
- War right and its media corollary, the clean War
- revolutionary War
- Psychological warfare
- subversive War
- Holy war
- basic War intensity, or guerilla
- Cold war
- List of the wars
- Origin of the war
- economic Polémologie
- War of independence
appearance of the war to the Neolithic era
- Great battles of the History
- File wars and conflicts
- “the Art of the war” by Sun Tzu
Beats-smg: Vaina Map-bms: Perang Nds-nl: Kraig Simple: War Zh-yue: 打仗
|Random links:||Firma dominante | Launcher (astronautics) | Marine crocodile | Lagas | White Selva | Avenue de Friedland|