Modern societies seem to be threatened by dangers which are more numerous, varied and greater in scope than ever. Modern man is both better informed and more aware of the risks that surround him. Paradoxically, at the same time that risky behaviour multiplies, there seems to be a refusal to accept its consequences. Post-modern societies continually reduce the threshold of acceptable risk, to the point that sociologists can now talk about what they term ‘non-risk societies’.⁽¹⁾ Nevertheless, the natural and physical sciences show us that movement, action or growth always bring with them chance, friction or risk. The human, economic and social sciences bear this out. For students of language, finally, the etymological derivation of the word ‘peace’ is a period of stability (from the Latin pangere, to settle), while war is the time of movement, of danger and of individual and collective risks.

Our Armed Forces are the product of a society which misunderstands and rejects the concept of risk. It remains a fact, however, that danger is a constant in military life and determines military action. The relationship of modern armies with the concept of risk is rendered more complex, navigating between the standpoints of a legitimate appreciation of what it implies, and its outright rejection.

Recent conflicts remind us of the need to rediscover what risk really means, and to place it in its proper context in operations.