With their methodology and their destructive effects, comparable to those of acts of war, the new forms of terrorism are often categorised as asymmetric threats, as they tend to catch unawares peacetime security systems, usually not designed to counter activity on such a scale, as also military defence systems, whose use is constrained by the peacetime legal framework. France’s White Paper on defence and national security takes these new forms of threat into account, and sets out recommendations to limit their effects, if they cannot be prevented entirely. Amongst the potential targets that can be categorised as ‘high value’ are those installations, such as military nuclear deterrent systems, that present major environmental risk in the event of so-called ‘disproportionate aggression’. If we are not on guard, the new asymmetric threats can circumvent these systems, for the most part designed to meet threats of a military nature.
Deterrence, Asymmetry and Circumvention
The media have not been found wanting in drawing attention to the intentions of emerging countries (North Korea, Iran) to acquire a nuclear deterrent capability, applying the ‘nuclear equalising potential’, alongside those states not formally recognised as such but nonetheless in possession of nuclear weapons (India, Pakistan, Israel). In spite of all the efforts to achieve non-proliferation, and the noble disarmament intentions written into the preambles of every international treaty, military nuclear capability would seem to be more than ever in the headlines, and destined to remain there.
At the same time, the last 20 years have been marked by completely new developments in the international situation, with the end of the Cold War and the emergence of a new balance of power and new forms of massive destruction (hyperterrorism), linked, many believe, to a resurgence of religious fanaticism, like Islamic fundamentalism. These new forms of aggression, not state-controlled, notably the 9/11 attacks, are characterised by actions that, in peacetime, have effects that are comparable to those of a wartime situation. They are categorised as asymmetric, inasmuch as they ignore international agreements governing the conduct of war and human rights, and are directed at targets identified as vulnerable, and generally civilian. By circumventing military defence systems they can, if we are not on our guard, radically alter the parameters of nuclear deterrence as we have until now understood them.
It would be useful, at this point, to recall certain basic principles and examine the impact of the new threats.
Il reste 91 % de l'article à lire
