People often try to convince us that we have a weak and small country. As such, in this brutal world we do not possess the perspective of insuring our independent and self-sufficient existence. This opinion gives rise to a natural question, may the weak can, if not triumphant, at least gain an advantageous situation regarding to the external aggressive environment? More precisely, is it possible that the weak party can by choosing an advantageous situation assure for itself the final triumph? I understand that the example which I hereunder will represent will sound weird or disputable for many emotional and ambitious supporters, but my approach is based upon a single fact. In the specific described case, in objective situation, the country in a weak position could on one hand bear minimal loss, on the other become a winner. The word is about France which left the WWII arena defeated, but became a full member of the winning countries at war and a permanent member of UN Security Council. In the last world war the history of France’s military participation lasted very short, only a few months. After several defeats the french authorities agreed to the german occupation of the country, but the political and military activists who did not accept that determination left the country and settled in the french north-african colonial territories, where they started to cooperate with the british, then with the americans. This split of the elite allowed for the country to establish friendly and stable relations with both fighting camps, the collaborationists with the germans and the Gaullists with the anti-Hitler coalition states. It was obvious that this was not a french war, it was a war between the germans and the anglo-saxons for global dominance and the french did not have the perspective of winning that war for their own interests. The only issue that they should deal with was to prevent the country from destruction and their appearance next to the winner as an ally. The issue got a marvelous solution. France got out of the war, could find common grounds with the fighting states and at the decisive moment became one of the winning states, even the liberation of Paris by the Leclerc tanks sounded like a beautiful performance mainly because they already had an agreement with the germans in handing over the city without unnecessary losses. Due to this behavior, France has not only avoided from destruction and great human loss during the war, but in the post-war period it could gain the status of a global power. For comparison we can mention, as an active and direct participant to the WWI France has lost only 1.200.000 people of its military and in result of the above described approach, during WWII its losses amounted around 340.000 people, of which the 1.250 were the sailors serving in the destructed french afloat, who were killed as a result of a british attack. In 1940 the french population was 41.000.000 and Armenia’s was 1.320.000. On the battlefield 200.000 armenian soldiers were killed. This huge imbalance between the inhabitants and human losses of France and Armenia was also partially due to France’s political choice. Now the time is approaching again for a similar choice.
Posted on: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 08:38:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015