A-Infos (en) France, OCL CA #357 - Militarization of minds and technologization of wars (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

In the context of the prominence of war rhetoric and the supposed need 
to rearm, we wanted to analyze what is happening in order to better 
resist it. Therefore, in the following pages, you will find articles 
offering different perspectives on this topic, but to begin, here are 
the reflections that emerged from our discussion. ---- On July 11th, the 
Chief of the Defence Staff, Thierry Burkhard, who has been developing 
his personal theories on war for several years, made a controversial 
statement. Not only did he clearly identify an enemy (Russia), but he 
also claimed that Putin had declared France to be his "main adversary in 
Europe." Journalists expressed doubts about this quote. Research 
conducted by journalists (as well as by AI!) found no trace of it. It 
seems that Macron pressured the Chief of the Defence Staff to make this 
statement in order to "raise awareness among the French of the 
seriousness of the threats facing France." Burkhard's persistence in 
maintaining his statement led to his dismissal.
Burkhard was replaced by Thierry Mandon, who had been the President's 
Chief of Staff. In November, still amid fears of war against Russia, 
Mandon declared that France must "accept losing its children," sparking 
further controversy. The government is backtracking, claiming that "our 
children will not go to fight and die in Ukraine," but that this 
statement is intended to awaken the nation to the risks posed by Russia 
in the medium term (2030).
At the same time, it is becoming clear that wars are increasingly being 
waged using innovative technologies (even if the Russo-Ukrainian 
conflict also contains archaic aspects reminiscent of World War I), or 
at least, technologies that are digitizing large parts of the conflict.
The cost of the new technologies being developed (drones, the use of AI 
for "autonomous weapons," hypersonic weapons, lasers, cognitive warfare, 
etc.) is enormous. By increasing the financialization of conflicts (to 
develop and finance computerized weapons), it will certainly reduce 
their operational cost (the number of soldiers actually on the front 
lines that need to be maintained).

What are the aims of speeches about war?
Macron and his cronies love warlike rhetoric. We all remember the "We 
are at war" of 2020 against the COVID-19 virus. But this was nothing 
new. Among candidate Macron's 100 promises in 2017 was the pledge to 
raise the defense budget to 2% of GDP by 2025 (1). The long Sorbonne 
speech (2) focused on Europe, but was full of this warlike rhetoric: "We 
are the heirs of two cataclysms that should have plunged our Europe into 
darkness, those of the last century, the two world wars," and promises 
of rearmament: "Europe's capacity for autonomous action," "European 
Defense; permanent structured cooperation," "European Defense Fund to 
finance our capabilities and our research."
The culmination was reached in January 2024 (3) with the development of 
the theme of rearmament: civic rearmament, experimentation with a 
"single uniform" (4) in schools, strengthening of border controls, the 
fight against incivility, drugs, and radical Islam... He then continued 
on the economic front: "we must accelerate in academic, scientific, 
technological, industrial, and agricultural rearmament" (5). This 
discourse then evoked the revival of nuclear power, then demographic 
rearmament, before concluding with a call for national mobilization.
So, what is the purpose of the current discourse on the need to 
strengthen the military capabilities of France and Europe?
Even if Macron often engages in superficial rhetoric, playing with 
words, and posturing, he is also capable of having his political choices 
implemented by the various governments. This can be seen in the increase 
in the military budget, the strengthening of the personnel and resources 
of the security forces, but also in the support for the war industries. 
Moreover, the economic interests of the military-industrial sector enjoy 
consensus across most of the French political spectrum.
Beyond the capitalist stimulus, do these discourses strengthen national 
sentiment and support for militaristic projects? This type of discourse 
only works for people who already hold nationalist convictions and favor 
the established order, therefore essentially those on the right and far 
right. 6. The real question is the amount of money available and ready 
to finance the military: the more resources they have to carry out their 
policies, the more we can speak of militarization.

Propaganda to society in general
Isn't the emphasis on the risk of soldiers losing their lives a way of 
making future wars increasingly automated more palatable... while 
simultaneously enabling the massacre of thousands of civilians through 
their new form?
France is still far from having the capacity to rebuild a militarized 
population, a mass military service, not only in terms of soldier 
recruitment, but especially in terms of infrastructure (barracks), the 
quantity of weapons, and the command staff.7
The discourse of remilitarizing society, even by brandishing the image 
of the Russian ogre, fails to convince the population. This is all the 
more true given how much mentalities have changed, and that giving one's 
child's life to defend France would not be seen by most people as an 
honor, but solely as a painful experience.
Fortunately for those who govern us, military power is no longer 
measured solely by the number of armed forces one can field. It is 
measured primarily by cutting-edge equipment. And Macron's boasts are 
more likely aimed at potential enemies.

Propaganda aimed at youth
The SNU (Universal National Service) has been dead and buried since 
January 1st of this year, and no one will miss it, given the abuses that 
occurred within it. To attract young people, it is being replaced by a 
voluntary military service (SMV) which will primarily focus, in addition 
to minimal training in some military skills, on professional integration 
and obtaining a driver's license. For those without qualifications, the 
compensation will be EUR345 per month (8). For young people with a 
vocational certificate (CAP) or other diploma, the SMV compensation is 
better: EUR745 per month, renewable for up to 48 months (9).
Regarding the militarization of minds, in addition to the media, there 
is a strong propaganda offensive targeting middle and high school 
students. This often takes the form of career exploration (military, 
security, even prison service). There are also, under the guidance of 
history and geography teachers or physical education teachers, days 
dedicated to military service in middle and high schools, and even 
year-long group training programs to simulate enlistment. This can begin 
with first aid training, extend to a visit to a fire station, and then 
lead to the gendarmerie, private security, the army, and even an 
exploration of careers in the prison service. Obviously, this propaganda 
only presents the positive aspects of enlistment, which is sold to them 
as a path to self-fulfillment.
Young people aren't stupid; meeting soldiers doesn't mean they'll join 
the army. Those who do enlist do so for practical reasons: funding for a 
driver's license, a salary, and the opportunity to learn a trade.
Another way to attract young people is to capitalize on their interest 
in new technologies, virtual piloting of vehicles, and video games. 
Antho: an example of the gamification of warfare; in Ukraine, teenagers 
are learning to pilot virtual combat drones at a training center in 
Lviv. (10)

Militarization of minds
Are current ways of thinking, the development of AI, and technical 
reasoning factors conducive to militarization? For a mind to be 
militarized, it must be conceived as a technology and be open to 
modification. A parallel evolution is occurring: the human brain is 
increasingly viewed as a machine within which scientists can intervene; 
artificial intelligence networks are compared to neural networks.
Technology is becoming increasingly abstract. We are in the virtual 
realm, more subject to technology. Therefore, we are now encountering a 
new parameter: the notion of strategy is the game. There is a 
convergence between strategic paradigms, the technological paradigm, and 
the gamification of war.
High school students experience uncertainty as anxiety-provoking, with 
increasingly serious psychological repercussions. The belief in 
techno-solutionism also generates a panic-stricken fear of failure. The 
more techno-solutionism functions, the more it increases the feeling of 
anxiety in the face of the indeterminate. This leads to 
psychopathological effects: anxiety, stress, panic, even among the 
highest-achieving students.
Fortunately, we are full of people with doubts and reasoning abilities. 
And we hope to increase the number of people resisting this 
technological pressure.

The reality of current conflicts
The technologization of warfare does not prevent the continuation of 
military barbarity. On the one hand, archaic forms of warfare persist in 
certain places, whether in the trenches of some areas of the 
Russo-Ukrainian conflict, or in militia wars like those in Sudan or 
eastern DRC.
On the other hand, what the technologization of warfare produces is 
better targeting of both strategic locations and human victims. Israel 
is capable of destroying specific infrastructure, assassinating a doctor 
or a journalist and their family, and razing a neighborhood.
New technologies are also used in the control and targeting of 
populations, especially in cases of cultural conflict (Uyghurs), 
anti-immigrant repression (USA), or popular uprisings (Iran).
There can be a discrepancy between technical and military capabilities: 
French military equipment is performing well, if sales figures are 
anything to go by. But not our politicians: France was ousted from 
Africa. The war in Mali demonstrated the French army's technical 
capabilities, while failing operationally.

Economic interests?
What economic interests are at stake in the development of technological 
warfare industries?
Is the next war being prepared for us intended to revive the capitalist 
economy through a technological boom, just as the First World War fueled 
the steel boom? The objective of a war isn't necessarily to win, but to 
prolong it, like the First World War...
Another aim of war is the appropriation of wealth: for example, the 
mineral wealth of Ukraine. And this is where certain economic interests 
can clash: Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, French uranium 
still comes primarily from Kazakhstan and is still enriched in Siberia: 
this doesn't sit well with a major Russian enemy. We remain dependent on 
Russia.
And after wars, GDP soars thanks to reconstruction. Economic recovery 
through military means would be possible, unless we buy the equipment 
from China (textiles, for example). But we're already seeing the 
militarization of industry: our strength lies in arms production, which 
is certainly different from maintaining troops. France is the world's 
second-largest arms exporter. Our economy is already militarized, and 
that has a significant impact.

Link between civilian and military technologies
The development of the first drones 30 years ago was for combating crime 
in the suburbs. So, for "domestic warfare." (11) Drones are a more 
"democratic" technology than military aviation. They are therefore 
easier to use and attract more people. There has been a significant 
increase in the use of these devices in warfare. This does not prevent 
the prosperity of large companies in the war industry: Airbus, Safran, 
Thales...
A whole segment of industry can be used interchangeably for civilian or 
military purposes. There is no longer a clear technological boundary 
between civilian and military technology. This seems different from a 
century ago, when there was indeed a technological gap between what was 
available in society and military technologies. An example of mineral 
products that are currently in high demand: tungsten is used militarily 
to harden the warheads of shells, but it is also used in the vibrators 
of mobile phones. Workers who used to work for the military knew this; 
today they don't. When you produce a chip, you don't know if it ends up 
in a combat drone or a drone used to spy on the neighborhood. 
Technological advancements make participation in war less tangible.

As long as we can only live by seeking the best deal,
as long as we say "you or me" and not "you and me,"
as long as it's not about progressing, but about getting ahead of others,
as long as there will be war.
As long as capitalism exists,
as long as war will exist.
Berthold Brecht , The Arts and Revolution

What should be denounced, what should be prioritized, and how?
The choice of war as a means of resolving conflicts by reducing the 
enemy (to nothing/defeat) in order to impose one's views is conditioned 
by the material conditions that govern the economy. War is no more 
medieval than a vendetta; it is simply one of the possible expressions 
of conflict resolution, chosen particularly in the presence of states. (12)
To accurately denounce all this militarism, we must avoid the pitfall of 
traditional antimilitarism attached to representations of the military 
world that are no longer current because France can no longer afford to 
provide military service for all young people.
With regard to mines and certain companies, how can we counter the CGT's 
discourse on the necessity of economic activity to preserve employment? 
People don't just want work; they want an income, but also activity and 
participation in a community. To change their minds, we would have to 
find something else to offer them. Concrete requests for career change 
are rare. The director of a laboratory in Vienne raised the question of 
taking on another arms contract with MBDA (13). This laboratory already 
works with SNECMA and Airbus. He asked the staff what they wanted to do. 
The majority vote was not to take on any other contracts in these 
areas... This is already a form of resistance.
There are a few examples of struggles that, through opposition to a 
project, have a discourse on war: the tungsten mine in Ariège, the chip 
project with STMicroelectronics... The most we can do is explain what 
the components produced are used for. We must raise awareness that 
chips, computers, etc., allow us to wage war abroad while simultaneously 
maintaining control here. The fight against STMicroelectronics has a 
certain effectiveness. There is a reversal of the narrative: What is the 
purpose of this factory? What does it consume? And above all, 
disseminate this information locally. It's the same with mines: we need 
to inform people about how what is extracted from them is used. One of 
the essential points for ST-Micro has been the protection of water.

In the context of wars, it's also important to provide information. We 
are antimilitarists, not pacifists: we are against the social 
consequences of wars, whereas pacifism focuses more on moral principles. 
Antimilitarism is against the capitalist and military system.
Given the nature of recent wars, denouncing the pervasive influence of 
new technologies on all aspects of society seems more relevant than 
limiting ourselves to criticizing only the development of purely 
military technologies.

Summary and additional information:
AD, Limoges

Notes
1 The promise was not only kept but exceeded as early as 2021.
2 September 26, 2017.
3 Long press conference of January 16, 2024.
4 Euphemism for "uniform."
5 Knowledge and science having only economic purposes.
6 But the project of a European armed force does not convince the far right.
7 In 1996, on the eve of the abolition of conscription, there were 
approximately 600,000 career soldiers, nearly half of whom were used to 
supervise conscripts. There are approximately 200,000 today.
8 A bit meager compared to the EUR561.88 offered by the Local Missions 
for a Youth Commitment Contract (replacing the "Youth Guarantee").
9 But who would want to commit for 4 years at this rate when the basic 
soldier receives EUR1200 including room and board?
10. Fulfilling what science fiction writer Orson Scott Card imagined in 
his 1985 novel Ender's Game.
11. See Mathieu Rigouste's *Police Domination*.
12. See in this issue the presentation of Christophe Darmangeat's book, 
*Casus Belli*.
13. European leader in missile manufacturing.

http://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4628
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en