Diplomacy & Crisis News

Robert Farley

Aircraft Carriers, Americas

The vulnerabilities of the big carriers are real, and the U.S. needs to either remedy those problems, or consider an alternative means of delivering ordnance.

Here's What You Need to Know: Plenty of world-beating weapons quickly become obsolete.

The United States has decided to spend many billions of dollars on the CVN-78 (“Ford”) class of aircraft carriers to replace the venerable Nimitz class. The latter has served the U.S. Navy since 1975, with the last ship (USS George H. W.  Bush) entering service in 2009. The Fords could be in service, in one configuration or another, until the end of the 21st century.

Just as the U.S. government has determined to make this investment, numerous analysts have argued that the increasing lethality of anti-access/area denial systems (especially China’s, but also Russia and Iran) has made the aircraft carrier obsolete.  If so, investing in a class of ships intended to serve for 90 years might look like a colossal waste of money.

As with any difficult debate, we should take time to define our terms, and clarify the stakes. The anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) systems around the world may indeed curb the effectiveness of the Ford class, but the U.S. will still find uses for this ships.

Define Obsolete:

We need to carefully describe how we think about obsolescence. Military analysts often equates obsolescence with uselessness, especially while pursuing dollars for new gadgets, but the two words don’t mean the same thing. In every war, armies, navies, and air forces fight with old, even archaic equipment.  Built for World War II, the A-26 Invader attack aircraft served in the Vietnam War.  The USS New Jersey, declared obsolete at the end of World War II, fought off Korea, Vietnam, and Lebanon.  The A-10 “Warthog,” thought by many to be obsolete before it even flew, continues to fight in America’s wars.  For countries less well-endowed than the United States, the point hold even more strongly; all of the armies currently fighting in Syria and Libya use equipment that the U.S. considered obsolete decades ago.

The point is that even if the ships of the CVN-78 class cannot penetrate advanced A2/AD systems, they can still serve other useful purposes.  Indeed, American carriers since 1945 have entirely earned their keep on these other missions, which include strike in permissive environments, displays of national power and commitment, and relief operations.  “Obsolescence” for one kind of mission does not imply uselessness across the range of maritime military operations.

Carrier vs. A2/AD:

People have predicted the obsolescence of the aircraft carrier since the end of World War II.  The Soviets developed an elaborate system of submarines, sensors, and aircraft designed to strike US aircraft carriers.  The U.S. developed countermeasures, including the F-14 Tomcat, intended to defeat and distract the Soviet systems. As war never happened, we never had the opportunity to test the capabilities of a carrier air wing against a flight of Tu-22M “Backfire” bombers. The Soviets and the Americans worked hard against each other, countering each innovation with an ever-more-sophisticated reply.  Each iteration led to a different constellation of power and vulnerability; the bombers had the upper hand at some points, and the carriers at others.

The next generation of A2/AD capabilities will have a similarly non-linear character. While Chinese missiles might have the range and terminal maneuverability to find U.S. carriers, missile defense and electronic counter-measures might make the missiles ineffective to the point of uselessness.  Similar, improvements in anti-submarine technology could limit or eliminate the vulnerability that carriers face against undersea threats. Carriers that become “obsolete” may not stay that way.

Flexibility:

The utility of a large, flat-decked ship comes primarily from the kinds of aircraft it can carry and launch. The aircraft carrier as a concept has survived, in no small part, because aircraft carriers are good for jobs other than penetrating tightly defended A2/AD systems.  Indeed, no U.S. carrier since World War II has ever needed to directly challenge such a system. Instead (as noted above) aircraft carriers have found themselves jobs in a variety of other conditions.

The U.S. Navy has enjoyed the advantage of nearly unfettered access to enemy airspace over the past twenty-five years, and has structured its air wings accordingly. While the U.S. has been slower than many would have liked to adapt to the new array of anti-access threats, the development of fifth and sixth generation stealth aircraft, as well as the eventual procurement of long range, carrier-based strike zones, can help restore the usefulness of the CVN-78 class, even if anti-access weapons drive the carriers further out to sea.

The Final Salvo:

Plenty of world-beating weapons quickly become obsolete. The fast battleships of World War II went into reserve less than a decade after their commissioning. The early fighters and bombers of the jet age sometimes had even briefer lifespans. Aircraft carriers, in widely variant forms, have enjoyed a good, long run. They survive because aircraft have short ranges, and fixed airfields have significant military and political vulnerabilities. These two factors seem likely to persist.

However, just because flat-decked aircraft carrying ships will likely be with us does not mean that the Ford class, which emphasizes high-intensity, high technology warfare, represents an ideal investment of U.S. defense capital.  The vulnerabilities of the big carriers are real, and the U.S. needs to either remedy those problems, or consider an alternative means of delivering ordnance.

Robert Farley, a frequent contributor to TNI, is author of The Battleship Book. He serves as a Senior Lecturer at the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky. His work includes military doctrine, national security, and maritime affairs. He blogs at Lawyers, Guns and Money and Information Dissemination and The Diplomat.

This article first appeared in 2017.

Image: U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Jason Waite

Caleb Larson

Submarine Warfare,

Of particular concern is how Moscow’s increasingly capable Russian submarine force is catching up to the U.S. Navy’s previously unparalleled underwater advantage.

Here's What You Need to Know: In addition to dropping hardware like sonobuoys in anticipated high-traffic locations, Marines pilots could fire anti-submarine torpedoes from the air, or ASW missiles from EABs. Not limited to anti-submarine warfare, Marine EABs could also deploy long-range anti-ship missiles from land to push a Russian presence further out at sea.

In Proceedings, a monthly magazine published by the United States Naval Institute, General David Berger, the Commandant of the Marine Corps outlined what could end up being a new mission for the Corps: anti-submarine warfare (ASW).

Berger cites the expanding Chinese and Russian capabilities underwater as justification for a Marine ASW capability. He argues that the Corps is especially well-positioned to take on underwater assets thanks to their Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABs). More specifically, Gen. Berger explained that ASW is a “campaign of sustained actions over time for undersea advantage,” and that Marine EAB assets, particularly in Europe would provide a “significant contribution to undersea warfare campaigns, including holding Chinese and Russian submarines at risk.”

In particular, Washington is worried about Russian revanchism since the end of the Cold War. Of particular concern is how Moscow’s increasingly capable Russian submarine force is catching up to the U.S. Navy’s previously unparalleled underwater advantage—an advantage that America wants to preserve.

Quoting Vice Admiral James G. Foggo, Commander Sixth Fleet, Gen. Berger described the underwater competition currently underway. “It is now clear that a fourth battle [of the Atlantic] is not looming, but is being waged now, across and underneath the oceans and seas that border Europe. This is not a kinetic fight. It is a struggle between Russian forces that probe for weakness, and U.S. and NATO ASW forces that protect and deter. Just like in the Cold War, the stakes are high.”

If the Navy’s current ASW capabilities were to be disrupted, Russian submarines could more easily transition from the Barents Sea in Russia’s northwest near Finland to the North Atlantic via the Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom gap (GIUK gap). The GIUK gap is a geographic chokepoint that Russia submarines would have to slip through in order to reach the open Atlantic. And so that gap is patrolled by North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) navies to prevent Russia from secreting sending a lot of its submarines through it.

The disruptive potential of Russian submarine assets in the Atlantic cannot be overstated. If given free rein in the Atlantic, an incredible number of targets in the United States and Europe could be threatened—and not just cities or other targets close to shore. If near enough to American or European shores, targets hundreds of miles from the coast could also fall victim to Russian submarine-launched cruise missiles.

To keep Russian submarines penned in, the Corps could build EABs in key areas. Norway and Iceland in particular would be prime locations for Marine EABs, as they would be relatively close to Russia, and could help augment existing Navy ASW assets. But what would a Marine Corps EAB do exactly?

The Marines are Coming

In addition to dropping hardware like sonobuoys in anticipated high-traffic locations, Marines pilots could fire anti-submarine torpedoes from the air, or ASW missiles from EABs. Not limited to anti-submarine warfare, Marine EABs could also deploy long-range anti-ship missiles from land to push a Russian presence further out at sea.

There is also an opportunity for Marine Corps EABs in the Pacific. “The same concept could be applied to the First Island Chain in the western Pacific. Without being limited to the Philippines and Japan, EABs could create opportunities from multiple locations beyond the South and East China Seas,” Berger explained. “Close, confined seas may offer more opportunities for Marine EABs to sense and strike Chinese ships and submarines, while supporting fleet and joint ASW efforts.”

Postscript

The Marine Corps has whole-heartedly embraced change in recent years. From divesting all their tank battalions, to getting a new amphibious troop carrier into service, to experimenting with remote-controlled, missile-lobbing trucks, change is rapidly coming to the USMC.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer with the National Interest. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

This article is being republished due to reader interest.

Image: Flickr.

Peter Suciu

SR-71 Blackbird,

It could cross continents in just a few hours, and at 80,000 feet, the Blackbird could survey 100,000 square miles of the ground below per hour.

Here's What You Need to Remember:

No other U.S. Air Force aircraft could fly faster or higher than the Lockheed SR-71 "Blackbird," and on its final flight, it set a truly impressive record.

The reconnaissance aircraft flew from the west coast of the United States to the east coast – some 2,404 miles – in just 68:17 minutes. During that flight, it traveled from St. Louis, Missouri, and Cincinnati, Ohio, a distance of 311 miles in about eight and a half minutes.

While no Blackbirds were ever flown over Soviet airspace (well, that we know of), the SR-71 played a crucial role in the Cold War and took part in missions over the Middle East, Vietnam, and even North Korea.

It could cross continents in just a few hours, and at 80,000 feet, the Blackbird could survey 100,000 square miles of the ground below per hour. In July 1976, an SR-71 even set two world records – one was an absolute speed record of 2,193.167 mph while the other was an absolute altitude record of 85,068.997 feet. It carried no weapons and speed was its only defense.

She Was Expensive to Fly

But one thing the SR-71 couldn't outrun was the costs to maintain it.

Everything about the aircraft was expensive.

The CIA had to smuggle out Soviet titanium, the best produced at the time, for the aircraft's skin and landing gear, while special aluminum-reinforced tires were developed by BF Goodrich specifically for the Blackbird. The life span of those tires was only about twenty landings.

Estimates were that the aircraft cost around $200,000 an hour to operate, and while more capable than the Lockheed U-2, the costs were seen as a significant problem. In 1989 the Blackbird was retired – and many SR-71s were sent to museums, while a few were kept in reserve.

SR-71, Rebooted

That could have been the end of the story, but in the early 1990s, the SR-71 program was reactivated – in part because a successor had yet to be developed (But the SR-72 might be around the corner). The aircraft was part of a contentious political debate that pitted members of Congress against the Pentagon over America's intelligence policy, where supporters in Congress questioned the Department of Defense's (DoD's) refusal to use the aircraft over Bosnia and other global hotspots of the era.

The Air Force argued the old warbird wasn't integrated with the rest of its modern equipment, and that its cameras took still photos that couldn't be relayed by video to the ground. Instead, the CIA and DoD relied on drones to provide an eye-in-the-sky, along with satellites. Supporters of the SR-71 countered that drones could be (and were) shot down, while foreign militaries could determine when satellites were due to fly overhead.

The SR-71 made its return, in part because the argument was made that the planes were already bought and paid for – while there were a lot of spare parts. Lockheed Martin's "Skunk Works" – which had developed the aircraft – was able to bring the Blackbird out of retirement under a budget of $72 million.

However, the reactivation was met with more resistance than the plane had faced from America's adversaries. It was simply something that Air Force leaders didn't want and required money to be shifted from other programs. The issue was so contentious that when Congress reauthorized funding, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case and ruled that President Bill Clinton's attempted line-item veto to cancel the funding was unconstitutional.

In 1998, the program was finally permanently retired, but NASA was able to operate the final two airworthy Blackbirds until 1999. It was an inauspicious end to an aircraft that could do what no other reconnaissance plane could do. While no SR-71 was ever shot down, it was the political infighting and an issue of funding that finally grounded the speedy Blackbird.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com. This article is being republished due to reader interest.

Image: Reuters.

Mener la bataille des idées pour soustraire les classes populaires à l'idéologie dominante afin de conquérir le pouvoir… Fréquemment citées, mais rarement lues et bien souvent galvaudées, les analyses d'Antonio Gramsci connaissent une remarquable résurgence. / Argentine, Inde, Italie, Russie, (...) / Argentine, Inde, Italie, Russie, Communisme, État, Histoire, Idées, Idéologie, Inégalités, Intellectuels, Mouvement de contestation, Politique, Socialisme, Marxisme, Société civile - 2012/07

In some of the poorest parts of the world, where there is no access to a reliable electricity grid, the UN is equipping hundreds of health facilities with solar technologies, allowing them to avoid power outages and save lives.

A good education is often seen as a route out of poverty, but many disadvantaged children are unable to finish school. In Thailand, a project involving the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, is linking academic achievement to cash rewards, providing tangible benefits to marginalized families, and helping kids to stay in school.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented public health, economic and social crises, threatening the lives and livelihoods of millions and exacerbating inequalities throughout the world, the World Bank said at the COVID-19: Vaccines for Developing Countries event on Friday. 

The vast majority of COVID-19 vaccines administered have so far gone to wealthy nations, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported on Friday. 

The UN Secretary-General on Friday welcomed steps announced by the International Monetary and Finance Committee (IMFC) and the World Bank Group Development Committee, to address debt crises and other financial distress to economies arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, “as a sign of hope and renewed multilateralism.”

Créée après guerre, l'ENA devait former des grands commis de l'Etat ; bicentenaire, l'Ecole normale supérieure avait pour mission de produire un corps enseignant d'élite baigné de valeurs humanistes. Devenues des instruments de reproduction de la classe dirigeante française, ces deux institutions (...) / France, Économie, Éducation, Entreprise, Finance, Fonction publique, Idéologie, Inégalités, Jeunes - 2011/08

The UN human rights office, OHCHR, has urged authorities in Sudan to protect citizens “without discrimination” in the wake of the latest resurgence of deadly violence in West Darfur. 

A quelles conditions le rire offre-t-il aux opprimés un instrument de résistance ? S'il dispose d'une assise populaire ; si son éclat libère une vision globale du monde ; si enfin il entretient avec l'ordre social un rapport de renversement. / Christianisme, Culture, Histoire, Identité culturelle, (...) / Christianisme, Culture, Histoire, Identité culturelle, Littérature, Politique, Religion, Société - 2010/08

Cette recension a été publiée dans le numéro de printemps 2021 de Politique étrangère (n° 1/2021). Marc Hecker, chercheur au Centre des études de sécurité de l’Ifri et rédacteur en chef de Politique étrangère, propose une analyse de l’ouvrage de Thomas Hegghammer, The Caravan: Abdallah Azzam and the Rise of Global Jihad (Cambridge University Press, 2020, 696 pages).

Fruit d’années de recherches, The Caravan est un ouvrage imposant dans tous les sens du terme. Par son volume, d’une part, auquel s’ajoute, pour lecteurs insatiables, un site web (azzambook.net) permettant d’explorer de nombreux documents d’archives. Par son contenu, d’autre part : il constitue un apport important à l’historiographie du terrorisme contemporain, et sa lecture s’impose à tous ceux qui veulent comprendre finement les origines d’al-Qaïda. Il ne se contente pas de décrire la vie et l’œuvre d’un idéologue majeur du djihadisme transnational : il nous plonge dans l’atmosphère du Peshawar des années 1980, avec ses réfugiés, ses travailleurs humanitaires, ses espions et ses volontaires affluant du monde arabe pour soutenir les moudjahidines afghans contre l’envahisseur soviétique.

Abdallah Azzam (1941-1989) avait de multiples visages. Il se fait d’abord connaître comme intellectuel. Diplômé des universités d’Amman et Damas, il obtient en 1973 un doctorat en droit islamique de l’université Al-Azhar au Caire. Il démarre alors une carrière d’enseignant, qui le conduit notamment en Arabie Saoudite, et publie plusieurs ouvrages dont Le Cancer rouge en 1980. Parallèlement à sa carrière académique, il se fait remarquer pour son militantisme islamiste : dans les années 1970, il gravit les échelons des Frères musulmans, jusqu’à devenir un des principaux responsables de cette organisation en Jordanie. Ses critiques du régime lui valent d’être expulsé du royaume hachémite. Il est surtout connu enfin pour son engagement guerrier : originaire de Cisjordanie, il fait ses premières armes contre Israël à la fin des années 1960, mais c’est surtout sa contribution au djihad afghan qui le fera entrer dans la postérité.

En 1981, Azzam s’installe avec sa famille au Pakistan, dans le cadre d’un programme de coopération scientifique conduit par son université saoudienne. Son engagement en faveur des moudjahidines va alors croissant. Il parcourt le monde – y compris l’Amérique du Nord et l’Europe – pour sensibiliser à la cause afghane et organise des campagnes de levée de fonds. Il s’éloigne progressivement des Frères musulmans, qui acceptent de fournir une aide financière et logistique mais refusent de s’engager dans les combats.

En 1984, avec le soutien d’Oussama Ben Laden, il crée le Bureau des services, structure chargée d’acheminer des combattants arabes en Afghanistan. Il publie une fatwa affirmant que la participation au djihad afghan est une obligation individuelle pour tous les membres de l’oumma, argument développé dans un livre qui demeure une référence de la mouvance djihadiste : La Défense des territoires musulmans (1985). Son action entraîne une hausse spectaculaire du nombre de volontaires arabes, qui passent d’une centaine en 1984 à plusieurs milliers dans les années qui suivent.

En novembre 1989, alors que les moudjahidines afghans ont triomphé de l’Armée rouge, Abdallah Azzam est assassiné dans des circonstances troubles. L’auteur de The Caravan, le chercheur norvégien Thomas Hegghammer, se lance sur la trace des tueurs. Plusieurs pistes sont envisagées – règlement de comptes inter-djihadiste, assassinat par les services pakistanais (ISI), russes (KGB), américains (CIA), ou israéliens (le Mossad) –, mais le mystère persiste. Une chose est sûre : si l’« imam du djihad » a disparu voici plus de trente ans, ses œuvres lui survivent et son influence reste considérable.

Marc Hecker

>> S’abonner à Politique étrangère <<

The world is “a long way off” from meeting the goals of the landmark Paris Agreement on Climate Change, the President of the crucial upcoming UN climate conference, COP26, said on Thursday.

The UN and partners are “following with deep concern” new reports of violations against civilians in northern Mozambique, the UN Spokesperson said on Thursday. 

More than 100 countries and economies have now received COVID-19 vaccines through the UN-partnered equitable coronavirus-busting scheme, COVAX.

For the United States, patience is the least bad option.

Alors qu'ils se présentent volontiers comme des modèles, les pays occidentaux voient le niveau d'abstention s'élever d'élection en élection, mettant en péril la démocratie. On peut, bien sûr, s'en prendre au manque de civisme comme le font certains dirigeants et commentateurs politiques qui, le plus (...) / États-Unis, France, Citoyenneté, Démocratie, Élections - 2002/04

Efforts to control information are only hardening the country’s divisions.

Auteur de l’article « Philanthropes sans frontières : la générosité privée au secours du monde ? » paru dans le numéro de printemps de Politique étrangère  (n°1/2021), Charles Sellen, docteur en économie internationale (Sciences Po) et Inaugural Global Philanthropy Fellow à la Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, répond à trois questions en exclusivité pour politique-etrangere.com.

1) Quelle place la philanthropie occupe-t-elle sur la scène internationale ?

La philanthropie privée occupait traditionnellement une place discrète, à l’arrière-plan. Aujourd’hui son influence est croissante, intervenant désormais en pleine lumière sur le devant de la scène internationale.

Ce n’est pourtant pas un phénomène nouveau : l’Ordre de Malte s’inscrit dans ce registre depuis l’époque médiévale. Henry Dunant, fondateur du Comité international de la Croix-Rouge au XIXe siècle, peut être considéré comme l’un des premiers philanthropes internationaux des temps modernes. Les fondations Carnegie et Rockefeller sont actives hors des États-Unis depuis plus d’un siècle, et ont pratiqué ce qui s’apparente à de « l’aide au développement » longtemps avant la création des institutions de Bretton Woods.

Depuis les années 2000, on assiste à une résurgence de cette « action privée au service de l’intérêt général » via la création de nouvelles fondations, souvent corollaires des fortunes bâties dans la finance ou les nouvelles technologies. Les nouveaux fondateurs, généralement habitués à déployer leurs activités entrepreneuriales à l’échelle planétaire, adoptent logiquement la même extension géographique pour leurs activités de mécénat, par-delà les frontières nationales.

Qu’on s’en réjouisse ou qu’on le déplore, le phénomène de philanthropie internationale est mécaniquement voué à prospérer. En l’absence d’une fiscalité fortement progressive, il sera le produit combiné d’une création et d’une captation massive de richesses d’une part, et d’une explosion des inégalités et des besoins sociaux d’autre part. Les États doivent désormais s’accommoder de l’irruption de ces acteurs non étatiques dans le jeu diplomatique. Ils peuvent aussi, habilement, mobiliser ces vecteurs d’influence (soft power) et ces canaux de diplomatie parallèle (track two diplomacy) pour conduire des négociations informelles ou établir des contacts non officiels.

Il est évident que la philanthropie ne peut pas et ne doit pas se substituer à l’action étatique ou intergouvernementale, quand bien même certains philanthropes prétendent la suppléer. Mais c’est un complément utile. Elle offre une liberté d’initiative, une marge de manœuvre, qu’on aurait tort de sous-estimer et dont il serait dommage de se priver.

2) Comment le cercle des grands philanthropes internationaux a-t-il évolué au cours des dernières années ?

L’aréopage de grands mécènes actifs à l’international s’agrandit et se diversifie rapidement. C’est la double résultante de la globalisation des fortunes, qui se forment désormais en tout point du globe, et de l’internationalisation des causes (environnement, climat, santé, migrations, etc.) qu’on ne peut pas espérer résoudre avec des solutions exclusivement locales. Mais qu’y a-t-il en commun entre une vieille famille européenne perpétuant ses valeurs intergénérationnelles dans la discrétion (voire l’anonymat), un self-made businessman de la Silicon Valley persuadé que la technologie est une panacée pour guérir tous les maux de la planète, et une fondation d’entreprise issue des pays émergents comme le Brésil, la Chine ou l’Inde, focalisée prioritairement sur des enjeux régionaux ?

Il n’y a pas une mais des philanthropies. Leurs actions se situent à des échelles géographiques et temporelles disjointes. Elles coexistent, se juxtaposent, mais se croisent rarement. Les philanthropes internationaux ne constituent donc pas « un cercle », au sens d’un cénacle dont ils seraient membres et où ils se concerteraient. Au-delà de quelques initiatives menées en commun, leurs actions manquent cruellement de coordination — d’une part entre eux-mêmes et d’autre part avec les autres acteurs du champ qu’ils investissent.

Les très grands donateurs poursuivent leur propre agenda en autonomie, voire en autarcie, affichant dans certains cas des objectifs qui confinent à l’hubris. S’ils doivent composer en général avec l’écosystème associatif préexistant au niveau national, ils jouissent d’une quasi totale liberté d’action sur la scène internationale. Certains privilégient des voies solitaires et monothématiques, tandis que d’autres poursuivent des stratégies « tous azimuts » en recherchant activement à nouer des partenariats avec des diplomates, des banques publiques de développement, des agences onusiennes, ce qui leur permet d’acquérir une légitimité et d’influencer l’action publique vers leurs priorités de prédilection. En ce sens, ils contribuent à une forme de privatisation des politiques internationales dans certains secteurs où leurs capitaux sont parfois plus importants que ceux des acteurs publics (c’est d’ailleurs un paradoxe, puisque ces ressources financières sont partiellement défiscalisées).

3) Quel impact la crise du coronavirus peut-elle avoir sur la philanthropie ?

Cette crise a simultanément fragilisé le tissu associatif et mis en exergue l’influence politique et médiatique considérable des très grands donateurs. Ce double effet entraînera des bouleversements à long terme sur le récit, la perception et la critique de la philanthropie.

De prime abord, les fondations ont été relativement épargnées, car leurs dotations sont souvent constituées d’actifs immobiliers ou financiers, dont la valeur ne s’est pas amoindrie (les cours boursiers ont retrouvé leurs niveaux d’avant-crise). En revanche, les associations qui mettent en œuvre des projets financés par les dons, traversent une passe très difficile. Les dons qu’elles reçoivent annuellement se sont stabilisés dans le meilleur des cas, ou fortement amoindris dans de nombreux cas.

Environ 20 milliards de dollars de dons ont été recensés dans le monde depuis le début de la crise. Cette somme semble importante, mais demeure une goutte d’eau par rapport aux milliers de milliards d’euros et de dollars débloqués en urgence par les gouvernements pour tenter de juguler le désastre économique. De plus, ce chiffre doit être pris avec précaution : d’abord car il additionne des promesses de dons futurs et des versements immédiats, ensuite parce que parmi les causes (recherche médicale, prise en charge de patients, soutien à l’activité économique…) on ne distingue pas précisément celles qui reçoivent l’essentiel des dons de celles qui sont laissées-pour-compte. Cette imprécision statistique ne permet pas d’y voir clair pour le moment.

Une belle lueur d’espérance toutefois : partout dans le monde, des citoyens ont spontanément manifesté de la générosité et de l’entraide, en rivalisant d’ingéniosité. Cette crise a révélé la diversité des formes que peuvent revêtir ces témoignages de philanthropie, au sens grec originel d’« amour de l’humanité ».

Accédez à l’article de Charles Sellen ici.

Retrouvez le sommaire du numéro 1/2021 de Politique étrangère ici.