ON PACIFICATION: INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL ISSUE

Abstract

In 1957 at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), one of NATO’s two strategic commands, a speech was given by General Allard of France. France had by that time given up what had become known as its ‘dirty war’ in Indochina, but was happy to continue a series of wars elsewhere which were hardly any ‘cleaner’. Such wars were understood by NATO and its allies, but also by their opponents, as ‘revolutionary wars’, and this was the subject of Allard’s speech: how to defeat the revolution. Allard’s view was that war against the various communist and socialist movements then in existence had to involve ‘pure’ military action, but that this alone would not be enough. Also needed was a second group of actions, grouped together because they worked in unison: psychological action, propaganda, political and operational intelligence, police measures, personal contacts with the population, and a host of social and economic programs. Of this combined action Allard notes: ‘I shall classify these various missions under two categories: Destruction and Construction. These two terms are inseparable. To destroy without building up would mean useless labor; to build without first destroying would be a delusion’. He then goes on to expand on these terms. The meaning of ‘destruction’ is fairly clear: the co-ordinated activity of army and associated state powers to ‘chase and annihilate … deal spectacular blows … and maintain insecurity’. ‘Construction’, however, means ‘building the peace’, ‘organizing the people’, persuading the people ‘by the use of education’ and, ultimately ‘preparing the establishment of a new order’. He adds: ‘This is the task of pacification’ (cited in Paret, 1964, 30-1). It is remarkable how often a comment along these lines appears, again and again,