WHAT IS A CRISIS?
By the rector Gerard-François DUMONT*
The term "crisis" is frequently used, particularly in
the titles of the articles, books, broadcast or telecast. To throw a first light
on its use, we take two examples of the year 2001, especially interesting as
they refer to two completely different temporalities. In April 2001, precisely
on the 1 - st of April, a crisis blows up between China and the USA concerning
an American spy-airplane EP-3. This plane which, according to the USA, was in
the international air space of the Pacific, confronted with a Chinese airplane
which pilot disappeared; then it would have compelled to touch down on the
Chinese Island Hainan by the Chinese hunter, infringing under enforcement the
Chinese sovereignty. As the USA cares to receive back the 24 American militaries
and of that of China to use the incident born "the crisis of the
spy-plane" , doing harm namely the intensification of the diplomatic and
economic exchanges between the two powers. After the negotiations, interposed
particularly by the media, the crisis untied for the essential in less than
twelve days with the recuperation and the returning of the American militaries
in their country.
In the same moment, the French minister of Home Affairs, pleading for "the
collective mobilization" for the benefit of "security" , does not
hesitate to write, in the French well-known daily newspaper, that France has
"destruction" due to "an economic and public crisis" which
lasts "for already thirty years" .
A precise term, but tarnished
These two examples conduct imperatively to interrogate themselves about the
word "crisis": it is used in the first case for an incident apparently
cyclical, solved in less than two weeks , and, in the second case to nominate a
phenomenon which will last for already thirty years and which will be thus
undoubtedly structural. The use of the same word to nominate so different
temporalities illustrates maybe simply the significance less and less precise
given to the considered word.
Really, the contemporary history of the word "crisis" gives an example
of the manner how a word sees its use evolve, and sometimes change . According
to three senses given to the word "crisis" in the French dictionary
Robert, we find a common denominator: the word is applied to short periods. In
the first sense, medical, crisis is "the moment of an illness characterized
by an undergone and generally definitive modification, good or bad". The
crisis is then the acute manifestation of an illness, appendicitis crisis,
asthma crisis, liver crisis, and cordial crisis... In the second common senses
by extension of the medical senses, the crisis is "a sudden and severe
emotive manifestation " (mad laugh crisis, nerve crisis, crisis of
anger...).
In its third sense, appeared by analogy in 1690, a crisis is "a grave phase
in the evolution of things, events, ideas". It is a moment of extreme
tension, paroxysm, conflict, modification, interfering when the regulations and
the retroactions of the political or geopolitical systems is not sufficient any
more or does not play any more. What is the intensity that we granted to it or
that it really has, such crisis can be immortalized, only if it is political,
geopolitical or economic.
The political internal crisis is a conflict which affects the chiefs of a State,
the nature of its institutions, or its society regime: it leads to a
governmental reorganization, to a modification of the government if the
precedent was compelled to retire, to constitutional adaptations, or to a change
of the regime. As to the geopolitical crisis, it happens from a conflict in the
relations between two or several States, between an international organization
and one or several States, or between two or several international
organizations. It can finish or by the desire to find an agreement between the
protagonists, or by sanctions towards a State (suspension or exclusion from an
international organization), or, in the worst case, to lead to an armed
conflict.
Stricto sensu, the economic crisis nominates the stop of the growth, the
moment when the conjuncture returns. When it is acute, the economic crisis
corresponds to the detonator of the depression. Economic crisis proceed
necessarily. According to the Marxists, they are written in the same principle
of the capitalist system. According to the liberals, the economic activity not
being regular and knowing various movements, the apparition of a crisis is in
the nature of things: therefore, the formidable economic growth of the USA in
the 1990s could not last (it became exponential) without a readjustment
supposing a time of slowing down, thus crisis born from the very nature of the
things. The consolation of the inevitable character of the economic crisis
happens namely from its temporary character.
If the previous definitions are clear, since the second half of the XX century,
the used sense of the word "crisis" evolved giving frequently to this
word a durable significance. While the crisis from 1929 remains joined to the
year quoted, the just formulation "the crisis from 1974" as to the
petroleum increases from October 1993/ January 1974 is an statement that
misfires. We do not say anything more: "the petroleum crisis from
1974" or "the petroleum crisis from 1979", formulation conforms
to the above mentioned sense of the word "crisis", but: the first
petroleum "shock", or the second petroleum "shock".
Enlarging and changing the initial sense of the word "crisis", we
apply it to the ensemble of the period born from the initial rupture and not
only of this last one. Besides, in an extremely large sense, as in the second
example quoted in the introduction, we use the term crisis to indicate the
ensemble of the phenomena arising during the years after the crisis stricto
sensu, and thus the ensemble of a period. Obviously, such as it is sometimes
used, the word "crisis" loses partially, even completely, its initial
sense relating to a moment of rupture, to a short period.
This evolution of the use of the word happens maybe from the fact that the word
"crisis" became doubtless something like the word "joker",
which avoids maybe to use other less convenient term because more exigent for
the critical reason. For example, since the beginning of the European
construction in the 1950s, the journalists used with a considerable frequency
the word "crisis". So, in fact, this construction knew a little amount
of real crisis, that is ruptures, even if it a following of tart negotiations.
The veritable and real crisis passed in July 1965 when France decided to suspend
its participation in the European instances. The journalistic "crises"
in the European construction are nothing in relation to the gravity of the
European crisis of the first half of the 20-th century , frequently regulated by
violent method (war, transition of population...).
In the end, the word "crisis" seems henceforth tarnished, used
"for all sauces". Gerard Chaliand considers that the world from today
is not worse than that from yesterday, but the media, sellers of alarms, give
this impression. Going farther, it finds even to the world a character of
stability rather pronounced despite of some number of perturbations less
numerous from his point of view at the end of the XX century than in the
previous periods. It suggests implicitly that the actual world knows fewer
crises, and thus there is an abuse of the word "crisis". Nevertheless,
with the Soviet implosion, it will be normal to assist to an augmentation of
crisis between the States as the number of state actors considerably increased,
while various international actors appeared or took more importance, affirming
their presence namely wishing to interfere in the crisis, quits to complicate
the resolution. Also, the humanitarian diplomacy is interested to the crisis
susceptible to justify its interference, while with the development of the right
of interference , the internal events of a country can become international
crisis between the countries not interpreting in the same way this right of
interference.
The thing that precedes invites to try to make a list of the use or of the
absence of the use of the word "crisis". It is necessary at first to
consider the events entitled "crisis" and which would deserve _
treatment different between those which are in fact reported to processes and
those which correspond to the initial sense of the word "crisis",
integrating the concept of rupture. In the second place, there are real crises,
which they try to put down, to pass under silence, refusing to nominate them for
what they are. At last, there is the use a little adapted of the word
"crisis", when they speak to indicate more complicated realities.
Crisis or process?
The media do not hesitate to publish about "the Algerian crisis",
"Zairian crisis", "Yugoslavian crisis", or still "the
crisis of the mad cow ". So these events are not necessarily "sudden
and violent manifestations". The mass murders of civil faces in Algeria are
certainly violent, but they can not be considered as sudden. The "Algerian
crisis", so difficult to understand as we do not benefit of the information
given under the form of flash by wireless and television, it is not a crisis in
the original sense as, since 1962, any precise rupture does not appear in the
history of a State which does not manage to build to itself. The situation in
Algeria at the beginning of the XXI-st century seems rather the consequence,
even simple the following of a long process, of the refusal resumed to take into
consideration the historical reality of the Algerian territories, in a way to
take political decisions in frequent disharmony with the needs of the
population, or disgusting methods regularly used by the power or some
oppositions. We take an example illustrating this protocol: Yves Lacoste reminds
that the awful periodic acts of massacre of the civil innocent peoples were
already committed (then not F.N.L. - Front of national liberation) during the
war of Algeria, and passed even before the cancellation of the first turn of the
legislative elections in 1991. In Algeria, we have thus affaire with "a
series of the successive phenomena forming a whole, and coming to a determined
result" . The series of the phenomena is included in the ideological
choices inappropriate but rendered possible in particular due to the hydrocarbon
resources; it has for result not only the inability to build "an Algerian
nation", but simply to perfect a State. Since years, someone hopes that
this process will lead on a salutary crisis, but everything happens as though
its very nature hindered or at least detained considerably such an issue.
Also, "the Zairian crisis", which arose at the departure of Mobutu,
then a kind of balkanization of Zaire, it is not in the proper sense a crisis,
but the result of a long process of decomposition, contradictory to the
significant riches that Zaire benefits.
As to that we nominate frequently as "the Yugoslavian crisis", the
statement which recovers a period spreading out for at least on ten years
(1991-2000), it was facilitated and doubtlessly prolonged by the inability of
the peoples from Europe , and especially of the Countries members of the
European Community to use their power to prevent conflicts, then to facilitate
the peace. But is it the result of an initial crisis, in the sense of a
historical rupture, or was it entered in the historical more former process? In
fact, it follows from a double ancient process, renewed by the more recent
period. The ancient process follows from the political and cultural boundaries
frequently unstable the Yugoslavian grounds, particularly in view of
religious fractures: from one hand, the Catholic people remained faithful to
Rome; from another hand, the orthodox people, with the auto-cephalic Churches,
sometimes too faithful to the national established authorities instead of giving
enough importance to the hierarchy existing outside the boundaries. And this one
is not facilitated when two authorities, in Istanbul and in Moscow, dispute this
summit of symbolical hierarchy where the diplomatic and liturgical party carries
sometimes away on the valors that it ought to be taught. At last, it is
necessary to consider the Muslim world, the inheritance from the ottoman
authority. The Yugoslavian events are explained also by a modern process, the
political Authoritarianism of Tito, which methods used to conserve the power
could to lead only to a danger of disintegration. And these risks could not be
prevented, in view of refusals to see the western diplomacies enough
generalized, and naive western commentators which adjoined the inverse use of
the words under the regime of Tito: the "federalism" meant
"autocracy", and the Yugoslavian "self-management", so
boasted by some political parties from the Western Europe which made an ideal
from it, was really only an "economic collectivism".
As to the "crisis" of the mad cow, it can seem surprising to criticize
the formulation, when they recollect the brutality with which it appeared in the
media in 1996. However, it follows clearly that it is not a temporary phase,
when we state different stages of its evolution. Besides, this "crisis of
mad cow " is not the product of a brutal rupture, but a logic consequence
of the behavior of some people who, considering themselves God, forgot the
common sense, which should be the rule of any animal rise. The events around the
problem of the mad cow are thus not born from an initial crisis, but from an
evaluative process created by a generalization of absurd modes of animal
alimentation.
As show the above-mentioned examples, it is necessary to state that the word
"crisis" is sometimes used - vainly - to indicate not a rupture, but a
series of phenomena, a process. There are however appropriate uses of the term
crisis.
Real crisis
This term, in the initial sense of the word, concerns the events, which
introduce ruptures, modifications. In order to reveal them, it is necessary to
avoid naming prematurely "crisis" any unusual event. For example, in
view of the complexity of the political game, there can arise attempts to
generate crisis that we are going to name rapidly and vainly "crisis",
while they are only inconsistent events, without real effect, and without
consequence. For example, a political leader, or a political figure which tries
to position as a political leader, threatens to denounce an agreement of the
government to underline his point of view or to test his real weight in report
of force. Or a minister leaves in a resignation, and the comments believe to
announce a governmental "crisis". Ten days later, the entire world
forgot the threat or the "deafening" resignation. There was not
a real crisis. The media ephemeral event can be explained because its author was
himself in crisis: "The certainly speak, about his own crisis",
observes Umberto Eco .
In exchange, there are real political crises. Therefore, the electoral defeat of
the right party in the French legislative elections from the 1 - st of June 1997
introduces a crisis inside its main party, R.P.R. (Association for the
Republic), for a long time headed by the President of the Republic who,
dissolving prematurely the national Assembly where he disposed of an
overwhelming majority, is the responsible of the defeat. In some days, the issue
arrives as the President going out from this political movement informs that he
will not ask the resumption of his mandate, keeping place to the unique
candidate to his succession, Philippe Seguin. In fact, the policy, by nature,
knows numerous attempts of crisis or of periodic crisis which protagonists hope
at the end to benefit from a better rapport of forces. The political history of
a country represented by a political commentator, is first of all the history of
the rapport of forces, which evolve in the rhythm of crisis.
Other events form real crisis. For example, in 1996, the grip of knowledge by
the Belgium opinion on the pedophilia affairs created a rupture in Belgium, in
the measure as we assisted to some return of the national Belgium sense, which
seemed already widely disappeared while succeeded institutional reforms. From
one hand, and for the first time since decades, the Belgians privileged the care
to protect a common moral, even than to put forward a Walloon or Flemish
appurtenance. From another hand, a respected person, but does he seem more and
more distant from any solution by an institutional system more blown up than
federal, reappeared to deliver forceful messages, which content went outside
that the Constitution allows: They speak about the king of the Belgians,
reminding implicitly to each one that the moral debt of the citizen from Belgium
was more important than his Walloon, Flemish or Brussels appurtenance.
We take henceforth the example of a social crisis, connected to the closing of a
factory, and located abroad a large automobile constructor. During a half of
century, since its nationalization the next day after the Second world war,
Renault is an automobile enterprise with a capital exclusively contained by the
French State and which President is appointed (and is withdrawn) by the
Ministerial council. This enterprise symbolizes a social completely nice model,
and also in some measures disputable, because financed, in some opacity, by the
French tax bearers. Then a law from 1993 organizes its partial privatization, at
first in November 1994, then in July 1996. A state returns then the party of its
capital to 46 %. At the beginning of 1997, the chiefs of this enterprise open a
crisis informing the closing of their factory of Vilvorde, in Belgium. This
event is frequently quoted for its syndicate effects, with, the 7-th of March
1997, the first manifestations of the workers joining syndicalists from some
more countries of the Europe. The essential is maybe not there, but in the
declarations of the Renault responsible faces and those of the State face to the
reactions begun by this closing: confirming the closing, and thus the state
refusal to interfere in the management of Renault, they mark a fundamental
rupture, the end of a long cohabitation between the French State and Renault.
For a long time, the French tax bearers were implied "not to reduce to
despair Billancourt " . The social preferential advantages of the workers
from Renault - advantages that he will be silly to criticize the pleasant
character for those who benefit from this - were in a large party on the account
of the State which subsidized Renault, directly or indirectly, or perceived
eventually less taxes on the societies. The French tax bearers paid for a long
time the insufficiencies of Renault competitiveness . The Vilvorde affair signs
the end of days. Renault is henceforth partially private and, in a period of
stability of the prices and of the least growth, it is more difficult to make
accept the new public subventions that the State made for Renault of time of
Thirty famous. As to the Belgium tax bearers, they do not consider themselves
concerned by the closing of the factory from Vilvorde, as it is a French
enterprise. The Vilvorde affair marks thus this rupture, at the end of an epoch
where the large national automobile enterprise could have a social policy
independent from the economic and financial considerations.
The inflationary and inappropriate use
Despite the necessity to distinguish the processes and the real crisis,
the word "crisis" knows an inflationary use. The party of explanation
of this phenomenon can follow from the development of the diplomacy of the
opinion: to prove its efficiency, it is necessary to present as crisis that is
not really in order to receive additional means or to prove the efficiency
thwarting "a crisis" in fact partially created, even imaginary.
Another example, the immoderate use of the term induces for example to speak
about "the crisis of the Third world". Therefore, the Third world,
statement proposed by Alfred Sauvy in 1953 to enclose all the countries that
political power was then weak (or occurring), and which economic weight was
minor, corresponds then to a geographical precise field. It incorporates at
first the twenty nine countries from Asia and Africa integrated in April 1955 in
Bandung (Indonesia) to underline their existence, the colonized countries by the
same continents, and the countries of Latin America absent in Bandung in view of
their too great dependence from the USA. Therefore, in Bandung, we find Japan,
then classified among the underdeveloped countries, and also Southern Korea,
Taiwan, Singapore, Thailand... This partial list show how absurd it is to speak
about "a crisis of the Third world". The notion of the Third world
used in singular - and Alfred Sauvy recognized it being alive -, should not be
more used, as it does not correspond more to a whole having a character of
international homogeneity. Can we consider in the same ensemble a country as
Chile which had, since 1974, a significant growth permitting to it to reimburse
the totality of its international debt, while it was the country the most
burdened in debts from the world, and Burma, a very rich country but
impoverished by a terrible political burden? Can we consider that the Indian
Union is only a country of the Third world, while we find whole parts of the
economy calling to the newest technologies, and competitive with the industrial
countries, even if other parties of the economy are slightly productive, poor,
even very poor?
Also, we can read or hear the statement "of Maghreb crisis": it could
be justified only if the history of Maghreb was lighted by a phenomenon of
rupture suddenly occurring in a given moment. So it is not anything. The
political chiefs from Tunis, Algeria and Morocco, since the 1960s, conducted the
respective countries to hardly difficult results. And if we want to recollect
that Libya and Mauritania make also part from Maghreb, we realize that Magreb is
a kaleidoscope.
How many times did we hear to speak about " a global crisis of
overpopulation ", or "about an African crisis of overpopulation
"? Therefore, these expressions are completely unsuitable, because these
crises are mythical, referring frequently to territory of weak denseness and to
the potential significant riches (Zaire, Gabon, and Angola...). They are even
more inappropriate if we consider the logic of the demographic science that
allows easily to understand the evolutions . Besides, they are inappropriate if
we reason upon ancient and exceeded projections, not taking into account the
importance of the demographic recession in numerous countries .
Considering the augmentation of the mono-parental families in a country as
France, some of the journalists do not hesitate to speak about "a family
crisis". So the reality is more complicated. In France, the statistical
services do not offer any knowledge of the evolution of mono-parental families'
flux. The unique score is a warehouse stated after dates very remote one from
others at the moment of inventories (1975, 1982, 1990, and 1999). A warehouse
very much heterogeneous. In fact, we can reasonably analyze as if they were
homogeneous these different mono-parental families: the wonder woman who
wanted a child, but mainly not a husband; the person who declares living in
mono-parental home hiding the partner whose existence could question some
social advantages; the person with children abandoned by the partner in the year
of the birth or after; the person with children, that the destiny made widower
or widow; the person living in a mono-parental home owing to divorce.
Besides, these different situations can be very various from a financial and
administrative point of view, from the point of view of an apartment, and
according to the regular payments or not of a food pension. To consider a total
number of the mono-parental homes it does not almost light the sociological
realities and an eventual rupture that seems have been made in the ideal image
of the family.
Concerning the marriages in Europe, the use of the word "crisis",
wanting to recover the nuptial phenomenon of lowering, is also disputable. As
the evolution, various according to the countries , is dependent on the
phenomena of the society, including the problems of regulation. The in-depth
examination of the number of marriages in France, and also in other countries
having changed repeatedly the regulation (Austria and Sweden for example) shows
very clearly the influence of public decisions on the number of marriages. That
is called "a family crisis" is thus an ensemble of more complicated
phenomena, which, in reality, find frequently their origin at the beginning of a
societal evolution among which the family is only the receptacle, or the
thermometer.
In the ideal, it would be convenient thus to distinguish the crisis from the
processes, to refuse to use the term crisis for the phenomena of a more
complicated nature or simply mythical.
The refusal to see
At last, it is necessary to consider another type of crisis when real
crises, insufficiently or not at all taken into account, generate durable
phenomena in the reason even of the refusals to treat them as crisis.
It is clear, for example, that the judges show in France, in the 1990s, a crisis
of policy, during the put in process of felonious means used for financing the
political parties. Even if the guilty interpellated by the Justice were minor in
relation to the overwhelming majority, honest, of the elected, their questioning
underlined roughly a forceful derive from the public interest and a removal from
the senses of the common goods of the high levels of responsibilities. The
political chiefs seem doubtlessly have called to clear this crisis, accepting to
light collectively and immediately the scandals, appeared or temporarily hidden.
A large part preferred to deny this crisis, to try "drown the
fish", or to bend, namely forcing to vote by the legislator complex
procedures of financing political parties which, in fact, complicate the
exercise of citizenship and of the democracy, without reconciling the French
with the policy. The crisis not being really treated, a bitter feeling remains
among the population some more years after, whence a growing number of persons
not entered in the electoral lists and a rise of abstention from voting.
This example shows that the crisis not or badly caring can have negative durable
effects . Two cases especially elucidating are those of the Three Mile Island in
1979 and of Chernobyl in April 1986. Then where a reactor of the nuclear station
Three Mile Island jumps in 1979, every responsible fails to manage this crisis:
the given information is inappropriate, a defensive and shriveled attitude,
aggravates the problem, and the refusal to take efficient steps the crisis
predominates. We know the result: the development in the whole world of a
psychosis more intense and more durable than that caused by the crisis itself,
and generated by its bad management.
Also, at the night from the 25-th of April till the 26-th of April 1986, one of
the four reactors of the nuclear station Chernobyl (Ukraine) blows up. The
radioactive debris are pushed at more than 2000 meters of height in the clouds
which are going to move to the Europe, then there at the discretion of the
winds. In France, they want to stifle the crisis. A communiqué from the 29-th
of April 1986 from the central Services of protection against the ionic shines
add: " In France, if we find out something, there is only a pure scientific
problem". The formulation could be a beautiful theme of examination, as we
can be interested what means "a pure scientific problem "? Then, the
6-th of May 1986, the ministry of Agriculture, denying in his turn the crisis,
brings a conclusion that wants to be definitive: " the French territory was
completely saved". As the Schengen space did not exist still, should we
consider that the customs officers managed to stop the cloud at the boundary?
The outcome to this lie did not cease to make outcomes, as the problem of
sanitary consequences in Chernobyl always make discussions in France in 2001.
The administrative initial logic consisting to refuse to see a crisis made
perennial outcomes.
The journalist Bernard Nicolas showed the difference between the crisis treated
in time and thus fast exceeded and another crisis badly treated and which
outcomes become durable. In the first case, Perrier offers a remarkable grateful
example, before even being able to analyze the technical reason, a problem of
manufacturing. In the second case, the affair of infected blood , while the
responsible faces and the experts knew, conducted to an "official" lie
that immortalizes the consequences of the crisis.
***
Face to the inflationary use of the term "crisis", it is necessary
thus to exercise all its critical reason to understand precisely the thing that
recovers the use which is made. The intellectual and cultural reaching to
realize in order to take in account clearly every crisis stated in its origin,
to operate its consequences, to hinder durable outcomes, risking to continue its
bitter taste, are important. They remain essential, mainly in relation to the
desire of silence on a transparency, face to the old ideas which continue to
privilege the rights to the devoirs, the hierarchical to the reticular, the due
to the responsibility, the individualism to the group feeling. Whence the
reflection of Pierre Gadonneix: "Nothing is so dangerous than the optimism
and the consent, they hinder to be prepared for the crisis" .
The answers and the comments brought to the question exhibited in the title of
this study request especially the prospective reflection. In fact, this last one
has for object to answer to the question "when will be the nearest
crisis?" in view to anticipate it and regulate it.
So, more we give an extended and inexact definition to the word crisis, more we
make an immoderate use, more we make impenetrable its own reality, and it is
more difficult to recognize the indicating signs and to precise the
recommendations of an action. We lose thus the advantages of the initial sense
of the word crisis that meant etymologically decision, choice to act to get over
a difficulty. It is thus important to add to the word crisis its veritable sense
in order to manage better its future.
G. - F. D.