"Memory of this tragedy has to help us to learn the right lessons from the past. This global conflict became a tragedy for all mankind, carried away millions of human lives, cardinally changed the political map of the European continent, entailed huge economic losses," Vladimir Putin declared at the international public and scientific forum "The Great War. History Lessons", devoted to World War I. As the forum was organized by the "French-Russian Dialogue" society, French historians took part in it, in particular the permanent secretary of the French academy, Elaine Carrer d'Ancoss (nee Zourabichvili). As an historian, political scientist and specialist in Russia she answered questions of "Vestnik Kavkaza" about the lessons of World War I. - Would it have been possible to avoid World War I if there had been no assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand? Many historians say that, sooner or later, all the same there would be a conflict. What's your opinion?- I think that all wars can be avoided. But the consequences of that war are incredible – it absolutely changed the whole of Europe, not only geographically and geopolitical, even the mentalities of people changed. In addition, the First World opened the way for the Second World War. It was the first war where people died in their tens of millions. France, for example, lost more than 6 million people from a population of 40 million. Many men were lost in that war, and the mentality strongly changed. After World War I, everyone said that such a situation would never be repeated. But soon World War II began. After that, people again started to say that people on the European land need to reconcile. The reconciliation of France and Germany, which led three wars against each other, happened after all.- Did Russia have a chance of not getting involved in the war, having left Serbia without support? Or all the same would it have got involved in the conflict through the course of events or by the will of the belligerent powers?- I think that everything began for Russia with the Russo-Japanese war. In Russia at the beginning of the 20th century there was an economic recovery, a lifting of cultural life. But in political life business became difficult. The revolution of 1905 showed this. In addition, Russia got involved in a war with Japan. So it seems to me that the involvement of Russia in World War II was inevitable. Nikolai II's character played a role - on the one hand he had a somewhat weak character, but on the other hand – he was a very honest person, and therefore he adhered to the obligations of the Franco-Russian alliance. He considered that it was his duty not to go to war. He was convinced not to get involved. Rasputin predicted that the throne would die, not only he and his family, but also Russia would be lost in this war.- Some historians today have called the eve of World War I nothing but a triumph of world hatred. Considering today's international situation, is it possible to draw parallels between the two eras? Has mankind also learned a lesson from these events?- I wouldn't began to draw such parallels. The 20th century was awful. It is a century of World War I, World War II, the beginning and the end of the Soviet Union. This century ended in December 1991. The present world is another world, it is what was constructed after World War II, there is a predictability, there are some rules of the game. However, now the world is a little confused. So nobody knows what the rules of the game are now. It is difficult to predict sanything. Therefore it is better not to draw parallels.
"Memory of this tragedy has to help us to learn the right lessons from the past. This global conflict became a tragedy for all mankind, carried away millions of human lives, cardinally changed the political map of the European continent, entailed huge economic losses," Vladimir Putin declared at the international public and scientific forum "The Great War. History Lessons", devoted to World War I. As the forum was organized by the "French-Russian Dialogue" society, French historians took part in it, in particular the permanent secretary of the Académie française , Hélène Carrère d'Encausse (nee Zourabichvili). As an historian, political scientist and specialist in Russia she answered questions of "Vestnik Kavkaza" about the lessons of World War I.
- Would it have been possible to avoid World War I if there had been no assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand? Many historians say that, sooner or later, all the same there would be a conflict. What's your opinion?
- I think that all wars can be avoided. But the consequences of that war are incredible – it absolutely changed the whole of Europe, not only geographically and geopolitical, even the mentalities of people changed. In addition, the First World opened the way for the Second World War. It was the first war where people died in their tens of millions. France, for example, lost more than 6 million people from a population of 40 million. Many men were lost in that war, and the mentality strongly changed. After World War I, everyone said that such a situation would never be repeated. But soon World War II began. After that, people again started to say that people on the European land need to reconcile. The reconciliation of France and Germany, which led three wars against each other, happened after all.
- Did Russia have a chance of not getting involved in the war, having left Serbia without support? Or all the same would it have got involved in the conflict through the course of events or by the will of the belligerent powers?
- I think that everything began for Russia with the Russo-Japanese war. In Russia at the beginning of the 20th century there was an economic recovery, a lifting of cultural life. But in political life business became difficult. The revolution of 1905 showed this. In addition, Russia got involved in a war with Japan. So it seems to me that the involvement of Russia in World War II was inevitable. Nikolai II's character played a role - on the one hand he had a somewhat weak character, but on the other hand – he was a very honest person, and therefore he adhered to the obligations of the Franco-Russian alliance. He considered that it was his duty not to go to war. He was convinced not to get involved. Rasputin predicted that the throne would die, not only he and his family, but also Russia would be lost in this war.
- Some historians today have called the eve of World War I nothing but a triumph of world hatred. Considering today's international situation, is it possible to draw parallels between the two eras? Has mankind also learned a lesson from these events?
- I wouldn't began to draw such parallels. The 20th century was awful. It is a century of World War I, World War II, the beginning and the end of the Soviet Union. This century ended in December 1991. The present world is another world, it is what was constructed after World War II, there is a predictability, there are some rules of the game. However, now the world is a little confused. So nobody knows what the rules of the game are now. It is difficult to predict sanything. Therefore it is better not to draw parallels.
