Strategic Signaling: A Lever for France in the Competition Between Powers?
From the joint and combined Orion 2023 exercice to the deployment of Leclerc tanks in Romania, through the qualification fire of new missiles, the French armed forces conduct many manoeuvres and activities that are now described as falling under the "strategic signaling".
This concept, resulting from nuclear deterrence, describes a way to spread a strategic message designed at the highest level of government, using several levers, of which military action is one of the main ones. Properly handled, strategic signaling demonstrates France's willingness and credibility to defend its interests and those of its partners. It also allows to modulate the action and reaction of the competitor by avoiding crossing the threshold of the conflictuality, and is part of a broader approach of influence, essential in a perspective of a multi domain integrated action.
However, in order to be effective, that is to say correctly perceived by allies and opponents, this strategic signaling must be in line with the resources available to France, and with a coherent strategy that is still struggling to be defined over the long term. In addition, there is a need to ensure greater fluidity in the design and conduct of signaling, which is still sometimes confused with simple operational communication. Finally, to verify that the message has been understood and has had an impact, it is essential to engage in reflection on the feedback, particularly through the intelligence services.
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Strategic Signaling: A Lever for France in the Competition Between Powers?
Jérémy BACHELIER
Former Military Fellow, Security Studies Center, Ifri
Héloïse FAYET
Research Fellow and Head of the Deterrence and Proliferation program, Security Studies Center, Ifri
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
From Corsairs to Private Military Contractors. Nonmilitary Maritime Actors and the Historical Continuities of Naval Warfare
Since late 2023, several Houthi attacks on commercial shipping have involved privately contracted armed teams conducting defensive engagements and coordinating immediate response efforts, often in the relative absence of regular naval forces during the immediate hostilities at sea. These cases highlight a strategic tension that increasingly confronts modern navies. On the one hand, they are expected to conduct persistent, low-intensity maritime security tasks such as counterpiracy, maritime policing, and the protection of commercial shipping. On the other hand, they face renewed pressure to prepare for high-intensity conflict against peer and near-peer adversaries amid the return of great power competition.
Framework Nation: A European Challenge and French Ambition
First appearing in the early 2000s, the framework nation concept follows several distinct rationales, whether it refers to a country assuming the leadership of a military operation, directing a multinational capability project, or commanding a permanent force structure. In every case, the country that takes on this role fully intends to derive from it additional politico-military influence.
The Nuanced Relationship Between Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
Public sentiment is something decision-makers must contend with, especially in democratic states. However, the extent to which public opinion shapes foreign policy varies. Three Council of Councils experts in France, India, and Nigeria reflect on how public opinion does—and sometimes does not—affect foreign policy decisions.
Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?