After a scholarly work on the past of Russia and its perspective with the war in Ukraine, Jean-François COLOSSIMO tells the story of the ancient empires of the 19th century, Tsarist, Ottoman, Persian, Ging, Mughal which seemed to have disappeared forever. In reality, “they had only hibernated, they reappeared, radically transformed”; and this is the thesis of the book that explains how this reappearance took place, the consequences for the West (the enemy) and the measures that the West should consider to protect itself against this “surge of hatred” “War is declared”: this is the title of the first chapter, which describes how “the domestication of the masses inside necessarily corresponds to the domination of the peoples outside. Whoever says empire means exponential seizures and embezzlements, unlimited enlargement and enslavement in order to sanctify war. The following chapters explain, according to the author’s usual methodology, historical reviews of empires explaining the present, their unsuccessful Europeanization from the 18th century, their artificial westernization in the 19th century, their crazy totalitarian modernization in the 20th century, their cultural self-destruction. The book ends with a long development on “The Great Rearmament” through a recourse “to the old religious beliefs” to revitalize the oppressive and repressive “imperial” systems. After World War II, the old world became bipolar between the communist East and the capitalist West.  On the one hand, the establishment of the new world requires the creation of a rational cult, where the human is completely detached from the divine. On the other hand, the restoration of the old world requires the creation of a streamlined cult where the human bends completely to the divine. The United States is subject to types of patterns similar to those of empires. America is its own religion. The founding narrative of the United States is that of a supernatural election to happiness. Oppositions, contrary to the initial analysis, are frontal. When quickly, writes the author, “the West became the imperial nickname of Washington,” the “opprobrium” that could only be thrown on the United States is in fact on the West, which has become “world enemy No. 1.” What is the situation of France? That of a great loneliness! Alone as a priority target for authoritarian empires to denigrate it in the eyes of “this fiction of the global South.” Alone, but also the only country in the European Union to hold the bomb. It must therefore rearm its power, redeploy its influence by “demonstrating that it has always been more than the West. Finally, the author defends the thesis that the real battle to be fought is not against de-westernization, but for de-globalization. Where we recognize that geopolitics meets the new economic expectations of the West. Basically, as General de Gaulle said: France’s policy is not made on the stock market. A statement that Jean François COLOSSIMO invited us to meditate on again! Review written by Dominique CHESNEAU

Climatology is far from an exact science, and there is a great deal of research that does not support the one-sided conclusions of the IPCC, the political body created by Thatcher and Reagan. Since 1950, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) has been studying the major thermal oscillations in the Pacific Ocean. The “el niño” phenomenon occurs every 5 to 7 years and moves huge ocean masses from east to west, triggering torrential rains here, droughts elsewhere and giant fires in Australia and Indonesia. Its influence is global. The temperature peak (+2 degrees Celsius) lasts from nine to twelve months and is followed by a reverse episode of cold anomaly. Over the past 50 years, the WMO has observed no increase in the frequency or amplitude of the phenomenon. With such erratic behaviour, it is impossible to blame carbon dioxide, which is released continuously rather than in bursts every two to seven years. The author shows us that the planet’s climate system is above all an oceanic machine. The mechanisms involved – in these oscillations – lie at the bottom of the oceans, in the powerful underwater currents that link the Pacific and the Atlantic, via the Antarctic Circumpolar Current that plunges into the abyss here and rises up along the coasts. Euler’s fluid mechanics teaches us that a fluid flows because of a pressure difference between the back and the front. As far as the Gulf Stream is concerned (over a hundred kilometres wide and over a kilometre high), it flows because of a difference in thermal tension between the poles and the equator, because as long as the sun shines and as long as the Earth’s axis remains tilted, the pole will remain a cold spot and the equator a hot spot. The ocean’s thermal inertia explains the difference between continental and oceanic climates. Even in the polar regions, everything stems from this property of storage and resistance to temperature variations. The North Pole is less cold than the Antarctic, which sits on a rocky base. Everywhere on the planet, it is the ocean that dictates to the atmosphere and not the other way round. All the laws of climate identified by Euler, Fourier, Planck, Angstrom and Coriolis apply to us and cannot be reduced to the greenhouse effect alone. Planck’s law tells us that if the earth’s temperature were to rise by 1 degree, the amount of radiation sent back into the cosmos would instantly increase by 4%, causing the earth to cool.  Life on Earth is entirely dependent on solar radiation. Without it, the planet would cool down very quickly. The Earth receives and re-emits millions of billions of watts of solar radiation into the cosmos, without which the Earth would have boiled over a long time ago, wiping out all life. It’s worth remembering this when so many people believe that it’s carbon dioxide that’s warming us up. First-year physics students learn to calculate the balance of incoming and outgoing radiation. The ratio of temperatures leads to a remarkable result that is equal to a simple ratio of lengths: radius of the sun to distance between the Earth and the sun. This equation says that our planet could see its temperature rise (or fall) to worrying proportions as a result of three changes: the diameter of the Sun, its surface temperature and its distance from the Earth. Taken as a whole, this explains the remarkable stability of the planet’s climate over thousands of centuries and argues against any dramatic acceleration. The climate is not driven by carbon dioxide; it is fundamentally regulated by the sun. In his book, the author tries to play it down. We are undoubtedly going through a phase of slow warming, but Planck’s response is a powerful brake on runaway warming, as the atmosphere-ocean system is able to moderate any lurching. For millions of years, the planet has been expelling its excess heat into space by radiation and internally by Fourier conduction and atmospheric convection – including Halley’s equatorial cell – three moderating effects that combine forces to ensure climate stability. As for the ideal culprit, C0². The sharp rise in temperatures at the time of the Vikings is in no way attributable to CO², as it enabled them to colonise Greenland and grow vines there before the cold returned. The decisive argument is provided by Al Gore himself. The inconvenient truth revealed to the public the ice cores taken from the depths of Antarctica. This fossil air is a precious archive, tracing the spectacular parallel between carbon dioxide levels and palaeo-temperatures over a period of 650,000 years. So have we returned to the great fears of the year 1000? It’s time to abandon facile emotion in favour of reason and describe the climate machine in all its complexity, governed by the placid inertia of deep ocean currents. Daniel HUSSON holds a doctorate in particle physics and is a lecturer in thermodynamics and Einstein’s relativity at the Université Louis Pasteur in Strasbourg. He is the author or co-author of more than seventy international scientific publications, and has also published the book Quarks, the story of a discovery. Review wrritten by Michel Gabet

In Putting an End to Misconceptions About Agriculture, Sophia Majnoni d’Intignano offers a lucid and well-documented analysis of the clichés surrounding French agriculture. Through 37 common misconceptions, she rigorously and thoughtfully dismantles often misunderstood notions while opening perspectives to rethink our agricultural model. One of the book’s key strengths lies in the author’s ability to combine expertise with accessibility. A trained jurist, she draws on her experience and knowledge to shed light on complex topics, whether they involve agricultural subsidies, environmental challenges, or issues related to food sovereignty. Far from simply denouncing problems, she offers a reflection that places agriculture at the heart of major societal choices. Majnoni directly addresses persistent myths such as “France is an agricultural powerhouse” or “Organic farming is excessively subsidized.” These analyses are supported by clear data and concrete examples, allowing readers to better understand the economic, social, and environmental dynamics at play. For instance, she highlights how agricultural subsidies, often criticized, are in fact distributed unequally, favoring large farms over smaller ones. The book also excels in demonstrating that agriculture and ecology are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, Majnoni highlights alternative models, such as organic farming, presenting them not as utopian, but as credible and necessary solutions to current crises—be they climatic, sanitary, or economic. She also shows that reducing chemical inputs is not an insurmountable challenge but rather an opportunity for innovation in farming. Despite the complexity of the topics covered, the book remains accessible thanks to its clear structure and straightforward style. The division into thematic chapters—economic, nutritional, environmental, and societal challenges—makes it easier to grasp the many facets of French agriculture. The arguments are well-supported without falling into excessive technical jargon, making the work relevant for both specialists and the general public. Putting an End to Misconceptions About Agriculture is a valuable contribution for anyone interested in the future of French and global agriculture. Sophia Majnoni d’Intignano succeeds in clarifying often misunderstood issues while opening avenues for building a more sustainable and equitable agricultural model. This is an essential book to foster critical and democratic debate. Sophia Majnoni d’Intignano is a jurist. She has been working on ecological policies for over twenty years. She was responsible for energy issues and later director of Greenpeace’s programs. She is now the general delegate of the National Federation of Organic Agriculture. Review by Benoit Frayer

While many economic articles talk about the CAC 40 and ETIs on a daily basis, it’s worth remembering that French SMEs represent 150,000 companies, more than 4 million employees (29% of the workforce) and, symbolically, almost €1,000 billion in sales. The author places particular emphasis on the presence of SMEs in the local economic fabric, which they animate through the “presential economy”. This gives them a human and civic dimension, through the multiplicity and diversity of the skills they possess, as opposed to large companies that have often relocated tasks with lower added value. The first part is about “Better Living”. Here we find the ideas of benevolence, sharing the fruits of growth and working in the regions. The second part focuses on “breathing easier”. It explains the advantages for the ISR of digitisation as a “national cause” and the greening of funding. The final proposal on the EPZs does not call them into question but recommends a more concerted deployment schedule with businesses. The next part deals with the issue of “living together better”. This more committed section begins with a plea for support for SMEs through a redistributive supply-side policy. The author takes a stand on recent or pending reforms to the organisation of work (pensions, freedom to demonstrate peacefully, Sunday work, etc.). The fourth part, “Making better decisions”, is more political and advocates the courage of unpopularity. It recommends that the Left rethink its image of business and that the Right reaffirm its social and entrepreneurial values. And he concludes with the need to resume dialogue between stakeholders to ensure that SMEs are properly integrated into society. The final section, “Better integration”, makes recommendations on the integration of young people, immigration, difficult neighbourhoods and the place of religion. In the future, these SMEs will be faced with the challenges of mastering digitisation, increasing complexity (regulatory, fiscal, environmental) and the transfer of ownership. This book is very well structured, with many concrete proposals. The focus sections at the end of each part allow you to go further on a number of subjects (e.g. SMEs and the Circular Economy). We can’t help but appreciate this spotlight on SMEs, which are often overlooked at a time when new generations are looking to this type of business for its agility and human scale. After the “start-up nation”, the author recommends the “SME nation”. Quite a programme ! Bernard Cohen-Haddad is Chairman of CPME Paris Ile de France. He chairs a THINK Tank and the economic commission of CESER Ile de France. Review written by Olivier STEPHAN