Expertise
Nine pieces in Revue Défense Nationale, an institutional op-ed with thirty-two signatories on nuclear policy, a NATO symposium. This is not a side interest: it is the best-documented field in the corpus.
Revue Défense Nationale has been published since 1939. One does not appear in it nine times by accident, and one does not publish opinions there: one publishes analysis grounded in fact, read by an editorial team that knows the subject. It is the most solid foundation of this body of work, and also the least known to the general public.
In April 2008, President Bush opened the largest summit in NATO’s history by setting Ukrainian and Georgian membership as a priority for Washington. A Franco-German move, coordinated with Moscow, denied them official candidate status.
That same year, Henri de Grossouvre drew a conclusion which the journal’s official English summary puts as follows: the episode illustrates America’s relative geopolitical decline. Written in 2008. The argument can be debated; it cannot be back-dated.
The following year, with Pierre Pascallon, he held that Greater Europe exists “from the Atlantic to the Urals” and therefore includes European Russia — and drew an operational consequence from it: the convening of an international conference, and the handling of pan-European security within the OSCE. Here too the approach is architectural. Diagnosis is only the way in.
In June 2026 he co-signed, with thirty-one others — parliamentarians, general officers, academics, among them Pierre Lellouche and Jacques Sapir — an op-ed that belongs not to commentary but to applied constitutional law. Nine measures are set out: constitutional reinforcement of Article 35, a legal definition of co-belligerence, a mandatory parliamentary debate on vital interests, and the possible use of a referendum for major strategic commitments.
The point of the text is not to settle a quarrel between two camps. It is to establish who decides, by what procedure, and under what oversight. That is a question of institutional machinery, and it is exactly where proposal work parts company with the op-ed page.
Two further angles complete the field. The first is Balkan: as early as 2015, a six-page op-ed cast Serbia as a hub between the European Union and Moscow — ten years before the question returned to the foreground.
The second is less expected and worth pausing on. In 2021 he devoted a review to Franck Galland’s War and Water, and took from it the essential point: water infrastructure as both target and weapon, from the chlorination of troops at Verdun to the destruction of dams, then on to contemporary vulnerabilities — desalination, energy dependence, cyber threats. This is where defence meets the sovereignty-technologies pillar.
Revue Défense Nationale, n° 713
At the Bucharest summit of April 2008, President Bush set NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia as a priority for Washington; a Franco-German move, coordinated with Moscow, denied them official candidate status. The journal's own English summary calls the episode a historic event illustrating America's relative geopolitical decline. Written in 2008.
Revue Défense Nationale, n° 716
The authors hold that Greater Europe exists “from the Atlantic to the Urals” and therefore includes European Russia. They call for an international conference to settle the continent's disorder, and for pan-European security to be handled within the OSCE.
Le Diplomate, 32 signatories
A collective op-ed bringing together thirty-two signatories — among them Pierre Lellouche, Jacques Sapir, general officers and academics. The text calls for stronger parliamentary oversight of military commitments and puts forward nine measures, including constitutional reinforcement of Article 35, a legal definition of co-belligerence, and a mandatory parliamentary debate on vital interests. An institutional proposal, not a commentary.
Revue Politique et Parlementaire, Libre opinion
A reading of the August 2019 Brégançon meeting as the start of a strategic shift. The article develops two lines: re-engaging Russia as a European power, and forming a political vanguard — France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg — in the service of strategic autonomy, in defence as in technology. It deals explicitly with Brexit and British defence cooperation. One formulation stands out: Europeans have become the object rather than the subject of international relations.
Revue Défense Nationale, Tribune T606
Six pages on Serbia at a crossroads, after years of difficult relations with the European Union. The analysis casts the country as a hinge between the EU space and Moscow — ten years before the question returned to the centre of attention.
Revue Conflits
A review of Franck Galland's book. It picks out water infrastructure as both target and weapon, from the chlorination of troops at Verdun to the destruction of dams, and follows through to contemporary vulnerabilities: desalination, energy dependence, cyber threats. A “critical infrastructure” entry that is anything but incidental in this corpus.