The Narrative of Oriental Despotism in French Foreign Policy in the first half of the 19th century: connections and analogies with Modernity

Ilyichev Anton Vladimirovich Junior researcher, Museum of the Heroic Defense and Liberation of Sevastopol 299020, Russia, Sevastopol, General Ostryakov Ave., 250-V, sq. 11 ilichev-toni@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction. France, for most of its history, has been an active actor in the European and international political space with a pronounced expansionist, imperialist foreign policy. Along with the British, the French were engaged in seizing new raw material bases and markets, putting their conquests into the highest mission of spreading civilization. The key narrative of French politics from the 18th to the 20th centuries was the narrative of "Oriental despotism". With his help, the French administration was able to justify a series of bloody campaigns of conquest in Africa and Asia.

The purpose of the study is a comparative analysis of the French narrative of "Oriental despotism" in the first half of the 19th century with the modern political agenda of France in relation to Russia and the Special Military Operation (SVO). The subject of the study is the ideological justification and media coverage of French international campaigns in the first half of the 19th century and today. The object of the study is the narrative of "Oriental despotism" in the ideology of the political elites of France.

The chronological framework of the study covers two time periods: the period from the 1820s to the 1870s, which is characterized by an active period of using the narrative of "oriental despotism" in French foreign policy, as well as the modern stage. The latter refers mainly to the active phase of the conflict in Ukraine in 2022-2024.

The territorial scope of the study for the first time period covers three campaigns of the French state: the invasion of Algeria, the Crimean War and the operation in Indochina. For the modern period, they are concentrated on the territories of Ukraine and modern France.

To study the research topic, the works of foreign authors devoted to the ideological justification of French foreign policy in the first half of the XIX century were analyzed. Among them are the works of such researchers as E.L.Conklin, T. Kaiser, F. Venturi and E. Thomson. The materials dealing with the direct formation of the necessary public opinion in relation to the proposed target countries for the invasion were analyzed. These are the works of K.F. Volney, Pierre-de Tassi, Vincent-Yves Boutin, J.S.-L. Simond de Sismondi and A. Nettement. A separate group is research on the Second Empire. To study the ways of applying the narrative of "oriental despotism" at the present stage, publications of leading French newspapers ("Le Point", "Le Figaro", "Les Echos", "La Presse", "Le Monde") for 2022-2024 were analyzed.

The research methodology is based on a civilizational approach. Both general scientific research methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison) were used in the work so it is specialized. Specialized methods include qualitative content analysis, historical-cultural and historical-comparative methods.

The main part. The narrative of "Oriental despotism" has played a huge role in the political history of France since the XVIII century. The word "despot" is of Greek origin and means a master who dominates slaves or servants ^{[1, p. 741]}. Aristotle defined "despotism" as a special form of government similar to tyranny, which is characteristic of barbarians, since due to their "slave" nature they cannot resist despotic power ^{[2, p. 389]}. Medieval authors, translating the works of Aristotle into Latin, referred to the barbarians as "people from the East" ^{[3, p. 133]}. In France, the terms "despotism" and "despotic rule" were first used in the late 17th century – early 18th century, during the reign of Louis XIV. This was a peculiar reaction of the nobility to the growing power of the monarch and his encroachments on the class privileges of the nobility. Writers such as Francois de Salignac Fenelon or Duke Louis de Rouvroy Saint-Simon put into the meaning of the word "despotism" precisely the political system characteristic of Asian and barbaric countries, which, in their opinion, included the Ottoman Empire and China ^{[1, pp. 741-742]}. Thus, accusing the current royal family of the fact that the expansion of its powers leads to the transformation of France into the same barbaric and slave country.

The theory of despotism in Europe and France acquired its final form in the works of Charles Louis de Montesquieu. Researcher Roger Boche, analyzing the work of the latter, came to the conclusion that Montesquieu had two theories of despotism. One of them has acquired a classical status and usually has a broader representation in the works. This theory describes despotism as an absolute form of government by one person, whose main instrument of governance is fear ^{[1, p. 743]}. Although the regime itself is established by violent means, as soon as the power of the despot becomes firm, he transfers control to those close to him who lead on his behalf, while he himself is removed from public affairs ^{[1, p. 744]}. The despot himself is characterized as a lazy ignoramus, enslaved to his own pleasures. A person in a country with a despotic system of government "passively obeys" and blindly follows the will of the sovereign ^{[1, pp. 743-744]}. An important clarification here is that Montesquieu believes that not only governments, but also societies can be despotic ^{[3, p. 134]}. As part of his first theory, Montesquieu cites Asian or Eastern states (especially the Ottoman Empire) as examples of despotic regimes.

Montesquieu's first theory of despotism not only represents an element of theoretical understanding and reflection of despotism, but also serves as an instrument of criticism of the royal family in France.

Montesquieu's second theory of despotism seems to completely contradict the first. It reflects the author's concerns about the growing influence of commerce on the political life of the country and the coming urbanization. All this will lead to the fact that residents will begin to be interested only in the problems of their own earnings, which will lead to an increase in corruption and promiscuity of society ^{[1, pp. 756-757]}. Montesquieu concludes that this was the reason for the collapse of many republics ^{[1, pp. 750-751]}. From this point of view, despotism is presented as not the worst form of government, in some ways even more sincere. Montesquieu adds that despotism should be transformed into a form where fear is not the main tool of management and gives his own examples of solving this problem ^{[1, p. 759]}.

A striking example of the classic "Oriental despotism" for France was the Ottoman Empire. Not only philosophers and public figures, but also French historians made a significant contribution to the formation of the dehumanistic image of the Ottomans, which, when describing the history of the Ottoman Empire, focused on numerous coups and usurpations of power ^{[4, p. 71]}. The image of the despotic, barbaric Ottoman state served two important functions for the French political system. The first of these can be described as "religious antagonism." One of the pillars of almost all French state systems was the positioning of the state as a defender of the Christian faith. The despotism of the Ottoman Sultan, who "oppressed" the Christian population of the empire under his control, was used by French monarchs and governments to increase their own popularity and strengthen their positions in power ^{[4, p. 72]}.

The second function was in opposition. The despotic, largely tyrannical regime in the Ottoman Empire was opposed to the legitimate, absolute power in France ^{[4, p. 72]}.

By the New Time, the image of Asia and the East as a barbaric world had clearly developed in the European space, which must be freed from the yoke of tyranny. In France, the revolutionary events led to the formation of the idea of the "exclusivity of the French nation" in French society. And the mission of this "great nation" is to spread revolutionary ideas beyond the borders of the country, bringing civilization to the barbarian peoples ^{[5, pp. 16-17]}.

The narrative of "oriental despotism" was used as one of the main reasons for France's intervention in other countries. The defeat of Napoleonic France and the deep crisis inside the country led to the short-lived disappearance of this plot from the political culture of France.

The narrative of "oriental despotism" returns with the beginning of the Greek War of Independence (1821-1829). Researcher Jennifer Sessions rightly noted that the Greek struggle prepared the basis for the French invasion of Algeria ^{[6, p. 30]}. French public and political figures promoted the idea of a "crusade" to Greece in order to free Christians from the oppression of the Ottoman Turks ^{[6, p. 30]}. The accession of Charles X to the French throne in 1824 further politicized the Greek question within France. Liberals and Republicans were concerned that the successful military operation in Greece could be used by ultra-royalists to strengthen their position in power, since the protection of the religious rights of Christians was one of their ideological pillars.

The narrative of "Oriental despotism" and the invasion of Algeria by French troops. In 1830, the Bourbons used narratives of both the Old Regime and revolutionary France to legitimize the invasion of Algeria. The ultra-royalists have created a "traditional oriental despot" from the governor of Algeria, Hussein dey, who is opposed by the Christian monarch Charles X with a holy mission to liberate Algeria from the yoke of tyranny. Jennifer Sessions points out that the delegitimization of the Algerian ruler was aimed at legitimizing the power of the Bourbons in France ^{[6, p. 30]}.

By the beginning of the French invasion, thanks to the work of travelers, scientists and diplomats throughout the 17th and 18th centuries. Stable images of North Africa were created in the mass consciousness of the French and Europeans. Researcher Anne Thomson in her work "Barbary and enlightenment. European Attitudes towards the Maghreb in the 18th Century" dwells on this issue in detail. In addition to the image of "Eastern despotism" described above, one can single out the narrative of the "Turks". Algeria, despite the presence of the Ottoman militia and the fact of formal subordination to the Ottoman Sultan, was in many ways an independent entity. At the same time, most of the population was of Greek or Armenian origin rather than Turkish. For Europeans, all the inhabitants of the Maghreb were "Turks". This word itself carries a negative image for them. Anne Thomson writes:

"The very word "Turk" caused fear in the hearts of all Christians, because for centuries they were their opponents, the personification of the Antichrist, the embodiment of cruelty and callousness" ^{[7, p. 16]}.

French authors blamed the Turks for all sins and catastrophes, including the plague epidemic. Constantin Francois Volney in his work "Considérations sur la Guerre des Turc" wrote:

"It was through these barbarians that these disasters came to us, and with their stupid fanaticism they contribute to the spread and renewal of this infection" ^{[8, p. 765]}.

Religious prejudice and hatred were another component of European ideas about the inhabitants of the Maghreb. Pierre-de Tassi wrote in the preface to his work:

"I am often asked if they have an idea of Divinity. I am convinced that if these people were given the opportunity to communicate with them disguised as Christians, they would find the same rationality and resilience; however, all these qualities will disappear once they put on turbans again."^[9]

Hussein Dey's crimes were listed in an article in the Moniteur Universel newspaper for April 20, 1830: "violation of the principles of international law, violation of treaties and conventions, unjustified extortion, advance offensive demands contrary to the laws of the kingdom and the rights of French subjects, attacks on French ships, public insult to the French consul, shelling of French parliamentarians" ^[10].

The French Ministry of Defense has prepared a reference manual for the Afrika Korps, which was supposed to demonstrate to military personnel the "criminal regime of Hussein dey." The document is based on the notes of travelers of the XVIII century. and the historical work of the talented engineer of the First Empire Vincent-Yves Boutin "Aperçu historique, statistique et topographique sur l'état d'Alger, à l'usage de l'armée expéditionnaire d'Afrique" ^{[6, p. 31]}.

The image of the enemy was based on three key pillars: radical Islamic fanatics ^{[11] [7, pp. 144-145] [10]}, despotic and cruel barbarians, and "vile" pirates ^{[12] [10] [13, pp. 266-268]}. It was in this form that the inhabitants of the Maghreb were presented to the majority of French residents thanks to literature and the media.

In the works and statements of that period, the most common terms used against the inhabitants of the Maghreb were: "barbarians", "pagans", "corsairs", "robbers", "slavers". The invasion of Algeria by French troops was presented to the inhabitants of France as "a righteous crusade by a Christian king against despotic corsairs who enslaved white people" ^{[6, p. 34]}.

The French engraving of 1830, which depicts an episode of the landing of French troops in Algeria, was accompanied by a text that, in the opinion of researcher Jennifer Sessions, could have been compiled by the apparatus of the Polignac government, as follows:

"African barbarians have been engaged in the slave trade by Europeans for many centuries, robbed merchant ships, demanded ransom for their release and humiliating tribute from the rulers for protecting [ships] from piracy. France had to avenge the humiliated humanity, clean up the seas and put an end to the power of these pirates" ^{[6, p. 34]}.

The narrative of "Eastern despotism" and the Second Empire. The Algerian adventure did not bring the Royalists the desired results. Instead of stabilizing the internal situation in the country, strengthening the power of the Bourbons and getting the country out of the political crisis, the July Revolution took place, which led to the establishment of the July monarchy. France returned to the narrative of "Oriental despotism" in the middle of the 19th century with the establishment of the Second Empire. Napoleon III used faith as one of the tools to strengthen his power, for which he enlisted the support of the Catholic Church. A clear confirmation of this is the results of the plebiscite vote on December 20-21, 1851, at which believers and clergy voted to support Napoleon III. The response of the new government was the active support of the Catholic Church and the adoption of a number of measures to increase the prestige and influence of the church in society. Among them are an increase in salaries for priests, the construction of new churches, the closure of cabarets (which the church community insisted on), exceptional freedom of assembly (under conditions of the establishment of an authoritarian system of government) and freedom of speech, the restoration of social prestige and influence of rural priests, etc. ^[14]

The rapid strengthening of the Church's position and its influence in society was the reason why Napoleon III used the religious factor in foreign policy to further strengthen his position.

The priority goal of the new regime on the world stage was to restore France's status as a great power. To accomplish this, a large-scale campaign was launched, including both diplomatic work on the recognition of the Bonapartist regime by European monarchies, and the active conduct of expansionist/colonial campaigns.

According to the Constitution of 1852, all the levers of mass media management were concentrated in the hands of government bodies, thereby ensuring the Bonapartist regime full control over media resources ^{[15, p. 215]}. But it is precisely during the period of censorship and strict control of the media that there is a surge in the development of the press. The number of newspapers printed daily increased from 150,000 in 1852 to 1 million in 1870. At the same time, it is worth noting that not all publications were subjected to strict censorship. Magazines and newspapers dealing with issues of art, culture and science, which completely lacked politics, were not subjected to strict control ^{[16, p. 129]}. The period of the 1852-1860s was characterized by the dominance of the Bonapartist press in society, which was under the direct control of state structures ^{[17, p. 41]}.

In 1535, an agreement was concluded between Suleiman and Francois I, which granted France the status of "Protector of the Holy See", whose powers and capabilities were significantly expanded in 1740 ^[18]. Thus, France, along with Russia, had significant influence in Palestine and the Levant in the XVIII – XIX centuries. Such a balance of power posed a threat to British Asia, which led to the active policy of Foreign Minister Henry John Temple Palmerston to open a consulate in Palestine ^[19].

In 1851, the Eastern question escalated again. There were several reasons for this. First of all, the weakening of the Ottoman Empire and, it would seem, its imminent collapse were used by Emperor Nicholas I as an excuse to establish control over the Bosphorus and Dardanelles Straits. In order to implement this scenario peacefully, negotiations were initiated with British Ambassador George Hamilton Seymour. During these negotiations, the option of dividing the territories of the Ottoman Empire and spheres of influence between Britain and Russia was proposed. However, the negotiations were perceived by the British side as a threat. The advance of the Russian Empire into the Mediterranean Sea was also unprofitable for Napoleon III.

In 1851, with the assistance of the French side, a conflict was ignited between the churches in Palestine. Under the threat of a naval blockade and French intervention, the Sultan decides to hand over the keys to the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem to Catholics, and a silver star was placed on the temple itself ^{[20, pp.8-9] [21, pp. 452-454]}.

The "Eastern question" was a convenient reason for Napoleon III to implement a whole range of political tasks:

1) the liquidation of the Holy Alliance and the dismantling of the Vienna system of international relations, which would ensure the return of France as the leading power in the European space;

2) strengthening one's own position in the country;

3) the preservation of the Ottoman Empire due to the inadmissibility of expanding the influence of the Russian Empire on the Mediterranean region ^[22].

Napoleon III, intending to restore the status of France as a colonial empire, faced a number of problems inside the country. The French political elite remained divided over the status of the armed forces. The government still retained a faction loyal to the ideas of the revolutionaries of the 1848s about European equality, blurring borders and the era of general disarmament ^[22]. In part, these ideas were supported by a number of economists and socialists who believed that excessive funds were being spent on the armed forces ^[22]. Another group insisted on expanding the role of the army and raising its prestige. During the July monarchy, the image of a "soldier-worker" was used. After the collapse of the July regime, the concept of "the armed forces as a kind of school of life" was proposed ^[22]. During the Second Empire, there was a transition from the army as a kind of civilizational school to the armed forces, which play the role of a refuge for moral values, in the era of an individualistic, materialistic corrupt society ^[22].

The Algerian army served as an ideal example of the above, since these were units that had significantly more combat experience than the troops in the metropolis. However, the popularization of the image of the "African soldier" had a number of drawbacks. The main one is the military. The soldiers in Algeria had specific experience in warfare, mostly of the guerrilla type. The Algerian army has never faced a professional European army. Subsequently, this will play a significant role in the fighting in the Crimea.

Another problem was the "culture of violence", which is a pillar of the French school of colonial warfare of General Tom Robert Bugeau ^{[23, pp. 11-12]}. The French military in Algeria built their tactics of warfare on the ideas of racial superiority and extermination, believing that the "natives" are able to understand only the language of violence ^{[23, p. 12]}. The resonance and scandals in society caused by the news of the "violent actions" of the French troops in Algeria, including the infamous incident in the caves of Dahra, forced the metropolis to exert pressure on the colonial troops ^{[23, p. 12]}. As a result, Tom Robert Bugeau was forced to partially change his policy, taking control of the "Arabs" and using them as a tool for the development of new territories. However, this did not mean the disappearance of violence as a tool of management and control. The relations established during this period between the French colonists and the indigenous population persisted until 1962 ^{[23, p. 13]}.

The creation of a colonial empire implies the presence of a powerful navy, and there was also a serious problem with this. Traditionally, the French had a negative attitude towards the naval forces. The population associated the navy with a "catastrophe", naval operations were incomprehensible to them, and difficult conditions of service and a system of corporal punishment did not contribute to the growth of the prestige of the country's Navy ^[22]. Napoleon III intended to create a fleet based on professional personnel, where the service would be based not on a system of punishments, but on encouragement ^[22].

As a result, despite all the efforts of Napoleon III, the attitude of the French towards the armed forces remained ambiguous. A deep wound from the bloody wars of the Republic and the First Empire remained in the collective memory of the people. For a certain part of the population, military service continued to be perceived as a "blood tax" ^[22].

The beginning of the information campaign on the Eastern question was the pamphlet by Eugène Bors "The Question of Holy Places". In the second part of the brochure, Orthodox clergy in the Holy Land were accused of intrigues, harassment of Catholics and their religious rights, as well as deliberate damage and improper control over Christian shrines ^{[24, pp. 46-60]}.

The position of the Catholic population and the Catholic Church of France was to put forward the following theses:

"It will take centuries for the Russians to shed as much blood as the French in the Crusades... Russians did not take part in the Crusades. The primacy of France in the East among Christian peoples is so strong that even the Turks call Europe "Frankistan".. ^{[25, p. 23]}.

Napoleon III, despite the aggressive rhetoric from Catholics on the Eastern issue (which was typical for many Catholic publications in Europe and the United States) and a number of provocative actions, was not interested in involving France in a full-scale war. The reason for this is public opinion. After the numerous upheavals of the late XVIII – first half of the XIX centuries, the French people were not ready to approve another campaign of conquest. Napoleon III understood this perfectly well and even in his speech in Bordeaux in 1852 noted:

"Because of distrust, people say, "Empire means there will be a war." I say, on the contrary, Empire means peace. The peace that France has needed for so long, and when everything is good in France, then so is the whole world. Fame is indeed inherited, but not war. I understand that, like the Emperor, I have many conquests ahead of me. I, like him, want to bring the warring parties back into a single, great national channel. I want to bring religion, morality and prosperity to that part of the population that in the land of faith barely knows the commandments of Christ, that among the most fertile land can barely afford basic necessities.... We are surrounded everywhere by ruins that need to be restored, false gods that need to be destroyed and the truth that needs to prevail. That's what I mean by the Empire, if it is destined to recover. These are the conquests that I have prepared for all those who, like me, wish the well–being of our country - my soldiers" ^[26].

After the refusal of Emperor Nicholas I to accept the Vienna Note, Napoleon III was forced to take drastic measures. The emperor announced the imminent possibility of France's participation in the war during his speech at the opening of the legislative session on March 2, 1854.:

"I did everything to keep the peace. Europe knows that if France draws her sword, it will be because she was forced to. She knows that France is not thinking about its expansion. It wants to resist the dangerous encroachments of a [colossal] power, which, with its successive invasions, covers both the North and the South, which has two inland seas from which it can bring down its army and navy on our civilization… Together with England, we are going to Constantinople to protect the Sultan and at the same time protect the rights of Christians. We are going there to protect the freedom of maritime trade and our legitimate influence in the Mediterranean… We go with all those who wish the triumph of the rule of law, justice, civilization..." ^[27]

Nevertheless, despite the fact that French society was not ready for a new war, the narrative of the "crusade against Russia" managed to find a response not only among Catholics, but also among liberals and Republicans ^{[28, p. 141]}. The French people counted on a quick, victorious war. The rise in bread prices caused by the crop failure in 1854, the lack of any significant successes on the front line, which signaled a prolongation of the conflict, led to a gradual increase in public discontent ^[29].

The capture of Sevastopol by the Allied forces on August 27 (September 8), 1855, became a key event of the Crimean War. Although for Napoleon III himself, who was preparing plans to oust Russia from the Crimean Peninsula, it was not a sign of the end of the war, the difficult situation of the Russian Empire (the proximity of default, the lack of military and financial resources to continue the conflict, the growth of public dissatisfaction within the country, the threat of uprisings) forced Emperor Alexander II to negotiate. The Paris Peace Treaty was the first high-profile victory of Napoleon III in foreign policy. The negotiations in Paris marked the destruction of the 1815 system and the return of France to the international arena as an influential actor. In addition, Napoleon III managed to create a significant gap in the Austro-Russian alliance, and curbing the exorbitant demands of British representatives allowed Russia and France to come closer.

The victory in Crimea strengthened the support of Napoleon III not only among Catholics, but also among the left, and also contributed to the growth of nationalism and patriotism among the people ^[14].

Napoleonic propaganda turned to the narrative of Oriental despotism and in the case of expansion into Indochina. Thus, under the pretext of protecting French Catholic missionaries and the Christian faith from Annamite attacks, an intervention was carried out in Cochinchina (southeastern Indochina) ^{[17, p. 129]}. These ideas could have received wide support among the peoples, but the publications of journalist Eugene Veillot managed to partially reverse the effect. In his materials, the journalist criticized the colonial policy of France, calling it ineffective, costly and demonstrating the moral weakness of the state in Indochina ^{[17, pp. 129-130]}.

Paradoxically, while Catholics criticized the French government for the meager results of the campaign, liberals expressed support for the government, which saw this as an opportunity to strengthen their positions in society by playing on the patriotic feelings of citizens.

Thus, for the period of the first half of the XIX century. The narrative of "eastern despotism" can be defined as a policy of ideological justification of external expansion, through the creation of a dehumanizing image of the enemy, based on the contrasting contrast of civilization and barbarism.

The myth of France as a state with a civilizing mission was preserved not only during the years of the Third Republic, but also continues to exist today. The former president of the French Republic, Jacques Chirac, in his speech in 1998, managed to interpret the colonial policy of France as the transition of society from a slave-owning to a democratic one, which took place under the shadow of the ideals of the French republic ^{[30, p. 148]}.

The modern stage. France still uses the narrative of Eastern despotism against Russia today. At the same time, it is necessary to immediately note its partial, meaningful transformation and a completely different nature of application. The process of decolonization that swept the world after World War II forced the French elites to significantly change their views on the format of interaction with their former colonies, as well as the general course of foreign policy to the state. The expansionist policy, which aimed to seize new territories and markets, was replaced by the policy of "Francophonie", which meant establishing close trade and economic cooperation with the ex-colonies. Researchers E.I. Fillipova and V.R. Fillipov in their work "The Collapse of the French Colonial Empire in the politics of memory of the Fifth Republic" noted that French society continues to remain split in relation to the colonial policy of the state in the XIX-XX centuries ^{[31, p.78]}. At the same time, the narrative of "oriental despotism" began to be used by a number of French publications to describe the Russian state. In 2007, the newspaper Figaro published an article entitled "Comment Vladimir Poutine orchestra le nouveau despotisme russe ("How Vladimir Putin establishes a new despotism in Russia)" ^[32]. In the material, we can see that the author focuses on and emphasizes such aspects of despotism as "flouting the law" and "using the repressive apparatus" ^[31]. In 2013, LesEchos published the article "La Russie et la tentation du "despotisme oriental" ("Russia and the temptation of Oriental despotism") ^[33]. The tonality of the material can already be traced in the annotation: "Russia continues to move away from Europe and is approaching Asia. The slow process is gradually inclining Moscow towards authoritarian rule and the dark pages of its history."^[33] The regime of government in Russia created by Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin is called, in the words of philosopher Karl Wittfogel, "Oriental despotism" ^[33]. The author of the publication, French political scientist Dominique Moisi, believes that the departure of the Moscow authorities towards an authoritarian, despotic regime is associated with internal economic, political and social problems ^[33]. According to the expert, in this way, the regime in Russia seeks to hide its own weakness ^[33]. In the LesEchos article, the author points out that the authoritarian form of government is characteristic of the Russian state when it feels its weakness ^[33]. The very next year, Le Point publishes an article by Nicolas Baveres "Parier sur la Russie au-delà du despotisme ("Betting on Russia beyond despotism")" ^[34]. The author writes:

"The excesses of the Winter Olympic Games in Sochi, for which $51 billion was spent, symbolize the personal power and cult of power that underlie Vladimir Putin's power. It was not for nothing that Montesquieu wrote in "On the Spirit of Laws": "Muscovy would like to give up its despotism, but it cannot.... The people consist of slaves tied to their land" ^[33].

Nicolasa Baveres believes that it is worth fighting despotism in Russia through an expanded partnership, meeting Russia's needs in the field of infrastructure and the latest technologies ^[34]. "The best antidote to autocracy is progress," the author writes ^[34].

It is worth noting that not all French publications have published materials with such characteristics in the direction of the Russian state. Such elements, at this stage, cannot be called part of a purposeful and systematic information campaign aimed at dehumanizing Russia in the French social creation. The French press is extremely heterogeneous. Among the French publications, you can find those that adhere to communist or left-wing views, as well as right-wing ideas. The appearance of materials with a certain tendentious view of Russia in the period from 2012 to 2017 can be partly explained by the beginning of a deep crisis in French-Russian relations, after the coming to power of the administration of F.Hollande. Serious differences have arisen between the countries on the resolution of the Syrian and Ukrainian crises. However, there were also positive aspects, including the "Nuclear deal with Iran" ^{[35, p.181]}. In general, this period of bilateral relations was characterized by the beginning of France's sanctions policy against Russia. With the coming to power of E. Macron, there were trends, if not to establish relations between states, then at least to build a constructive dialogue on a number of issues.

At the same time, after the start of a Special military operation in Ukraine on February 24, 2022, the number of publications showing a negative or biased attitude towards Russia is rapidly increasing.

On February 24, 2022, the publication of the journalist "La Press" Alexander Sirua is published under the title "Le délire d'un despote ("The Nonsense of a despot")" ^[36]. In it, the author points out that the world is on the verge of the largest military invasion in Europe since the Second World War. The president's speech, made by him on the night of February 24, was called "the dangerous ravings of a mad tyrant" ^[36]. And the president's theses about the genocide committed by Ukrainian troops in Donbass, the puppet nature of the Ukrainian regime, are "disinformation caused by paranoia" ^[36]. At the same time, the author does not provide any substantiated and supported counterarguments, leaning only towards an emotional, unprofessional reaction.

In March 2022, Nicolas Tenaillon's publications "Poutine est-il un dictateur, un despote ou un tyran? ("Is Putin a dictator, despot or tyrant?")" ^[37] and the association "Sauvons l'Europe" entitled "Comment Poutine a détruit la Russie: les infortunes du despotisme éclairé ("How Putin destroyed Russia: the misfortunes of enlightened despotism") ^[38]. The purpose of these two materials is to show Russia as a backward military dictatorship that sows war crimes around the world. There is a parallel with the image that the French created for Algeria and Hussein dey, but with minor adjustments. Instead of radical Islam, Orthodoxy, barbarian Turks, barbarians, Russians, and bloodthirsty pirates were replaced by war criminals.

In October 2022, the article "Lefigaro" was published with the headline "La barbarie, socle de la guerre russe ("Barbarism is the basis of the Russian war")", where the author accuses the armed forces of the Russian Federation of numerous war crimes and the creation of "filtration camps" on the territory of Ukraine ^[39]. Journalists of the same publication, in an earlier article entitled "La Syrie, le laboratoire de la barbarie guerrière de Vladimir Poutine" ("Syria, Vladimir Putin's laboratory for waging a barbaric war"), have already accused Russia of barbaric methods of warfare, which, in their opinion, were tested by Russia in Syria ^[40]. In general, publications about the alleged "crimes of the Russian army on the territory of Ukraine" were extremely widespread in 2022 ^{[41] [42] [43] [44] [45]}. In conclusion, we will focus in more detail on the pretentiousness and fallacy of these accusations.

It should be noted that a number of French publications continue to maintain a certain complementary view of Russia, and in particular this is manifested in the publication of materials where the authors condemn the military support of Ukraine from France. Negative publications about Russia can be linked to the opinions of individual journalists, analysts or editorial offices. Within the framework of the article, it is impossible to cover absolutely the entire information space of France within the established chronological framework of the study. In this regard, the thesis that the modern information space of France consists exclusively of anti-Russian publications can be considered pretentious. However, the study and coverage of such nominal materials is extremely necessary in the modern information agenda. Changes in the tone and nature of the presentation of material in major French publications serve as an important marker of public policy. The appearance of a wide range of anti-Russian publications in a number of information resources can serve as a preparation for the public to make any political decision.

At the present stage, when France does not pursue an active, expansionist policy, the narrative of "eastern despotism" must be interpreted in the context of the conflict in Ukraine. In this case, it is presented as a policy of ideological justification for providing military assistance to Ukraine in order to weaken the Russian state.

Conclusion

Throughout world history, the main narrative for argumentation to the electorate/population/subjects of the expansionist foreign policy of the state has been the narrative of an external threat with a contrasting contrast between civilization and barbarism. In the Ancient world, the Romans and the Hellenes argued for the seizure of territories by the thesis that they were the only carriers of civilization, surrounded by numerous barbaric ethnic groups. For the Hellenes, the Persian threat from the East was particularly relevant. Based on this existential threat to the Greek states, a narrative of "Oriental despotism" was created in enlightened Athens. In the Middle Ages, through the translation of ancient works, the narrative was adjusted in accordance with the current geopolitical conditions. The "Persian state" is being replaced by the Fatimid Caliphate, which will later be replaced by the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire threatened the European space not only as a military threat, but also as an economic one. It controlled the main trade routes from the East and Asia, before the discovery of the New World.

In France, stories about "despotism" and "despotic rule" began to take hold during the reign of Louis XIV, when the absolute power of the monarch began to pose a direct threat to the country's elites. The French school of philosophy has created images of "despot" and "despotism" as an absolute form of government of one person (usually ignorant and possessing all possible vices), established by violent means, where the main instrument of control is fear. Such "barbaric" countries as the Ottoman Empire and China, according to French figures, were taken as a basis.

The narrative of "Oriental despotism" was a double-edged weapon. The French monarchy used it to increase its support and influence within the country, reinforcing the images of the "barbaric East and Asia" with the status of the state as a protector of the Catholic population and the Christian faith. By dehumanizing the image of the Eastern and Asian population and supplementing it with religious antagonism, the French monarchy created the myth of the "exclusivity of the French nation", whose main task is civilizing, i.e. bringing civilization to barbaric territories. Thus, the French monarchy received a convenient tool that allowed it to legitimize almost any intervention in an Asian or Eastern state. At the same time, "despotism" was supposed to play the role of a balancing mechanism within the country. The French aristocracy, accusing the monarchical government of "despotism", thereby defended its economic and political interests, sending a clear signal to the supreme power.

Revolutionary events forced France to move away from the narrative of "oriental despotism." The authorities of the already restored monarchy turned to him during the peak of the socio-political crisis and tension within the country. The ultra-royalists, led by Charles X, intended to divert public attention from the problems inside the country and raise their popularity through external expansion. The choice fell on Algeria. The ultra-royalists based their myth-making on the narratives of both the Old Regime (the monarch as the defender of the Christian faith) and the revolutionary ones (the struggle for the liberation of peoples from the rule of tyranny). Thanks to the works of travelers, philosophers, the media, and public speeches, Algeria was turned into an "Oriental Despotism." However, the intervention in Algeria did not bring the desired results to the ultra-royalists, having the opposite effect, which resulted in the repeated fall of the Bourbon regime.

"Oriental despotism" was also used in the foreign policy of the Second Empire. In 1851, following the results of a popular plebiscite, the Second Empire was proclaimed in France, headed by Emperor Napoleon III. Napoleon I's nephew chose the Catholic faith as one of the pillars of his new government. Restoring the role and prestige of the church within the country after the Second Republic and the July Monarchy, Napoleon III used faith as a tool for external expansion. The aim of the new regime was the revival of France as an influential actor in the European political space, which was impossible with the existence of the Vienna system of international relations. To implement these plans, the ideal option was a "fast, victorious war." The aggravation of the "Eastern Question" in the 1850s in connection with the weakening of the Ottoman Empire provided an ideal platform for the realization of the set goals. France used the issue of holy sites as an excuse to provoke the Russian Empire into aggressive actions against the Ottoman Empire. Initially, Napoleon III did not plan direct military intervention by the French armed forces due to the deep trauma within the French people associated with the consequences of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. However, by playing on the religious issue and the ideals of the liberal democratic sense, the emperor managed to gain sufficient public support for the direct participation of the Second Empire in the conflict.

In addition to the Crimean War, the narrative of "Oriental despotism" was used to invade Indochina. Today, this narrative is used by a number of French publications and political forces in the information space when covering the Ukrainian crisis. Their goal is to create the necessary background, with the help of which the French authorities will be able to receive the necessary support from their own population for the subsequent provision of military assistance to Ukraine. The French authorities are thus striving to revive the status of France as one of the great powers on the European continent, through active participation in the Ukrainian crisis. The personification of the Russian state as an "eastern despotism" and Russian President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin as a "despot" or "tyrant" began long before the start of the special military operation on February 24, 2022. French journalists and political scientists tried to create a negative image of our country in order to justify the subsequent unfriendly actions by the French state against our state. With the beginning of the civil war in Ukraine in 2022, the image of the "eastern" barbaric state began to be broadcast through the prism of the "war crimes" of Russian troops. At the same time, the charges themselves have no evidence base. In the press, they are submitted through, as is correct, anonymous messages, absolutely unsupported by any evidence. In addition, the Ukrainian side has been repeatedly accused of falsifying evidence and deliberate staging. Back in 2022, a number of domestic publications reported on the work of a "fake factory" in Ukraine, waging an information war against Russia ^{[46],[47],[48],[49]}. Fabrizio Casar, a journalist from the Spanish edition, wrote about the presence of such centers in Ukraine that are engaged in fabricating evidence of "atrocities" and crimes of the Russian army ^[50]. You can learn more about the analysis of Ukrainian fakes about the armed forces of the Russian Federation in the telegram channel "Fight against fakes".

At the official level, Russia has repeatedly denied all accusations of war crimes against it. And the crimes of the armed forces of Ukraine, which were confirmed by representatives of the Investigative Committee of Russia, including nuclear terrorism (strikes on the Zaporizhia NPP), attacks on civilian facilities, shootings of Russian prisoners of war, are ignored by French publications. The existence of cases of Ukraine using prohibited methods of warfare has been documented in a number of reports by international organizations. As an example, we can cite the Human Rights Watch report of June 2023, where human rights defenders recorded the use of anti-personnel mines by the armed forces of Ukraine, prohibited by the treaty of 1996, which Ukraine also signed ^[51].

The appearance of a whole range of publications on the subject of "Russian war crimes on the territory of Ukraine" in a number of French publications coincides with the periods when France provided military assistance to Ukraine. In particular, the first mass wave of materials appeared in the French information field in March-April 2022. ^{[39],[40],[52],[53],[54],[55],[56],[57]}. And already in mid-April, the French authorities announced their intention to transfer CAESAR self-propelled artillery installations to Ukraine. The appearance in the French information field of publications dehumanizing Russia and its armed forces is one of the ways to prepare public opinion in France to provide military assistance to Ukraine. This, in turn, only leads to a further escalation of the conflict. Today, France, along with Germany and the United Kingdom, is one of the main suppliers of military equipment and other military services to Ukraine. According to the official resource of the French Ministry of Defense, the total amount of assistance provided by France to Ukraine amounted to over 3.8 billion euros. The same material indicates that the French have trained over 10,000 Ukrainian soldiers at bases in Poland and France. In addition, the deployment of additional troops in Romania, Estonia and Latvia is noted ^[58]. Despite the fact that the French authorities have repeatedly expressed their lack of intentions to enter into a direct armed conflict with Russia, senior French officials make a number of provocative statements that do not contribute to the settlement of the conflict in Ukraine. So in March and May 2024, French President E. Macron did not rule out the possibility of sending French military personnel to the territory of Ukraine. On May 20, 2024, the head of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the French Parliament, Jean-Louis Bourlange, called for allowing Ukraine to strike with French weapons on the territory of the Russian Federation ^[59].

Thus, the narrative of "oriental despotism" and "despotism" is one of the active tools of French foreign policy. The increasing influence of the Russian state on the world stage forced the French, taking as a basis the narrative of "Eastern despotism", to create a story about the "Russian threat" and the interpretation of the Russian state as a barbaric power inhabited by barbarian nomads. This narrative was created in the Old Bourbon regime, was actively used in revolutionary, Bonapartist France, the July Monarchy and was subsequently inherited by the Second Empire. Modern France also uses this narrative, which is actively reflected in the statements of French politicians and the tone of publications of the French and French-speaking press.