Gérald Arboit, head of intelligence studies at the National Conservatory of Arts and Crafts (Cnam), associate researcher at the Sorbonne Identity joint research unit, international relations and civilization of Europe, suggested Thursday March 31 on franceinfo that the departure of General Éric Vidaud as head of French military intelligence is perhaps a “political issue” which aims to “cleaning up the Le Drian heritage”. General Éric Vidaud, who took office only seven months ago, has been questioned in his handling of the war in Ukraine. The Chief of the Defense Staff, General Burkhard, had regretted that the French analyzes on Ukraine did not have the level of the Americans. “You can hardly blame him for a lot of things”believes Gérald Arboit.
franceinfo: What do you think of the replacement of General Vidaud at the head of military intelligence?
Gerald Arboit: General Vidaud had been there for seven months, for which he can hardly be held responsible for many things. Then, General Burkhard did not criticize the intelligence, he simply said, by the sensors that France had, that the French had different intelligence from what the Americans had. He did not bring disgrace to military intelligence. In any case, military intelligence in the Ukrainian question intervenes very little since the French military forces are not involved. So it’s not his job, it’s the job of the DGSE.
Why was he sidelined?
The hypotheses are multiple. It may be a coup in the government majority, since he was a former member of the Jean-Yves Le Drian cabinet. So maybe we want to clean up the Le Drian legacy. It is perhaps also the kick of the donkey of the DGSE vis-à-vis the DRM. It can be simply a political political question if it’s Le Drian or simply political because we wanted to put someone else in the place.
“We are on the eve of elections and we need to free up positions to be able to put other people in their place.”
Gérald Arboit, head of intelligence studies at Cnamat franceinfo
Are there French agents in Ukraine?
Yes, there are French agents. There are French operations underway. Less than we would like to see since we don’t have much to offer them. Just look at the statistics that the Ukrainians have released on the donations that NATO countries and Western countries have given to Ukraine in terms of military equipment. We didn’t give much.
At the highest level, French intelligence is criticized for not seeing this conflict coming, unlike the Americans. What did we miss?
The problem is that we all saw the conflict coming. Except that we have not seen it with the same precision. We have the same analytical capacity, but we are in France, the United States and the British are overseas. So they have another vision and another interest in the matter. It was expected that the Russians would intervene after spring, that is to say from the time when the land was dry and when tanks or armored vehicles could be driven across the fields.
France also has many intelligence tools such as satellites?
We have a whole intelligence apparatus, from human sensors to electronic and satellite sensors. We have analytical skills that are going well. Afterwards, we are not in divination. You have to see what the Americans did between November and February. They said: “They will attack tomorrow”. Each time, they changed the date. Where there was a difference was that apparently the British had two sources embedded in the Russian political apparatus that gave this information. But the latest information that came out from the Americans is that the operation would be launched between February 12 and February 22. And we can clearly see that Putin is realizing the objectives he announced on February 22.
France is struggling in terms of intelligence?
In terms of intelligence, we are in the top 3 or 4, there is no problem. There, we are on a problem more of French policy than of war in Ukraine. If we had something to reproach the DRM for, it was rather the coups d’etat which had not been planned in Mali. But there, General Vidaud has nothing to do with it since he was not in office at that time.