C’est avec grand intérêt que j’ai lu cet article, Imperial Entomology : Boris P. Uvarov and Locusts, c.1920-c.1950 de Michael Worboys.

« Claude Peloquin has argued that the drive for locust control exploited a particular conjunction of interests: it ‘called for precisely the type of international, federal, and techno-political apparatus that was necessary to legitimize the role of Free France at the head of the remaining French empire, and as the node linking the colonies with the other Allied countries’. Uvarov represented Britain. He was critical of the response in French colonies and urged the adoption of a more ‘generalised fight’, using military personnel and poisons. He cited British, MEALU-led operations as a model. After some hesitance, the French delegates, keen to have British support, agreed to adopt stronger measures and establish an Office national anti-acridien (ONAA).Peloquin argues that the CFLN compromised because they wanted not just Allied practical support, but recognition of their political legitimacy, which was ‘best achieved by approval of the entomologist representing Great-Britain, at this instance, Boris Uvarov’. »

Je ne peux que renchérir les propos de Worboys en mentionnant quelques hypothèses. À faire.