{"id":65602,"date":"2003-05-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-05-07T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2003\/05\/07\/powell-rumsfeld-et-le-reste-tous-en-guerre\/"},"modified":"2003-05-07T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2003-05-07T00:00:00","slug":"powell-rumsfeld-et-le-reste-tous-en-guerre","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2003\/05\/07\/powell-rumsfeld-et-le-reste-tous-en-guerre\/","title":{"rendered":"Powell-Rumsfeld et le reste, tous en guerre<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Powell-Rumsfeld et le reste, tous en guerre<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t7 mai 2003 L’Irak attise les oppositions \u00e0 Washington. Ce n’est pas nouveau mais cela ne cesse de s’amplifier, de prendre une allure structurelle. De plus en plus se v\u00e9rifie la remarque que la vraie guerre a lieu \u00e0 Washington D.C., pas dans les sables irakiens et alentours.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLe plus gros de cette guerre, et le plus visible, est entre State (Powell) et DoD (Rumsfeld). Le dernier \u00e9pisode en date d\u00e9marre avec la nomination hier de Paul Bremer III<\/a> \u00e0 la t\u00eate de l’administration int\u00e9rimaire (US) de l’Irak ; on s’interroge alors de savoir quel r\u00f4le il va r\u00e9ellement jouer avec l’actuel administrateur, le g\u00e9n\u00e9ral Jay Garner, avec l’hypoth\u00e8se qu’il va sans doute l’avoir sous ses ordres puisqu’il est pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 de cette fa\u00e7on, mais de fa\u00e7on prudente (selon le New York Times<\/em> d’hier : \u00ab L. Paul Bremer, who served as an ambassador at large for counterterrorism in the Reagan administration, will assume the post and outrank Jay Garner, the retired lieutenant general who has been in charge of postwar administration until now<\/em> \u00bb). Pour expliquer cette pr\u00e9sentation, il faut dire que Garner semble \u00eatre l’homme du DoD (Rumsfeld) et Bremer, peut-\u00eatre, cela reste \u00e0 voir, celui de State (Powell). (Toutes ces pr\u00e9cautions de langage sont compl\u00e8tement n\u00e9cessaires.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa th\u00e8se \u00e9tait expos\u00e9e de la fa\u00e7on suivante par BBC News, le 4 mai<\/a> :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab The Pentagon’s prominent role in Iraq has caused unease. A former US state department official is reported to have been appointed civilian administrator of Iraq. According to Newsweek magazine, Paul Bremer would have authority over Jay Garner, the retired general currently in charge of reconstruction efforts, who in turn currently reports to US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The new appointment is said to have been designed to resolve bitter infighting between the Pentagon and the US state department over the future of Iraq. It could also be seen as a victory for Secretary of State Colin Powell.<\/em> \u00bb <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tHier matin, un nouveau rebondissement \u00e9tait annonc\u00e9 dans cette affaire, avec l’annonce par The Independent<\/a> du d\u00e9part de Garner, et son remplacement pur et simple par Bremer. L’information reste largement conditionnelle puisqu’elle n’a re\u00e7u aucune confirmation un jour plus tard, la seule certitude \u00e9tant qu’elle contribue \u00e0 faire de cette affaire le reflet pr\u00e9cis d’une situation extr\u00eamement fluide, encore plus \u00e0 Washington D.C. qu’\u00e0 Bagdad.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tVoici ce qu’\u00e9crit The Independent<\/em> :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Jay Garner, the former general who was appointed Iraq’s chief civil administrator, was on his way out last night as it became clear that Washington was dropping him in favour of a former diplomat equally close to the Bush government. General Garner is likely to leave Iraq within weeks after a decision that he was not up to the delicate political task of coaxing the country towards democracy.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb General Garner’s somewhat erratic style on political issues was evident yesterday after he said the \u00a0\u00bbbeginning of a nucleus of an Iraqi government\u00a0\u00bb would be in place by mid-May. In fact about half a dozen former leaders of opposition to Saddam Hussein are expected to be in charge of convening a conference in four weeks’ time, which will be designed to agree a transitional government.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tLe probl\u00e8me, avec cette annonce qui constitue un d\u00e9saveu de Garner et de son travail en Irak, comme d’ailleurs les autres annonces de l’arriv\u00e9e de Bremer qui implique un d\u00e9saveu de Garner, c’est que le secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense Rumsfeld n’a cess\u00e9 ces derniers jours de tresser \u00e0 son g\u00e9n\u00e9ral pro-consul des lauriers ; en m\u00eame temps, il opposait jusqu’\u00e0 hier un mur de d\u00e9n\u00e9gation implicite \u00e0 l’annonce de la nomination de Paul Bremer. On en a encore une id\u00e9e avec cet \u00e9change, au cours d’une interview avec Fox News, le 4 mai :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Question : General Garner, what is his role now? What is he doing with the civil and administrative? (Inaudible.) form the State Department.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Rumsfeld: General Garner is doing a terrific job, he’s a very talented person and a<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tfriend and the country is fortunate that people of that caliber will pick and go off<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tand help to serve our country and the coalition and the people of Iraq. There has<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tbeen no announcement by the White House on anyone else.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tLa confusion est donc extr\u00eame. Elle l’est encore plus lorsqu’on pr\u00e9cise la personnalit\u00e9 et la carri\u00e8re de Bremer. Il est pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 comme un homme de Powell puisqu’il semble (est-ce s\u00fbr ?) d\u00e9pendre du State Department. D’autre part, il est pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 comme tr\u00e8s proche des n\u00e9o-conservateurs, les extr\u00e9mistes eux-m\u00eames tr\u00e8s proches de Rumsfeld, comme le note The Independent<\/em> : \u00ab Although the change replaces a Pentagon appointee with a State Department person, Mr Bremer is thought to be close to neo-conservatives around the US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(Les rapports entre State et DoD sont aussi marqu\u00e9s par une lettre tr\u00e8s r\u00e9cente de Powell \u00e0 Rumsfeld, o\u00f9 le premier rappelle au second qu’il serait temps qu’il envisage de lib\u00e9rer certains des d\u00e9tenus de Guantanamo. Rumsfeld s’appr\u00eaterait \u00e0 l\u00e2cher du lest sur cette question. La lettre a \u00e9videmment ajout\u00e9 un \u00e9l\u00e9ment de tension entre les deux hommes, entre les deux bureaucraties.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa guerre est d\u00e9finitivement revenue \u00e0 Washington. L’Irak y a ajout\u00e9 un \u00e9l\u00e9ment d’affrontement majeur. On peut envisager de dire qu’en aucune autre p\u00e9riode de l’histoire moderne des \u00c9tats-Unis, les factions au coeur du gouvernement ne se sont affront\u00e9es aussi haineusement et d’une fa\u00e7on aussi d\u00e9vastatrice. Il est probable que ce fait va jouer un poids grandissant dans la situation de la politique \u00e9trang\u00e8re US, qui va \u00eatre toujours plus d\u00e9termin\u00e9e en fonction de la situation int\u00e9rieure plus qu’en fonction de la politique ext\u00e9rieure qu’elle est cens\u00e9e traiter.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Powell-Rumsfeld et le reste, tous en guerre 7 mai 2003 L’Irak attise les oppositions \u00e0 Washington. Ce n’est pas nouveau mais cela ne cesse de s’amplifier, de prendre une allure structurelle. De plus en plus se v\u00e9rifie la remarque que la vraie guerre a lieu \u00e0 Washington D.C., pas dans les sables irakiens et alentours.… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-65602","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65602","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=65602"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65602\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65602"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65602"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65602"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}