{"id":65620,"date":"2003-05-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-05-25T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2003\/05\/25\/pour-les-anglais-la-guerre-nest-pas-finie\/"},"modified":"2003-05-25T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2003-05-25T00:00:00","slug":"pour-les-anglais-la-guerre-nest-pas-finie","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2003\/05\/25\/pour-les-anglais-la-guerre-nest-pas-finie\/","title":{"rendered":"Pour les Anglais, la guerre n’est pas finie<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Pour les Anglais, la guerre n’est pas finie<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t25 mai 2003 Les Anglais sont connus pour leur opini\u00e2tret\u00e9. Ils le montrent encore avec la question des armes de destruction massive (WMD en acronyme anglais) qu’on n’arrive pas \u00e0 trouver en Irak. La question a une place importante dans la mesure o\u00f9 la pr\u00e9sence suppos\u00e9e et affirm\u00e9e de WMD en Irak fut l’argument essentiel pour lancer la guerre contre l’Irak.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCette question est plus ou moins pass\u00e9e au second plan aux USA. Au Royaume-Uni, elle est au contraire de premi\u00e8re importance et elle contribue fortement \u00e0 menacer la position de Tony Blair, qui s’av\u00e8re extr\u00eamement fragile malgr\u00e9 la victoire rapide en Irak. Il ne s’agit pas seulement d’un courant d’opinion mais d’initiatives tr\u00e8s concr\u00e8tes,<\/a> au niveau parlementaire.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Tony Blair is facing growing political pressure to explain the mystery of Iraq’s missing weapons of mass destruction. With no solid evidence yet that there are any chemical, biological or nuclear weapons in occupied Iraq, more than 70 MPs, including 53 Labour MPs, have signed a Commons motion challenging him to prove his claim that they were ever there in the first place.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tD’autres initiatives vont encore alourdir le climat, comme celle d’un symposium organis\u00e9 dimanche prochain<\/a>, qui traitera de l’ill\u00e9galit\u00e9 de la guerre et, parmi les sujets qui conditionnent l’appr\u00e9ciation d’ill\u00e9galit\u00e9 \u00e0 propos de cette guerre, de la question des WMD. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab The war on Iraq will be condemned as illegal by a panel of eminent international lawyers at a conference being organised by the actor Corin Redgrave. The symposium, to be held next Sunday at the Young Vic theatre in London, will also hear senior legal experts allege that the conflict has seriously weakened the authority of the United Nations and potentially threatened global security.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The panellists include Professor Philippe Sands QC, a member of Cherie Booth’s Matrix chambers, Professor Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics, and Jan Kavan, the president of the UN General Assembly and former Czech foreign minister.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Another prominent speaker, Professor Burns Weston, a human rights lawyer at the University of Iowa in the US, fears that other countries might use the American decision to wage war illegally to justify their own unlawful wars. He is most concerned about India and Pakistan two nuclear powers in dispute over Kashmir. It is a very bad precedent for other countries that might seek, in their own lack of wisdom, to emulate the United States, he said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The event, called Liberation or War Crime will be chaired by the former Radio 4 Today programme presenter Sue MacGregor and is expected to attract other prominent figures, including the playwright David Hare, the Booker Prize-winning Indian writer Arundhati Roy and the former foreign secretary Robin Cook.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Prof Sands, one of 16 prominent international lawyers who earlier this year publicly warned Tony Blair that the war was illegal, said the conflict raised two major issues. First, did the Security Council authorise the use of force, and the answer to that is no. And [second] were we misled about the presence of weapons of mass destruction? Apparently, yes. These things are going to come back to haunt us, Prof Sands said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Mr Redgrave, whose film roles include parts in Four Weddings and A Funeral, Enigma and In the Name of the Father, said one objective in staging and paying for the event was to investigate the damage caused by the war to international peace. Very early on, before the war began, it seemed that one of the main casualties of war was the whole fabric of international law and convention, he said. It seemed to me there was a willingness, indeed a desire, on the part of America at least, to rend that fabric in a way that would almost make it irreparable.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tIl s’agit d’une situation tr\u00e8s remarquable, aujourd’hui au Royaume-Uni. Apr\u00e8s une formidable campagne anti-guerre avant le conflit, qui faillit entra\u00eener la d\u00e9mission de Tony Blair, la guerre elle-m\u00eame, avec son d\u00e9roulement et la victoire tr\u00e8s rapide, sembla faire reculer de fa\u00e7on d\u00e9cisive ce mouvement, avec notamment un retournement de l’opinion. La situation actuelle semble indiquer la possibilit\u00e9 d’un nouveau renversement dans le sens contraire, avec la mise en \u00e9vidence que le renforcement de la position de Tony Blair avec la victoire n’a \u00e9t\u00e9 que temporaire.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tBien entendu, le d\u00e9roulement de la situation \u00e0 Bagdad et en Irak m\u00eame est pour beaucoup dans l’\u00e9volution du climat. D’autres r\u00e9v\u00e9lations (notamment celles sur les m\u00e9thodes de guerre<\/a>) vont contribuer encore plus \u00e0 relativiser la valeur de cette victoire. Bien entendu, l’absence de toute WMD en Irak constitue un argument de grand poids pour cette relance du d\u00e9bat sur l’ill\u00e9galit\u00e9 de la guerre. A c\u00f4t\u00e9 de cela, les perspectives de b\u00e9n\u00e9fices \u00e0 cause de la reconstruction, b\u00e9n\u00e9fices toujours tr\u00e8s hypoth\u00e9tiques (on ne commencera \u00e0 faire des b\u00e9n\u00e9fices sur l’exploitation du p\u00e9trole irakien que dans 10 ans) et li\u00e9s au r\u00e9tablissement du calme en Irak, constituent un argument de moins en moins acceptable.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCurieusement, cette guerre en Irak, exp\u00e9di\u00e9e en trois semaines et en peut-\u00eatre un peu plus de 10.000 morts civils irakiens<\/a> (un record qui laisserait pantois s’il est confirm\u00e9, pour ce qu’il dit de l’emploi d’armes sophistiqu\u00e9es qui devraient nous \u00e9pargner les soucis humanitaires des pertes collat\u00e9rales), cette guerre ne cesse de nous r\u00e9server des surprises. Il est possible qu’elle ait, finalement, raison de Blair lui-m\u00eame, si l’affaire des WMD introuvables vient effectivement s’ajouter \u00e0 ses difficult\u00e9s face \u00e0 Gordon Brown sur la question de l’euro.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Pour les Anglais, la guerre n’est pas finie 25 mai 2003 Les Anglais sont connus pour leur opini\u00e2tret\u00e9. Ils le montrent encore avec la question des armes de destruction massive (WMD en acronyme anglais) qu’on n’arrive pas \u00e0 trouver en Irak. La question a une place importante dans la mesure o\u00f9 la pr\u00e9sence suppos\u00e9e et… <\/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":[705,4002],"class_list":["post-65620","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-blair","tag-wmd"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65620","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=65620"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65620\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65620"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65620"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65620"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}