{"id":65669,"date":"2003-07-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-07-10T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2003\/07\/10\/blair-est-devenu-lexpedition-des-affaires-courantes\/"},"modified":"2003-07-10T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2003-07-10T00:00:00","slug":"blair-est-devenu-lexpedition-des-affaires-courantes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2003\/07\/10\/blair-est-devenu-lexpedition-des-affaires-courantes\/","title":{"rendered":"<strong><em>Blair est devenu \u201cl&rsquo;exp\u00e9dition des affaires courantes\u201d<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><h2 class=\"common-article\">Blair est devenu l&rsquo;exp\u00e9dition des affaires courantes<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t10 juillet 2003  Peu \u00e0 peu, au fur et \u00e0 mesure que la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 du pi\u00e8ge se confirme et que ses explications sur les raisons d&rsquo;aller en guerre se compliquent, il arrive \u00e0 Blair la pire des choses  : le ridicule, la d\u00e9rision, voire la compassion. Pauvre Blair, dit-on d\u00e9sormais, en ne doutant plus une seconde, pour certains, que son d\u00e9part, par lassitude et absence de cr\u00e9dit, n&rsquo;est plus qu&rsquo;une question de temps. Nicholas Kristof <a href=\"http:\/\/www.iht.com\/articles\/102126.html\" class=\"gen\">\u00e9crit dans l&rsquo;International Herald Tribune,<\/a> un article avec ce titre significatif : \u00ab <em>The U.S. could use Blair if Britain gets rid of him<\/em> \u00bb, suivi de cette appr\u00e9ciation impitoyable :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em>One of the saddest results of the war in Iraq is that it may finish off Tony Blair before Saddam Hussein.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Everywhere I go in Britain, people dismiss Blair as President George W. Bush&rsquo;s poodle. Blair&rsquo;s Labor Party has fallen behind the Conservatives in the latest poll for only the second time in 11 years. The Iraq critics think that the prime minister has betrayed his country to a Texas gunslinger, William Rees-Mogg noted in The Times of London.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tLes amis am\u00e9ricains de Blair viennent de lui ass\u00e9ner un coup de plus, un coup d\u00e9vastateur (\u00ab <em>devastating blow<\/em> \u00bb). Au lendemain de sa prestation devant les d\u00e9put\u00e9s britanniques o\u00f9 il avait renouvel\u00e9 ses diverses convictions, concernant les WMD, les ignominies de Saddam, la juste cause de la guerre, et \u00e9galement sa conviction que l&rsquo;affaire de l&rsquo;uranium achet\u00e9 au Niger par l&rsquo;Irak est fond\u00e9e, la Maison-Blanche pr\u00e9cise que cet argument-l\u00e0, effectivement utilis\u00e9 par GW dans son discours sur l&rsquo;\u00c9tat de l&rsquo;Union et explicitement mentionn\u00e9 comme venant des Britanniques, ne vaut plus tripette \u00e0 ses yeux. Cette prise de position ne pouvait venir \u00e0 un plus mauvais moment, et elle est m\u00eame pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e par <a href=\"http:\/\/news.independent.co.uk\/uk\/politics\/story.jsp?story=422957\" class=\"gen\">The Independent, ce matin,<\/a> comme une \u00ab <em>smoking gun<\/em> \u00bb, c&rsquo;est-\u00e0-dire un \u00e9l\u00e9ment d\u00e9cisif (contre Blair). Les Am\u00e9ricains ont pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 cette position sans avoir averti Blair pr\u00e9alablement, notamment avant son audition d&rsquo;hier devant le Parlement, alors qu&rsquo;ils savaient que Blair allait \u00e0 nouveau pr\u00e9senter cette preuve comme tr\u00e8s valable. Ce n&rsquo;est pas compl\u00e8tement un coup de couteau dans le dos mais c&rsquo;est une indiff\u00e9rence compl\u00e8te aux probl\u00e8mes du Premier ministre britannique.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em>In his address to Congress in January, Mr Bush said: The British government has learnt that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>But a statement approved by the White House on Monday said: Knowing all that we know now, the reference to Iraq&rsquo;s attempt to acquire uranium from Africa should not have been included in the State of the Union speech. There is other reporting to suggest that Iraq tried to obtain uranium from Africa. However, the information is not detailed or specific enough for us to be certain that attempts were in fact made.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>In other words, a White House official told The New York Times, we couldn&rsquo;t prove it and it might in fact be wrong.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tCette affaire suit la publication du rapport des Communes <a href=\"http:\/\/www.publications.parliament.uk\/pa\/cm200203\/cmselect\/cmfaff\/813\/\" class=\"gen\">sur les conditions d&rsquo;entr\u00e9e en guerre contre l&rsquo;Irak<\/a> (fabrication de preuves ou pas  ? Etc.) Le bilan est plus que mitig\u00e9, surtout pour Blair. On attendait surtout que <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article.php?art_id=789\" class=\"gen\">Alastair Campbell soit mis en cause, durant les auditions d&rsquo;il y a deux semaines.<\/a> En fait, Campbell sort blanchi de l&rsquo;affaire. On ne lui reproche aucune manipulation de la v\u00e9rit\u00e9, aucune dissimulation d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9e, transformation de preuves, etc. Campbell ne peut plus faire office de fusible. Pour autant, il para\u00eet improbable qu&rsquo;il reste encore longtemps en fonction, tant des vindictes diverses se sont concentr\u00e9es contre lui.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tPar contre, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/articles\/A21106-2003Jul7.html\" class=\"gen\">le rapport est s\u00e9v\u00e8re pour le comportement du gouvernement<\/a>. Il laisse planer bien des doutes, s&rsquo;interroge, dit son insatisfaction, etc. Toutes ces questions s&rsquo;adressent \u00e0 Tony Blair et le rendent d&rsquo;autant plus fragile. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.wsws.org\/articles\/2003\/jul2003\/facs-j09.shtml\" class=\"gen\">Le site WSWS.org synth\u00e9tise et explique bien cet aspect du rapport<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em>There is an almost schizophrenic character to the report, which in one paragraph exonerates Blair, Campbell, Straw and Defence secretary Geoff Hoon only to then hurl awkward questions that leave the government open to further attacks.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>The main reason for this is that the 11-strong committee had to make concessions to its Tory and Liberal members. Three Conservatives and one Liberal Democrat had forced a series of votes insisting that the report&rsquo;s language be toughened up. And they were occasionally lent support by the committee&rsquo;s Labour chairman, Donald Anderson, and more often by Labour maverick backbencher Andrew Mackinlay. In the end the committee only cleared Campbell of inserting the 45-minute claim on Anderson&rsquo;s casting vote, which defeated a Tory amendment 6-5 that said the issue was non proven as MPs had not been given enough documentation to make a proper judgement.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>These concession in the main report helped prevent an even more damaging scenario whereby the non-Labour members could have issued a dissenting minority report and divided the committee openly on party lines. Even so, Tory FAC member Richard Ottaway stated publicly, I have reached the conclusion the government did exaggerate the case for war in the run-up to the critical vote in Parliament, and both Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith and Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy have called for an independent inquiry.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tAujourd&rsquo;hui, Tony Blair appara\u00eet \u00e0 la fois comme un prisonnier de l&rsquo;\u00e9volution de la situation interne sur ce dossier irakien, et, d&rsquo;une fa\u00e7on plus g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, comme un Premier ministre extraordinairement affaibli et d\u00e9pendant du rapport des forces politiques et de l&rsquo;exploitation qu&rsquo;on fera ou qu&rsquo;on ne fera pas de cette affaire. Il est d\u00e9sormais install\u00e9 au coeur d&rsquo;une crise qu&rsquo;il a lui-m\u00eame laiss\u00e9e se d\u00e9velopper et s&rsquo;installer, et qui est devenue une crise end\u00e9mique du pouvoir politique au Royaume-Uni. Tombera-t-il ? Sera-t-il oblig\u00e9 de d\u00e9missionner \u00e0 un moment ou l&rsquo;autre ? Ces questions ont d\u00e9sormais moins d&rsquo;importance.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tD\u00e9sormais, un d\u00e9bat devrait se d\u00e9velopper au Royaume-Uni sur la politique qui a conduit \u00e0 cette crise, notamment avec les aspects de la politique transatlantique d&rsquo;alignement inconditionnel sur les USA. Dans ce cadre et sauf dans le cas d&rsquo;un accident ou d&rsquo;une crise politique ext\u00e9rieure grave, Blair est l\u00e0 pour tenir l&rsquo;apparence d&rsquo;ordre politique qui continue \u00e0 r\u00e9gner. Son gouvernement ressemble \u00e0 celui qui exp\u00e9die les affaires courantes, simple garantie de la continuit\u00e9 et de la stabilit\u00e9 du syst\u00e8me. Sa voix et son orientation ne sont d\u00e9sormais plus pr\u00e9pond\u00e9rantes. En ce sens, on peut dire que l&rsquo;\u00e9poque Blair est finie, le probl\u00e8me \u00e9tant de d\u00e9terminer par quoi la remplacer.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Blair est devenu l&rsquo;exp\u00e9dition des affaires courantes 10 juillet 2003 Peu \u00e0 peu, au fur et \u00e0 mesure que la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 du pi\u00e8ge se confirme et que ses explications sur les raisons d&rsquo;aller en guerre se compliquent, il arrive \u00e0 Blair la pire des choses : le ridicule, la d\u00e9rision, voire la compassion. Pauvre Blair,&hellip;&nbsp;<\/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":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[857,4002],"class_list":["post-65669","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-irak","tag-wmd"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65669","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=65669"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65669\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65669"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65669"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65669"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}