{"id":65894,"date":"2004-03-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-03-12T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/03\/12\/chapeau-bas-pour-sir-david\/"},"modified":"2004-03-12T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2004-03-12T00:00:00","slug":"chapeau-bas-pour-sir-david","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/03\/12\/chapeau-bas-pour-sir-david\/","title":{"rendered":"Chapeau bas pour Sir David<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Chapeau bas pour Sir David<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t12 mars 2004 La chose (le courage) \u00e9tant assez rare, il est bienvenu de saluer le courage de certains hommes responsables quand ils en montrent. Sir David King est l’un de ceux-l\u00e0. Ce scientifique renomm\u00e9, conseiller scientifique du Premier ministre Tony Blair, a d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de passer outre aux avertissements et \u00e0 la censure secr\u00e8te comme d’habitude de ce m\u00eame Premier ministre.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tOn conna\u00eet quelques \u00e9l\u00e9ments de cette affaire. D’abord, The Independent<\/em> met en \u00e9vidence, le 9 janvier, un extrait d’un article de Nature<\/em> avec des affirmations importantes de Sir David<\/a>. La plus importante pour Tony Blair, bien s\u00fbr, n’est pas celle qui s’interroge sur la possibilit\u00e9 d’une catastrophe climatique aux cons\u00e9quences apocalyptiques, mais celle o\u00f9 Sir David dit que cette crise est une menace plus grave que le terrorisme et que la responsabilit\u00e9 de l’administration Bush dans cette affaire est consid\u00e9rable<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tDeux mois plus tard, on apprend, par le plus grand des hasards (une maladresse informatique), que sir David a \u00e9t\u00e9 mis en garde de ne plus faire cette sorte d’intervention, notamment la mise en cause de la politique am\u00e9ricaine<\/a>. Sir David est sous le feu de la censure du grand lib\u00e9ral humanitariste Tony Blair, parce que rien ne doit menacer la bonne humeur de GW \u00e0 l’\u00e9gard du Royaume-Uni. La question que pose Sir David, de l’avenir de la civilisation par rapport \u00e0 la crise climatique, est, pour l’instant, jug\u00e9e nettement secondaire.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Downing Street tried to muzzle the Government’s top scientific adviser after he warned that global warming was a more serious threat than international terrorism. Ivan Rogers, Mr Blair’s principal private secretary, told Sir David King, the Prime Minister’s chief scientist, to limit his contact with the media after he made outspoken comments about President George Bush’s policy on climate change.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(…)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Support for Sir David’s view came yesterday from Hans Blix, the former United Nations chief weapons inspector, who said the environment was at least as important a threat as global terrorism. He told BBC1’s Breakfast with Frost: I think we still overestimate the danger of terror. There are other things that are of equal, if not greater, magnitude, like the environmental global risks.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Since Sir David’s article in Science was published, No 10 has tried to limit the damage to Anglo-American relations by reining in the Prime Minister’s chief scientist. In a leaked memo, Mr Rogers ordered Sir David a Cambridge University chemist who offers independent advice to ministers to decline any interview requests from British and American newspapers and BBC Radio 4’s Today .<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab To accept such bids runs the risk of turning the debate into a sterile argument about whether or not climate change is a greater risk, Mr Rogers said in the memo, which was sent to Sir David’s office in February. This sort of discussion does not help us achieve our wider policy aims ahead of our G8 presidency [next year]. The move will be seized on by critics of Mr Blair’s stance over the Iraq war as further evidence that he is too subservient to the Bush administration. It will also be seen as an attempt to bolster the Prime Minister’s case for pre-emptive strikes to combat the threat of international terrorism, which he outlined in a speech on Friday.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tSans aucun doute, le plus consternant que nous apprennent tous ces articles est bien que les affirmations de Sir David ne sont nullement contest\u00e9es par Tony Blair et son cabinet. Sir David n’est pas licenci\u00e9 pour catastrophisme ou charlatanisme scientifique. Il est \u00ab highly regarded by Mr Blair<\/em> \u00bb, par cons\u00e9quent, on en d\u00e9duit que le Premier ministre ne met pas en cause les comp\u00e9tences du scientifique. Ne rien dire dans ces circonstances, et interdire \u00e0 King de parler en d\u00e9signant le principal responsable de cette crise laisse sans voix. Il est difficile de ne pas \u00eatre conduit \u00e0 r\u00e9viser le jugement assez favorable qu’on peut avoir de Blair le chef de gouvernement, lorsqu’on est conduit \u00e0 un tel jugement. Cet homme porte, \u00e0 cet instant, dans le domaine que nous commentons ici, une extraordinaire responsabilit\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTout cela n’a pas d\u00e9courag\u00e9 Sir David King. Convoqu\u00e9 aux Communes le 10 mars, sans doute \u00e0 la suite des articles de The Independent<\/em>, il a repris toutes ses accusations<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab The Government’s chief scientist today set out an apocalyptic vision of global warming bringing back the conditions which drove the dinosaurs to extinction.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Professor Sir David King told a House of Lords committee that urgent action was needed within the next few years to avert the threat of sudden and severe climate change.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb He claimed that last summer’s heatwave was a man-made event and a warning sign of worse to come.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb And he defied Downing Street by repeating his charges that global warming is a bigger threat than terrorism, and that Washington is failing to tackle the problem.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tNous mettons encore en \u00e9vidence cette d\u00e9claration de Sir David King sur les responsabilit\u00e9s. Comme on dit, tout le monde le sait sans songer \u00e0 en parler \u00e0 haute voix ; avec une telle d\u00e9claration, on ne pourra plus dire qu’on ne savait pas. \u00ab And <\/em>[King] accused American oil giant Exxon of funding lobbyists who are trying to undermine the consensus on global warming by suggesting that scientists are divided on the nature of the problem.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t[Pour plus de facilit\u00e9, mais avec les restrictions d’usage, trois textes concernant cette affaire et renseign\u00e9s comme liens sont publi\u00e9s sur ce site, ce jour<\/a>.]<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Chapeau bas pour Sir David 12 mars 2004 La chose (le courage) \u00e9tant assez rare, il est bienvenu de saluer le courage de certains hommes responsables quand ils en montrent. Sir David King est l’un de ceux-l\u00e0. Ce scientifique renomm\u00e9, conseiller scientifique du Premier ministre Tony Blair, a d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de passer outre aux avertissements 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":[705,3392,3228],"class_list":["post-65894","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-blair","tag-climatique","tag-crise"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65894","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=65894"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65894\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65894"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65894"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65894"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}