{"id":66023,"date":"2004-07-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-07-09T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/07\/09\/demain-qui-sera-notre-ennemi\/"},"modified":"2004-07-09T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2004-07-09T00:00:00","slug":"demain-qui-sera-notre-ennemi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/07\/09\/demain-qui-sera-notre-ennemi\/","title":{"rendered":"Demain, qui sera notre ennemi?<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Demain, qui sera notre ennemi?<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t9 juillet 2004 Un analyste de la fameuse Rand Corporation, Charles Wolf Jr., s’attaque \u00e0 un probl\u00e8me int\u00e9ressant, celui de la qualit\u00e9 d’ennemi, et, plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment, cette question de savoir ce qu’est aujourd’hui un ennemi des Etats-Unis<\/a>. Wolf s’appuie sur le fameux adage du Premier ministre britannique Palmerston (l’Angleterre n’a ni ami, ni ennemi perp\u00e9tuels, seuls les int\u00e9r\u00eats de l’Angleterre sont perp\u00e9tuels).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl pose cette question plus pr\u00e9cise : qui, aujourd’hui, est l’ami des \u00c9tats-Unis ? Et il propose un test.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Consider the following seven current and major international security issues – U.S. interests, policies and pronouncements on all of them are clear and unequivocal:<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Countering global terrorism; Making a commitment to security, reconstruction and democratization in Iraq; Making a commitment to security, reconstruction and democratization in Afghanistan; Promoting a two-state \u00a0\u00bbroad map\u00a0\u00bb solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict while maintaining strong support for Israel; Insisting on \u00a0\u00bbmultilateral\u00a0\u00bb negotiations by the six powers (rather than unilateral negotiations by the United States) for the elimination of North Korea’s nuclear programs and capabilities; Endorsing a peaceful resolution of Taiwan’s status through negotiations between the parties, while opposing provocative moves by Taiwan, as well as the use of force by the mainland; Demanding that Iran be inspected and monitored to ensure that it forgo nuclear weapons development.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Now, consider which countries support or oppose these U.S. policies, or intake a neutral stance toward them. It is perhaps not surprising to find that Britain, Australia, Japan and South Korea display strong alignment with the United States on at least five of these issues. On two of the issues – Taiwan and Israel-Palestine – the four countries incline toward a more neutral stance than the United States.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb What is more surprising is that China, India, Pakistan and Russia are more closely aligned with U.S. policies and interests than France and Germany. On these seven issues, China, India, Pakistan and Russia support the U.S. stance to an equal or greater extent than France and Germany.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tSurprise, surprise, nous dit Wolf : la France et l’Allemagne seraient bien plus nos ennemis que la Chine ou la Russie Surprise ? C’est \u00e0 voir.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa France (mettons l’Allemagne un peu \u00e0 part, elle le m\u00e9rite) pose un sacr\u00e9 probl\u00e8me \u00e0 l’Am\u00e9rique, certains Am\u00e9ricains commencent \u00e0 s’en apercevoir. C’est le cas de Charles Krauthammer, le commentateur proche des n\u00e9o-conservateurs, brutal, assez peu ami des nuances, mais avec un franc-parler qui nous dispense de tout d\u00e9cryptage. Quant \u00e0 la France, Krauthammer estime savoir \u00e0 quoi s’en tenir depuis assez longtemps, et son analyse est loin d’\u00eatre infond\u00e9e. (Sa seule faiblesse, fort courante chez les Anglo-Saxons qui finissent par s’en remettre pour leurs \u00e9valuations techniques au travail de d\u00e9sinformation de leurs propres journaux, est de montrer une compl\u00e8te ignorance de la puissance militaire fran\u00e7aise, comme on peut le voir dans un des extraits ci-dessous : la France, \u00ab a country whose closest brush with glory and empire today consists of patrolling the swamps of Ivory Coast.<\/em> \u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tA diff\u00e9rentes reprises, il a d\u00e9j\u00e0 d\u00e9velopp\u00e9 ce th\u00e8me, qui donne \u00e0 la France un r\u00f4le central d’opposition \u00e0 la puissance h\u00e9g\u00e9monique am\u00e9ricaine.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t• Par exemple, sous le titre The French Challenge<\/em>, un texte publi\u00e9 le 21 f\u00e9vrier 2003 dans sa chronique du Washington Post<\/em>, avec quelques extraits significatifs : <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab With the end of the Soviet threat, everything changed. A unipolar system emerged with the United States dominant and unchallenged. The Iraq crisis has provided France an opportunity to create the first coherent challenge to that dominance and to give France a unique position as leader of that challenge. Last Friday at the Security Council was the high water mark. France stood at the head of an impressive opposition bloc Germany, Russia, China, perhaps seven other members of the council and dozens of other smaller countries challenging American policy and, implicitly, American hegemony.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The world has not become bipolar. But we have just witnessed the first serious breach of the post-Cold War unipolarity engineered not, as many expected, by Russia or China, but by France. France is reaching to become not only the leading power in Europe (hence the pique with those pesky Eastern Europeans) but also the leader of a new pole of world power opposite the American hyperpower.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Not a bad vocation for a country whose closest brush with glory and empire today consists of patrolling the swamps of Ivory Coast.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t• Le 13 mars 2003 dans le magazine Time<\/a>, Krauthammer consacrait un essai \u00e0 ce sujet, terminant par ce constat: \u00ab Dean Acheson famously said, Britain has lost an empire but has not yet found a role. France too lost an empire but has found its role: giant killer. Remaker of the post-cold war world. Leader of the global anti-American camp.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t• Retour de Krauthammer sur le m\u00eame th\u00e8me, dans sa chronique du magazine Time du 6 juillet 2004<\/a>, sous le titre : \u00ab Why the French Act Isn’t Funny Anymore, Their resistance to helping in Afghanistan and Iraq is now downright dangerous<\/em> \u00bb. Si l’argument est \u00e0 peine diff\u00e9rent, il reste tout de m\u00eame une variation sur un m\u00eame th\u00e8me, cette fois avec une France qui rassemble l’opposition anti-am\u00e9ricaine des Arabes, le fond de l’analyse est plus que jamais celle qu’on a vue<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Chirac wants not only to make France the champion of the oppressed in general against the great American hegemon but also to make it in particular the champion of Arab aspirations against American imperialism. Even the left-leaning French newspaper Le Monde criticized Chirac for acting the \u00a0\u00bbkilljoy\u00a0\u00bb in Istanbul. But Chirac’s behavior was no mere outburst. It is a strategy for a French future. Chirac is charting a course a collision course with America. Istanbul was just one accident scene. There are many more to come.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tIl s’impose \u00e9videmment de lire l’un (Krauthammer) par rapport aux constats que fait l’autre (Wolf) pour comprendre qu’en aucun cas on puisse se croire assur\u00e9 d’une \u00e9volution allant vers un retour des relations harmonieuses intra-occidentales. Les deux hommes nous fournissent les outils logiques et analytiques pour comprendre que la grande fracture occidentale r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9e par la guerre d’Irak est un ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne promis \u00e0 durer. Bien s\u00fbr, la France est au premier rang de cet \u00e9v\u00e9nement.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

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

Demain, qui sera notre ennemi? 9 juillet 2004 Un analyste de la fameuse Rand Corporation, Charles Wolf Jr., s’attaque \u00e0 un probl\u00e8me int\u00e9ressant, celui de la qualit\u00e9 d’ennemi, et, plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment, cette question de savoir ce qu’est aujourd’hui un ennemi des Etats-Unis. Wolf s’appuie sur le fameux adage du Premier ministre britannique Palmerston (l’Angleterre n’a… <\/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-66023","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\/66023","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=66023"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66023\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66023"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66023"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66023"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}