{"id":66146,"date":"2004-12-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-12-01T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/12\/01\/les-vertiges-du-pentagone\/"},"modified":"2004-12-01T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2004-12-01T00:00:00","slug":"les-vertiges-du-pentagone","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/12\/01\/les-vertiges-du-pentagone\/","title":{"rendered":"<strong><em>Les vertiges du Pentagone<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><h2 class=\"common-article\">Les vertiges du Pentagone<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t1er d\u00e9cembre 2004  L&rsquo;affaire des <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article.php?art_id=1283\" class=\"gen\">tankers Boeing KC-767<\/a> menace de devenir un scandale plus fondamental encore, en devenant \u00e9ventuellement l&rsquo;affaire Druyun.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tDarleen Druyun est cette officielle du Pentagone, adjointe au chef du service des acquisitions de l&rsquo;USAF, qui a contr\u00f4l\u00e9 tous les contrats de l&rsquo;Air Force pendant neuf ans (de 1993 \u00e0 2002), avant de partir chez Boeing, puis d&rsquo;\u00eatre licenci\u00e9e, inculp\u00e9e, jug\u00e9e et condamn\u00e9e (en septembre 2004) \u00e0 neuf mois de prison pour corruption et trafic d&rsquo;influence.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tDruyun est un personnage hors du commun, qui fut <a href=\"http:\/\/www.govexec.com\/features\/0204\/0204s1.htm\" class=\"gen\">charg\u00e9e d&rsquo;une mission fondamentale de restructuration et de r\u00e9forme<\/a> dans le syst\u00e8me d&rsquo;acquisition du Pentagone (de l&rsquo;USAF), quand elle fut nomm\u00e9e \u00e0 son poste de contr\u00f4le des acquisitions de l&rsquo;Air Force en 1993. C&rsquo;est l\u00e0 qu&rsquo;elle travailla et \u00e9tablit les liens avec Boeing, notamment sur le programme des ravitailleurs 767, avant d&rsquo;\u00eatre inculp\u00e9e et condamn\u00e9e sp\u00e9cifiquement pour ces liens. Les chefs civils actuels du Pentagone, dont Rumsfeld, ont reconnu que, pendant tout ce temps, personne n&rsquo;a assur\u00e9 le moindre contr\u00f4le sur Druyun. (Rumsfeld : \u00ab <em>So what you had <\/em>[] <em>over a 10-year period . . . the only continuity was that single person, who&rsquo;s now pled guilty and is going to go to jail. When you have that long period of time, with . . . no one above her and no one below her, over time I&rsquo;m told that what she did was acquire a great deal of authority and make a lot of decisions, and there was very little adult supervision.<\/em> \u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLa r\u00e9alit\u00e9 est encore plus sombre et plus surr\u00e9aliste : il s&rsquo;av\u00e8re que le Pentagone, et l&rsquo;USAF en l&rsquo;occurrence, ignoraient comment Druyun a travaill\u00e9 et comment elle a r\u00e9ussi \u00e0 frauder. On comprend d&rsquo;autant mieux cette situation que Druyun a exploit\u00e9 un syst\u00e8me centralis\u00e9 qu&rsquo;elle avait elle-m\u00eame mis en place, et qu&rsquo;elle \u00e9tait par cons\u00e9quent la seule \u00e0 conna\u00eetre parfaitement, notamment dans la fa\u00e7on de l&rsquo;utiliser pour frauder. Ainsi l&rsquo;USAF se trouve-t-elle dans la situation o\u00f9 de telles pratiques pourraient recommencer (puisqu&rsquo;elle n&rsquo;assure pas le contr\u00f4le complet du syst\u00e8me), \u00e0 moins de r\u00e9former tout le syst\u00e8me.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tMarvin Sambur, assistant secretary de l&rsquo;Air Force pour l&rsquo;acquisition, a r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.govexec.com\/dailyfed\/1104\/113004g1.htm\" class=\"gen\">dans une interview donn\u00e9e lundi au magazine Government Executive<\/a>, que l&rsquo;USAF cherchait \u00e0 obtenir de Druyun des informations sur la m\u00e9thode qu&rsquo;elle a employ\u00e9e pour frauder.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em>Air Force officials want to question former acquisition chief Darleen Druyun about how she steered billion of dollars in contracts to Boeing without raising suspicions, according to Marvin Sambur, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Druyun was sentenced in September to nine months in federal prison after she admitted to violating ethics rules for negotiating a job with Boeing, while still overseeing the company&rsquo;s Pentagon contracts. Druyun said she favored Boeing in four contract negotiations and called a multibillion Air Force proposal to lease tanker refueling aircraft from Boeing a parting gift to her future employer.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Whatever she did it wasn&rsquo;t fairly obvious, Sambur said in an interview Monday. We asked the prosecutors if we could speak to Darleen to see how she was able to manipulate <\/em>[the system]. <em>We want to find out Hey, is there an Achilles&rsquo; heel in the system that you were able to exploit?&rsquo;.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Druyun has yet to respond to the Air Force&rsquo;s request.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Sambur said the recent announcement that he and Air Force Secretary James Roche were resigning before the start of President Bush&rsquo;s second term was driven in part by the Druyun scandal. He conceded that he and Roche had become lightening rods for criticism surrounding Druyun and the controversial tanker lease proposal, and that was affecting the service&rsquo;s relationship with Congress.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>God knows why because, from my point of view, I was the one who cleaned up her act in terms of getting her to retire six months after I came here. All the things that she admitted to having done, happened before my watch. She was here for 10 years. I was here for six months, said Sambur.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Shortly after taking over in 2001, Sambur, who had spent his career as a Defense industry executive, realized that Druyun had enormous sway over every aspect of Air Force weapon&rsquo;s buying. She allowed only herself to see information and herself to make decisions, he said.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tIl y a diff\u00e9rents aspects dans ce scandale Druyun : d&rsquo;une part, reprendre le contr\u00f4le du syst\u00e8me que Druyun elle-m\u00eame a contr\u00f4l\u00e9 pendant neuf ans, ou bien mettre en place un autre syst\u00e8me ; d&rsquo;autre part, identifier et comptabiliser toutes les malversations r\u00e9alis\u00e9es durant ces neuf ann\u00e9es. Le processus est d\u00e9j\u00e0 en cours pour revoir tous les contrats pass\u00e9s avec Boeing depuis 2000. Il semble assez probable que cette v\u00e9rification sera \u00e9tendue \u00e0 toute la p\u00e9riode (1993-2002) et aux autres contractants que Boeing seul. (Il y a des contrats d&rsquo;une importance consid\u00e9rable durant cette p\u00e9riode, dont le contrat du JSF avec l&rsquo;USAF. De ce c\u00f4t\u00e9 aussi, l&rsquo;affaire peut prendre des dimensions consid\u00e9rables.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLes risques sont tr\u00e8s importants de voir ressurgir des affaires graves, avec les secousses qui suivraient. Pourquoi ces risques seraient-ils pris alors qu&rsquo;il est manifeste qu&rsquo;ils vont mettre en p\u00e9ril certaines structures au Pentagone et certaines structures industrielles (certains parlent d\u00e9j\u00e0 du d\u00e9mant\u00e8lement de Boeing au bout du compte), donc mettre en danger la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale US ? Pour la raison simple, et \u00e9vidente \u00e0 Washington o\u00f9 tout n&rsquo;est qu&rsquo;affrontement de pouvoirs concurrents, qu&rsquo;un autre pouvoir est engag\u00e9 dans cette affaire, dans une position antagoniste \u00e0 celle du Pentagone : le Congr\u00e8s, le S\u00e9nat plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment avec le s\u00e9nateur John McCain, qui trouve l\u00e0 un terrain r\u00eav\u00e9 pour asseoir une influence et une autorit\u00e9 renfor\u00e7ant sa stature politique. L&rsquo;affaire Druyun est la circonstance r\u00eav\u00e9e pour l&rsquo;action du Congr\u00e8s, une action l\u00e9gale de type maccarthyste (nous parlons de la forme de l&rsquo;action, pas du sens politique). McCain a d\u00e9j\u00e0 r\u00e9ussi \u00e0 bloquer le programme KC-767 et, r\u00e9cemment, \u00e0 <a href=\"http:\/\/www.govexec.com\/dailyfed\/1104\/110504g1.htm\" class=\"gen\">bloquer la carri\u00e8re d&rsquo;un officier g\u00e9n\u00e9ral de l&rsquo;USAF<\/a> qui devait devenir chef d&rsquo;\u00e9tat-major.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tL&rsquo;affaire Druyun est potentiellement \u00e9norme. Darleen Druyun \u00e9tait venue r\u00e9former un syst\u00e8me secou\u00e9 par plusieurs affaires (les scandales de corruption <em>Ill Wind<\/em> de 1986-87, l&rsquo;abandon du programme de l&rsquo;avion d&rsquo;attaque A-12 au d\u00e9but 1991 qui co\u00fbta pr\u00e8s de $5 milliards au Pentagone) et plac\u00e9 devant les perspectives de l&rsquo;apr\u00e8s-Guerre froide. Elle le fit de deux fa\u00e7ons : centralisation et appel massif aux m\u00e9thodes de comp\u00e9titivit\u00e9 du secteur priv\u00e9 aux d\u00e9pens des m\u00e9thodes, mais aussi de l&rsquo;esprit des pouvoirs publics. On voit le r\u00e9sultat. La question est bien : y a-t-il encore une alternative ? Sinon, on conclurait que le syst\u00e8me est irr\u00e9m\u00e9diablement vici\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Les vertiges du Pentagone 1er d\u00e9cembre 2004 L&rsquo;affaire des tankers Boeing KC-767 menace de devenir un scandale plus fondamental encore, en devenant \u00e9ventuellement l&rsquo;affaire Druyun. Darleen Druyun est cette officielle du Pentagone, adjointe au chef du service des acquisitions de l&rsquo;USAF, qui a contr\u00f4l\u00e9 tous les contrats de l&rsquo;Air Force pendant neuf ans (de 1993&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":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-66146","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\/66146","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=66146"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66146\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66146"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66146"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66146"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}