{"id":66150,"date":"2004-12-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-12-06T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/12\/06\/une-mission-pour-sortir-dun-desarroi-qui-dure-deja-depuis-un-tiers-de-siecle\/"},"modified":"2004-12-06T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2004-12-06T00:00:00","slug":"une-mission-pour-sortir-dun-desarroi-qui-dure-deja-depuis-un-tiers-de-siecle","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/12\/06\/une-mission-pour-sortir-dun-desarroi-qui-dure-deja-depuis-un-tiers-de-siecle\/","title":{"rendered":"Une mission pour sortir d’un d\u00e9sarroi qui dure d\u00e9j\u00e0 depuis un tiers de si\u00e8cle… <\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Une mission pour sortir d’un d\u00e9sarroi qui dure depuis un tiers de si\u00e8cle…<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t6 d\u00e9cembre 2004 Thomas Friedman propose aujourd’hui A new mission for America<\/a>. Le th\u00e8me principal : l’ind\u00e9pendance \u00e9nerg\u00e9tique. Voyons le programme.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab If President George W. Bush is looking for a legacy, I have just the one for him – a national science project that would be our generation’s moon shot: a crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation to make America energy-independent in 10 years. Imagine if every American kid, in every school, were galvanized around such a vision. Ah, you say, nice idea, Friedman, but what does it have to do with your subject – foreign policy?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Everything! You give me an America that is energy-independent, and I will give you sharply reduced oil revenues for the worst governments in the world. I will give you political reform from Moscow to Riyadh to Tehran. Yes, deprive these regimes of the huge oil windfalls on which they depend and you will force them to reform by having to tap their people instead of oil wells. These regimes won’t change when we tell them they should. They will change only when they tell themselves they must.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb When did the Soviet Union collapse? When did reform take off in Iran? When did the Oslo peace process begin? When did economic reform become a hot topic in the Arab world? In the late 1980s and early 1990s. And what was also happening then? Oil prices were collapsing.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb In November 1985, oil was $30 a barrel, recalled the noted oil economist Philip Verleger. By July of 1986, oil had fallen to $10 a barrel, and it did not climb back to $20 until April 1989. Everyone thinks Ronald Reagan brought down the Soviets, said Verleger. That is wrong. It was the collapse of their oil rents. It’s no accident that the 1990s was the decade of falling oil prices and falling walls.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb If Bush made energy independence his moon shot, he would dry up revenue for terrorism; force Iran, Russia, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia to take the path of reform – which they will never do with $45-a-barrel oil strengthen the dollar; and improve his own standing in Europe, by doing something huge to reduce global warming. He would also create a magnet to inspire young people to contribute to the war on terrorism and America’s future by becoming scientists, engineers and mathematicians.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb This is not just a win-win, said the Johns Hopkins foreign policy expert Michael Mandelbaum. This is a win-win-win-win-win.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t()<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Summoning all our energies and skills to produce a 21st-century fuel is George W. Bush’s opportunity to be both Nixon to China and JFK to the moon – in one move.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tLe programme d’ind\u00e9pendance \u00e9nerg\u00e9tique que Friedman propose, avec son effet politique et son effet moral, si caract\u00e9ristiques du mythe Am\u00e9ricain (\u00ab Summoning all our energies and skills<\/em> \u00bb), rappelle une autre circonstance.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tEn 1977, lorsque Jimmy Carter arriva au pouvoir, l’un de ses principaux projets fut d’assurer l’ind\u00e9pendance \u00e9nerg\u00e9tique du pays. En pr\u00e9sentant, le 20 avril 1977, son programme \u00e9nerg\u00e9tique, il parla de la mobilisation n\u00e9cessaire face \u00e0 un danger qu’il comparait \u00e0 celui qu’affronta l’Am\u00e9rique le 7 d\u00e9cembre 1941, avec l’attaque de Pearl Harbor ; d’autre part, il compara l’effort qu’il demandait au pays \u00e0 celui qui fut fait pour la conqu\u00eate de la Lune (1961-69).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tA cette \u00e9poque, quatre ans apr\u00e8s la Guerre d’Octobre (guerre isra\u00e9lo-arabe du Kippour d’octobre 1973), l’embargo sur le p\u00e9trole et la crise \u00e9conomique, ce qui \u00e9tait d\u00e9sign\u00e9 comme la crise de l’\u00e9nergie, co\u00fbt de l’\u00e9nergie, ind\u00e9pendance \u00e9nerg\u00e9tique, etc constituaient une crise g\u00e9n\u00e9rale.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPour l’Am\u00e9rique, cette question, telle que la pr\u00e9sentait Carter, devait avoir aussi une dimension morale, voire mythique, consid\u00e9rable. Carter \u00e9tait le Pr\u00e9sident \u00e9lu par une Am\u00e9rique plong\u00e9e dans un immense d\u00e9sarroi, \u00e0 cause du Viet-n\u00e2m et de la crise morale qui l’avait accompagn\u00e9, de la crise politique et constitutionnelle du Watergate, issue indirectement de la crise vietnamienne, de la crise g\u00e9n\u00e9rale des institutions en 1974-76 (notamment les scandales de la CIA). Carter pr\u00e9sentait le projet d’ind\u00e9pendance \u00e9nerg\u00e9tique comme une Mission \u00e0 la fois r\u00e9g\u00e9n\u00e9ratrice (sortir de la crise Viet-n\u00e2m-Watergate) et mobilisatrice (retrouver l’esprit de la conqu\u00eate de la Lune).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa dimension \u00e9cologique du programme de Carter \u00e9tait \u00e9galement tr\u00e8s forte puisqu’il proposait de d\u00e9velopper des \u00e9nergies alternatives non polluantes en m\u00eame temps qu’il appelait les Am\u00e9ricains \u00e0 contr\u00f4ler et \u00e0 limiter leur consommation.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tSon \u00e9chec fut complet, comme on sait aujourd’hui, dans tous les domaines abord\u00e9s. L’Am\u00e9rique n’est pas ind\u00e9pendante \u00e9nergiquement, elle consomme et pollue plus que jamais (25% d’\u00e9mission de gaz polluants pour 7% de la population terrestre). Elle n’a pas retrouv\u00e9, ni dans ce programme de 1977 ni dans aucune autre initiative, l’\u00e9lan moral et industriel dont les commentateurs de l’am\u00e9ricanisme parent certaines autres initiatives telles que la riposte \u00e0 Pearl Harbor (et la guerre de 1941-45 en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, avec le projet Manhattan) et la conqu\u00eate de la Lune.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’analogie de la tentative de Carter avec l’article que publie Friedman aujourd’hui est int\u00e9ressante. La comparaison des deux \u00e9v\u00e9nements mesure aussi bien l’\u00e9chec de Carter que l’absence de r\u00e9veil des \u00e9nergies mobilisatrices (innovation industrielle et r\u00e9g\u00e9n\u00e9ration morale \u00e0 la fois) des Etats-Unis depuis le Viet-n\u00e2m. Le pr\u00e9sident succ\u00e9dant \u00e0 Carter, Ronald Reagan, avait propos\u00e9 son projet mobilisateur le 23 mars 1983 : la SDI (bouclier anti-missiles), ou guerre des \u00e9toiles. LA SDI \u00e9tait pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e par Reagan, le 23 mars 1983, plus comme un effort technologique pour assurer la paix (sortir de l’\u00e9quilibre de la terreur et de la menace d’an\u00e9antissement nucl\u00e9aire r\u00e9ciproque) que comme une arme anti-sovi\u00e9tique. Dans son discours, Reagan proposait aux Sovi\u00e9tiques le partage des technologies de la SDI (la chose fut prestement enterr\u00e9e par le Pentagone).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’indication \u00e9tait claire, on le mesure dans l’\u00e9volution jusqu’\u00e0 GW : d’un projet non-guerrier (Carter), on en revenait aux armements. Par ailleurs et malgr\u00e9 la propagande r\u00e9publicaine, la SDI fut un \u00e9chec complet de ses intentions de mobilisation collective des USA, et m\u00eame de ses effets politiques. Comme le signale l’\u00e9conomiste Philip Verleger, opportun\u00e9ment cit\u00e9 par Friedman, \u00ab [e]veryone thinks Ronald Reagan brought down the Soviets. That is wrong. It was the collapse of their oil rents.<\/em> \u00bb Effectivement, pour ce qui est de la contribution des facteurs \u00e9conomiques et industriels \u00e0 la chute de l’URSS, le prix du p\u00e9trole est un bien meilleur argument que la course aux armements.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl y eut encore, depuis l’\u00e9chec de la SDI, quelques tentatives de mobilisation collective des USA du type conqu\u00eate de la Lune (la lutte contre le SIDA, propos\u00e9e, sans rire, par Ronald Reagan en 1988, mais pas tr\u00e8s longtemps ; les autoroutes de l’information, grand projet de Clinton). Sans sous-estimer les divers d\u00e9veloppements \u00e9conomiques et technologiques impliqu\u00e9s, aucun de ces projets ne r\u00e9ussit dans son fondement moral (mobilisation).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tQue Friedman ressorte aujourd’hui une telle id\u00e9e remontant en 1977 n’est que la mesure du d\u00e9sarroi actuel de l’Am\u00e9rique. Le dernier projet en date de mobilisation (lutte contre le terrorisme) est un \u00e9chec. Il est un \u00e9chec op\u00e9rationnel (aujourd’hui, on en est m\u00eame \u00e0 signaler qu’on a perdu la trace de Ben Laden<\/a>) et un \u00e9chec moral (les Am\u00e9ricains ont r\u00e9\u00e9lu GW pour les valeurs traditionnelles US, certainement pas pour son succ\u00e8s en Irak). Au reste, si Friedman ressort la question de l’ind\u00e9pendance \u00e9nerg\u00e9tique, c’est parce qu’il craint un recul de la recherche scientifique aux USA, cette recherche qu’il faudrait au contraire accentuer pour trouver des \u00e9nergies alternatives, d\u00e9j\u00e0 en cours au niveau budg\u00e9taire et humain, comme cons\u00e9quences de la guerre contre la terreur.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Of all the irresponsible aspects of the 2005 budget bill that the Republican-led Congress just passed, nothing could be more irresponsible than the fact that funding for the National Science Foundation was cut by nearly 2 percent, or $105 million.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Think about this. America is facing a mounting crisis in science and engineering education. The generation of scientists, engineers and mathematicians who were spurred to get advanced degrees by the 1957 Soviet launch of Sputnik and the challenge by President John Kennedy to put a man on the moon is slowly retiring.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb But because of the steady erosion of science, math and engineering education in U.S. high schools, the cold war generation of American scientists is not being fully replenished. America traditionally filled the gap with Indian, Chinese and other immigrant brainpower. But post-9\/11, many of these foreign engineers are not coming here anymore, and, because the world is now flat and wired, many others can stay home and innovate without having to emigrate.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb If we Americans don’t do something soon and dramatic to reverse this erosion, Shirley Ann Jackson, the president of Rensselaer Polytechnic and president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, told me, we are not going to have the scientific foundation to sustain our high standard of living in 15 or 20 years.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Instead of doubling the NSF budget – to support more science education and research at every level this Congress decided to cut it! Could anything be more idiotic?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb If President George W. Bush is looking for a legacy, I have just the one for him a national science project that would be our generation’s moon shot: a crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation to make America energy-independent in 10 years<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

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

Une mission pour sortir d’un d\u00e9sarroi qui dure depuis un tiers de si\u00e8cle… 6 d\u00e9cembre 2004 Thomas Friedman propose aujourd’hui A new mission for America. Le th\u00e8me principal : l’ind\u00e9pendance \u00e9nerg\u00e9tique. Voyons le programme. \u00ab If President George W. Bush is looking for a legacy, I have just the one for him – a national… <\/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":[3643,4396,4345,4106,3215],"class_list":["post-66150","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-carter","tag-energetique","tag-independance","tag-pollution","tag-reagan"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66150","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=66150"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66150\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66150"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66150"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66150"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}