{"id":66176,"date":"2004-12-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-12-31T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/12\/31\/le-tsunami-gw-et-the-rest-of-the-world\/"},"modified":"2004-12-31T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2004-12-31T00:00:00","slug":"le-tsunami-gw-et-the-rest-of-the-world","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/12\/31\/le-tsunami-gw-et-the-rest-of-the-world\/","title":{"rendered":"Le tsunami, GW et the rest of the world<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Le tsunami, GW et the rest of the world<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t31 d\u00e9cembre 2004 On ne s’\u00e9tonnera pas que l’attitude des USA et de leur pr\u00e9sident GW \u00e0 l’\u00e9gard de la catastrophe asiatique soit rapidement devenue un cas politique de premi\u00e8re importance, les USA (et GW) ayant d\u00e9cid\u00e9 que les USA sont le centre du monde, le rest of the world<\/em> observe chacune de leurs r\u00e9actions. Comme il \u00e9tait pr\u00e9visible, car l’homme est sans surprise, la r\u00e9action initiale de GW a \u00e9t\u00e9 naturellement plus que m\u00e9diocre. Certains mots de la premi\u00e8re intervention du pr\u00e9sident US ont \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9v\u00e9lateurs. Le site WSWS.org<\/a>, tr\u00e8s critique de cette r\u00e9action, observe justement ceci, avec quelques mots assez rudes mais bien trouv\u00e9s (\u00ab the moral and intellectual cretinism of Bush and his cohorts<\/em> \u00bb), qui montrent qu’il n’est plus temps aujourd’hui de prendre des gants:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Bush’s press statement in Crawford did contain one indisputable truth. This has been a terrible disaster, Bush said. It is beyond our comprehension.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The speechwriter who crafted those words revealed more about Bush than he perhaps intended. This failure to grasp the dimensions of the south Asian disasterand anticipate the public reaction to a display of indifferenceis a measure of the moral and intellectual cretinism of Bush and his cohorts.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tLa faiblesse politique de l’\u00e9quipe GW est telle qu’une affaire aussi \u00e9norme et qui devrait \u00e9loigner toute pol\u00e9mique politique au profit de la solidarit\u00e9 globalisatrice, devient une pol\u00e9mique politique de premi\u00e8re grandeur. Les articles s’accumulent aujourd’hui, qui d\u00e9finissent les enjeux et les probl\u00e8mes politiques li\u00e9s \u00e0 l’attitude de GW face au tsunami<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t• Il s’agit pour GW d’un test de son cr\u00e9dit politique r\u00e9el dans le monde (\u00ab Bush’s tsunami aid could help fix U.S. image abroad<\/em> \u00bb, par David E. Sanger, dans l’International Herald Tribune d’aujourd’hui<\/a>).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t• Pour beaucoup de commentateurs, l’\u00e9v\u00e9nement est d’ores et d\u00e9j\u00e0 une mesure de son \u00e9chec av\u00e9r\u00e9 dans ce domaine (\u00ab Bush Fails a Global Test<\/em> \u00bb, de John Nichols, dans The Nation, du 30 d\u00e9cembre<\/a>, et aussi \u00ab Bush’s response to South Asia disaster: indifference compounded by political incompetence<\/em> \u00bb de Patrick Martin, dans le texte de WSWS.org du 30 d\u00e9cembre<\/a> d\u00e9j\u00e0 cit\u00e9). Ces m\u00eames commentateurs mettent en \u00e9vidence la mont\u00e9e des critiques internes \u00e0 Washington, notamment au Congr\u00e8s. Parmi les \u00e9ditoriaux critiques, on retient celui du Star Post de Minneapolis, dans le Minnesota<\/a>, en date du 30 d\u00e9cembre.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab As the Bush administration is wont to say, actions speak louder than words, and America’s actions in recent days have painted the United States as a rich, self-absorbed and uncaring nation that had to be shamed into anything approaching appropriate concern about this catastrophe. The Bush administration’s handling of this crisis has been inept beyond belief.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb There’s a broader context here that bears consideration. Two days before Christmas, the media reported that unprecedented U.S. deficits caused substantially by the Iraq war, which most of the world hates, and by Bush’s tax cuts for wealthy Americans had led the Bush administration to cut substantially its previously agreed contributions to world food programs. By going back on its commitments, the Bush administration forced numerous aid agencies to suspend ongoing programs in many impoverished nations including, ironically as it would turn out, Indonesia.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Then a day after Christmas came the undersea earthquake and resulting tsunami waves that very likely will end up taking well more than 100,000 lives while putting millions at risk of disease and destroying both their livelihoods and homes. From the very first hours it was apparent this was going to be an almost unprecedented humanitarian crisis. Yet Bush remained at his Texas ranch where, aides said, he spent time cutting brush and bicycle riding. He uttered not a single public word about what had happened in Asia.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb On Monday, the United States announced an initial $5 million in aid, mostly through the Red Cross, to which it said it most likely would add an additional $10 million at some point. Bush still was nowhere to be seen.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The criticism began almost immediately, and it did not come only from a U.N. official. Comparisons were drawn, for example, to the additional $80 billion that Bush has requested for the war in Iraq and the $30 million to $40 million that his January inauguration will cost.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The criticism had an effect. While responding angrily to accusations of stinginess, the administration on Tuesday added an additional $20 million to the $15 million it had announced on Monday. The appearance was clearly that Washington had been shamed into the larger contribution. Bush was still in Texas with his brush piles and mountain bike.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb But his absence had been noticed, and numerous reporters in Crawford were pressing Bush aides on why he was invisible in this crisis. Late Tuesday, in response to the questions, it was announced that he would have a public statement Wednesday. Again, the appearance was that he was shamed into it.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t• On a aussi une indication de l’affolement soudain de GW et de son \u00e9quipe devant les premi\u00e8res r\u00e9actions tr\u00e8s n\u00e9gatives \u00e0 l’\u00e9gard de ses premi\u00e8res r\u00e9actions, avec, pour tenter d’endiguer ce mauvais effet, des promesses d’intervention majeure (\u00ab Bush Promises Long-Term Aid for Asia<\/em> \u00bb, de Deb Riechmann, de Associated Press, du 30 d\u00e9cembre).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t• Enfin, et c’est le plus inattendu, la crise a donn\u00e9 une indication de ce qui pourrait s’av\u00e9rer \u00eatre un \u00e9loignement tr\u00e8s net des positions de GW et de son alli\u00e9 Blair. Comme l’observe The Independent d’aujourd’hui<\/a>, Blair, dont le pays assure la pr\u00e9sidence \u00e0 partir de demain, a refus\u00e9 la demande de Berlusconi de r\u00e9unir le G8 pour que cet organisme prenne la crise en main. La manuvre italienne est limpide: les Italiens sont obs\u00e9d\u00e9s par ce qu’ils croient \u00eatre la perspective d’une Allemagne qui se verrait offrir un si\u00e8ge permanent (avec droit de veto) au Conseil de S\u00e9curit\u00e9, alors qu’eux-m\u00eames resteraient dans l’anonymat d’un si\u00e8ge normal. Cette crainte explique en bonne partie toute la politique pro-am\u00e9ricaine de Berlusconi depuis trois ans (pour obtenir le soutien am\u00e9ricain dans cette affaire). En obtenant la r\u00e9union du G8 qui substituerait cette organisation (o\u00f9 les Italiens sont pr\u00e9sents \u00e0 \u00e9galit\u00e9 avec les Allemands) \u00e0 l’ONU, Berlusconi ferait largement avancer son argument. Mais Blair tient \u00e0 renforcer le soutien de son parti, si largement \u00e9rod\u00e9 par l’affaire irakienne, en r\u00e9habilitant l’ONU dont la position internationaliste rencontre les grandes tendances id\u00e9alistes des travaillistes. Du coup, il se trouve en confrontation avec GW Bush, dont l’id\u00e9e farfelue d’une coalition des pays donateurs qui aurait supplant\u00e9 l’ONU dans le r\u00f4le de leader international dans la catastrophe asiatique a rencontr\u00e9 scepticisme, ironie et sarcasme.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab A Downing Street spokesman said: The Prime Minister said he will contact the other G8 members about assistance that we might be able to give to the United Nations. But we are confident G8 members will agree it is right that the UN should continue to take the lead role in co-ordinating the relief effort.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Mr Blair’s support for the UN is in marked contrast to President George Bush’s announcement yesterday that a core group of donor countries the US, India, Australia and Japan would co-ordinate the effort. The US belatedly added the UN to that group last night.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tGrosso modo, la catastrophe asiatique, qui est \u00e9videmment un enjeu politique par son \u00e9normit\u00e9, l’effet public et les implications diverses qu’elle rec\u00e8le, est aussi une catastrophe diplomatique pour les USA. Toute surprise \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard est d\u00e9plac\u00e9e. On voit confirm\u00e9e l’absence compl\u00e8te d’int\u00e9r\u00eat pour l’ext\u00e9rieur des actuels dirigeants am\u00e9ricanistes, dont la vision du monde semble born\u00e9e aux collines du Texas ; confirm\u00e9 \u00e9galement, l’\u00e9tat \u00e9pouvantable de la diplomatie am\u00e9ricaine, compl\u00e8tement militaris\u00e9e et tourn\u00e9e vers la seule perspective guerri\u00e8re de la guerre en Irak et de la guerre contre la Terreur. L’initiative US de former une coalition des pays donateurs porte involontairement la marque de l’obsession am\u00e9ricaine. Sans doute a-t-il fallu expliquer \u00e0 GW qu’il s’agissait moins d’attaquer l’Indon\u00e9sie que de lui venir en aide. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tD’ores et d\u00e9j\u00e0 l’initiative am\u00e9ricaine s’est trouv\u00e9e largement r\u00e9duite en ambitions par les Am\u00e9ricains, devant la position naturelle de coordination des op\u00e9rations adopt\u00e9e par l’ONU. Aujourd’hui, BBC News<\/a> notait: \u00ab Mr Powell agreed the UN had chief responsibility for co-ordinating the aid effort, despite a move by Washington to set up a core group of donor countries with India, Australia and Japan.<\/em> \u00bb L’un des effets inattendus de l’immense catastrophe sera donc d’isoler encore plus les \u00c9tats-Unis, et d’accro\u00eetre la rupture de sa politique avec les pr\u00e9occupations du reste du monde.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

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

Le tsunami, GW et the rest of the world 31 d\u00e9cembre 2004 On ne s’\u00e9tonnera pas que l’attitude des USA et de leur pr\u00e9sident GW \u00e0 l’\u00e9gard de la catastrophe asiatique soit rapidement devenue un cas politique de premi\u00e8re importance, les USA (et GW) ayant d\u00e9cid\u00e9 que les USA sont le centre du monde, le… <\/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":[705,3478],"class_list":["post-66176","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-blair","tag-onu"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66176","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=66176"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66176\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66176"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66176"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66176"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}