{"id":66357,"date":"2005-04-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-04-25T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/04\/25\/le-chaos-irakien-ou-le-sparadrap-anglo-saxon\/"},"modified":"2005-04-25T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2005-04-25T00:00:00","slug":"le-chaos-irakien-ou-le-sparadrap-anglo-saxon","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/04\/25\/le-chaos-irakien-ou-le-sparadrap-anglo-saxon\/","title":{"rendered":"<strong><em>Le chaos irakien, ou le \u201csparadrap anglo-saxon\u201d<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><h2 class=\"common-article\">Le chaos irakien, ou le sparadrap anglo-saxon<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t25 avril 2005  La crise irakienne comme sparadrap dont on n&rsquo;arrive pas \u00e0 se d\u00e9tacher, selon la fameuse anecdote du capitaine Haddock. Il s&rsquo;agit sans aucun doute d&rsquo;une catastrophique sp\u00e9cialit\u00e9 anglo-saxonne.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tDeux nouvelles sur le front int\u00e9rieur.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tConstat irakien (des Am\u00e9ricains): la violence est de retour. Apr\u00e8s des palinodies extraordinaires et nombreuses pour nous convaincre que <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article.php?art_id=1464\" class=\"gen\">tout est fini<\/a>, on admet que rien n&rsquo;est fini bien que l&rsquo;on tente de se convaincre officiellement que cela n&rsquo;est pas si grave, au prix de <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article.php?art_id=1493\" class=\"gen\">contorsions extraordinaires<\/a>. Les faits, eux, montrent simplement que <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/articles\/A12417-2005Apr23.html\" class=\"gen\">la situation est tr\u00e8s pr\u00e9occupante<\/a> au point o\u00f9 l&rsquo;on (re)commence \u00e0 s&rsquo;en pr\u00e9occuper \u00e0 Washington.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em>Violence is escalating sharply in Iraq after a period of relative calm that followed the January elections. Bombings, ambushes and kidnappings targeting Iraqis and foreigners, both troops and civilians, have surged this month while the new Iraqi government is caught up in power struggles over cabinet positions.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Many attacks have gone unchallenged by Iraqi forces in large areas of the country dominated by insurgents, according to the U.S. military, Iraqi officials and civilians and visits by Washington Post correspondents. Hundreds of Iraqis and foreigners have either been killed or wounded in the last week.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Definitely, violence is getting worse, said a U.S. official in Baghdad, who spoke on condition of anonymity. My strong sense is that a lot of the political momentum that was generated out of the successful election, which was sort of like a punch in the gut to the insurgents, has worn off. The political stalemate has given the insurgents new hope, the official added, repeating a message Americans say they are increasingly giving Iraqi leaders.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tAutre point o\u00f9 tourner notre attention: l&rsquo;Irak au Royaume-Uni, ce n&rsquo;est pas fini. Tony Blair croyait en \u00eatre quitte, il avait pr\u00e9par\u00e9 une campagne \u00e9lectorale aux petits oignons, o\u00f9 l&rsquo;on parlerait de croissance, d&rsquo;esp\u00e9rance sociale, \u00e9ventuellement des grands d\u00e9fis du temps (r\u00e9chauffement climatique). Patatras, \u00e7a n&rsquo;a pas march\u00e9!<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tD\u00e9sormais, Blair est confront\u00e9 \u00e0 la menace que <a href=\"http:\/\/politics.guardian.co.uk\/election\/story\/0,15803,1469610,00.html\" class=\"gen\">l&rsquo;Irak s&rsquo;installe au coeur de la campagne<\/a>, alors qu&rsquo;on se trouve \u00e0 deux semaines du scrutin.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em> The Liberal Democrats and Conservatives launched a two-pronged attack on Tony Blair yesterday<\/em> [24 April], <em>accusing the prime minister of having undermined trust in politicians and lied over the Iraq war. Labour was last night braced for the prospect that the war could be a key issue in the closing stages of the 2005 election campaign, after hints that the attorney general&rsquo;s legal advice will finally become public.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>The Mail on Sunday published a summary of what it claimed was Lord Goldsmith&rsquo;s 13-page assessment of the legal pros and cons of the US-led invasion in March 2003, which Mr Blair backed with British troops despite widespread domestic opposition.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Blair aides dismissed the claim. \u00a0\u00bbThere&rsquo;s nothing new to this story,\u00a0\u00bb said one. But it prompted both main opposition leaders to renew their attacks. Charles Kennedy demanded that the government bow to the inevitable and show how it became involved in what he called \u00a0\u00bba dreadful error, carried out on the basis of the wrong arguments and for the wrong reasons\u00a0\u00bb. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tMr Kennedy will today attempt to raise the profile of the Iraq war in the election campaign by calling for a full public inquiry into the way the decision to commit troops was taken. Arguing that \u00a0\u00bbthe British people won&rsquo;t allow it\u00a0\u00bb to be sidelined as an issue, the Lib Dem leader will set out his belief that the 2003 war was illegal, and that Mr Blair&rsquo;s conduct \u00a0\u00bbhas undermined trust in government\u00a0\u00bb. In view of the Mail on Sunday&rsquo;s report he will argue that the issue will \u00a0\u00bbnot go away\u00a0\u00bb until Lord Goldsmith&rsquo;s legal advice is published in full.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>The Conservatives, previously cautious on the issue in light of their official support for the war, also stepped up the attack. Interviewed on BBC1&rsquo;s Breakfast with Frost, Mr Howard accused the prime minister of having lied, and he urged voters to make the poll a judgment on his character.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tCes situations sont \u00e0 la fois \u00e9tonnantes et consternantes. Des deux c\u00f4t\u00e9s, am\u00e9ricain et britannique, on s&rsquo;\u00e9tait impliqu\u00e9 compl\u00e8tement pour vendre l&rsquo;histoire d&rsquo;une fin d\u00e9mocratique et \u00e9mouvante du conflit irakien.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t(Pour certains, d&rsquo;ailleurs, le fait d&rsquo;avoir pu organiser les \u00e9lections le 30 janvier est d\u00e9j\u00e0 une immense victoire en soi. On n&rsquo;imagine pas sornette plus consid\u00e9rable, quand on songe \u00e0 la situation de d\u00e9part et la popularit\u00e9 acceptable des Am\u00e9ricains en Irak en avril 2003, dans tous les cas l&rsquo;absence initiale de r\u00e9sistance s\u00e9rieuse. Des \u00e9lections auraient parfaitement pu \u00eatre organis\u00e9es en mai ou juin 2003. C&rsquo;\u00e9tait d&rsquo;ailleurs l&rsquo;intention du premier pro-consul&rsquo; US, le g\u00e9n\u00e9ral Jay Gardner. Il en fut emp\u00each\u00e9 par les id\u00e9ologues-intellectuels de Washington, qui voulaient d&rsquo;abord laisser s&rsquo;approfondir le d\u00e9sordre cr\u00e9ateur&rsquo; pour mieux d\u00e9structurer le pays et y installer les structures hyper-capitalistes et hyper-d\u00e9mocratiques. Le r\u00e9sultat est convaincant.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tAujourd&rsquo;hui, le lapin irakien ressort pour s&rsquo;imposer \u00e0 nouveau dans les agendas int\u00e9rieurs.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t&bull; Pour les Am\u00e9ricains, cela para\u00eet moins grave, un peu de virtualisme l\u00e0-dessus et il n&rsquo;en para\u00eetra pas trop. Pourtant la poursuite de la violence confirmera la contrainte pesant sur les troupes US, \u00e9cartant d&rsquo;\u00e9ventuels projets de r\u00e9duction des forces ; elle pourrait conduire \u00e0 forcer \u00e0 envisager la pire des choses au niveau int\u00e9rieur (pour la stabilit\u00e9 de l&rsquo;administration GW et le soutien \u00e0 sa politique): le retour de la conscription. (Lisez <a href=\"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/ips\/kyriakou.php?articleid=5705\" class=\"gen\">le texte de Niko Kyriakou<\/a> du 23 avril, sur <em>Antiwar.com<\/em>: il fait mesurer la gravit\u00e9 de la situation \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t&bull; Pour les Britanniques et Tony Blair, c&rsquo;est la mal\u00e9diction qui continue. Le PM britannique a hypoth\u00e9qu\u00e9 la totalit\u00e9 de sa politique et sa popularit\u00e9 pour une aventure qui s&rsquo;av\u00e8re catastrophique en tous points et repr\u00e9sente, pour l&rsquo;arm\u00e9e britannique, le plus formidable gaspillage de ressources qu&rsquo;on puisse imaginer. (C&rsquo;est tout l&rsquo;avenir de la puissance militaire britannique qui est \u00e9rod\u00e9 par l&rsquo;affaire irakienne.) Le retour obstin\u00e9 de la pol\u00e9mique irakienne sur la sc\u00e8ne int\u00e9rieure britannique est une bonne mesure du d\u00e9sarroi int\u00e9rieur britannique actuel.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Le chaos irakien, ou le sparadrap anglo-saxon 25 avril 2005 La crise irakienne comme sparadrap dont on n&rsquo;arrive pas \u00e0 se d\u00e9tacher, selon la fameuse anecdote du capitaine Haddock. Il s&rsquo;agit sans aucun doute d&rsquo;une catastrophique sp\u00e9cialit\u00e9 anglo-saxonne. Deux nouvelles sur le front int\u00e9rieur. Constat irakien (des Am\u00e9ricains): la violence est de retour. Apr\u00e8s des&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":[705,4525,4524],"class_list":["post-66357","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-blair","tag-gardner","tag-haddock"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66357","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=66357"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66357\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66357"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66357"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66357"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}