{"id":67258,"date":"2006-02-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-02-09T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/02\/09\/neocons-in-neocons-out\/"},"modified":"2006-02-09T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-02-09T00:00:00","slug":"neocons-in-neocons-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/02\/09\/neocons-in-neocons-out\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201c<em>Neocons in, neocons out<\/em>\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>Laissons parler les commentateurs, car les choses vont vite \u00e0 Washington.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t&bull; Le 13 d\u00e9cembre 2005, H.D.S. Greenway publie dans le Boston <em>Globe<\/em> et dans l&rsquo;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.iht.com\/articles\/2005\/12\/13\/opinion\/edgreenway.php\" class=\"gen\">International Herald Tribune<\/a> une analyse avec le titre : \u00ab <em>The return of the neocons<\/em> \u00bb. Il y d\u00e9crivait la tentative en cours des n\u00e9o-conservateurs, Richard Perle en t\u00eate, d&rsquo;imposer une action contre la Syrie pour changer le r\u00e9gime en place. Greenway disait sa crainte d&rsquo;un regain de l&rsquo;influence des <em>neocons<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t&bull; Le 7 f\u00e9vrier 2006, Alec Russell, du <em>Daily Telegraph<\/em>, publie <a href=\"http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/main.jhtml?view=BLOGDETAIL&#038;grid=P30&#038;blog=america&#038;xml=\/news\/2006\/02\/07\/blamerica07.xml\" class=\"gen\">une analyse<\/a> sur le <em>blog<\/em> du journal, avec le titre : \u00ab <em>neocons no more<\/em> \u00bb. Il y annonce la fin de l&rsquo;influence des <em>neocons<\/em> au sein de l&rsquo;administration GW. (C&rsquo;est donc qu&rsquo;ils s&rsquo;y trouvaient toujours en place? Y \u00e9taient-ils revenus?) C&rsquo;est ce que le <em>Daily Telegraph<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/main.jhtml?xml=\/news\/2006\/02\/09\/wneo09.xml&#038;sSheet=\/portal\/2006\/02\/09\/ixportal.html\" class=\"gen\">deux jours plus tard<\/a>, qualifie de \u00ab <em>neo-realist approach<\/em> \u00bb. Il s&rsquo;agit de montrer que, d\u00e9sormais, Washington privil\u00e9gie une approche diplomatique (notamment dans la crise irakienne).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tAlors, <em>neocons in, neocons out<\/em>? Ces diverses tentatives de rationalisation d\u00e9crivent un courant politique que personne ne contr\u00f4le vraiment. La r\u00e9alit\u00e9 n&rsquo;est pas dans le choix de telle ou telle politique mais dans les moyens disponibles,  et, dans le cas US, des moyens militaires disponibles, car c&rsquo;est la seule chose qui compte pour les am\u00e9ricanistes. <em>Neocons<\/em>, n\u00e9o-r\u00e9alistes, qu&rsquo;importe. La situation en Irak et l&rsquo;\u00e9tat de la machine militaire am\u00e9ricaniste dictent la politique possible. La messe est dite.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tPubli\u00e9 le 9 f\u00e9vrier 2006 \u00e0 13H05<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Laissons parler les commentateurs, car les choses vont vite \u00e0 Washington. &bull; Le 13 d\u00e9cembre 2005, H.D.S. Greenway publie dans le Boston Globe et dans l&rsquo;International Herald Tribune une analyse avec le titre : \u00ab The return of the neocons \u00bb. Il y d\u00e9crivait la tentative en cours des n\u00e9o-conservateurs, Richard Perle en t\u00eate, d&rsquo;imposer&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":[2],"tags":[5073,1104,5074],"class_list":["post-67258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-neo-realistes","tag-neocons","tag-shift"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67258","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=67258"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67258\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}