{"id":67338,"date":"2006-03-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-03-09T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/03\/09\/le-mythe-dune-alternative-moderee-a-gw\/"},"modified":"2006-03-09T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-03-09T00:00:00","slug":"le-mythe-dune-alternative-moderee-a-gw","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/03\/09\/le-mythe-dune-alternative-moderee-a-gw\/","title":{"rendered":"Le mythe d&rsquo;une alternative mod\u00e9r\u00e9e \u00e0 GW"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><h2 class=\"titleset_a.deepblue\" style=\"color:#0f3955; font-size:2em\">Le mythe d&rsquo;une alternative mod\u00e9r\u00e9e \u00e0 GW<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>9 mars 2006 &mdash; Le Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), prestigieux institut am\u00e9ricain de tendance mod\u00e9r\u00e9e et multilat\u00e9raliste, vient de publier un rapport sur la Russie : \u00ab\u00a0<em>Russia&rsquo;s Wrong Direction: What the United States Can and Should Do<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0. Le document, de 80 pages, est disponible depuis le 6 mars sur le site du <a class=\"gen\" href=\"http:\/\/www.cfr.org\/content\/publications\/attachments\/Russia_TaskForce.pdf\">CFR<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Le rapport est extr\u00eamement critique de l&rsquo;\u00e9volution de la Russie et recommande des mesures fermes contre ce pays. On peut en lire ci-apr\u00e8s une appr\u00e9ciation, de nos sources internes, en date du 6 mars.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"normal\" style=\"font-size:1.05em;\">\n<p><p>&laquo; <strong><em>Report urges U.S., EU to threaten Russia with G-8 expulsion<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The world&rsquo;s powers should let Russia know that it risks losing membership in the G-8 without better cooperation on key international problems, a former U.S. lawmaker said Sunday. Former Republican Representative Jack Kemp, co-chair of a new analysis of Russia, said that nation, which will host the G-8 summit in July in St. Petersburg, should be reminded \u00ab\u00a0that the G-8 is not a perpetual organization.\u00a0\u00bb Russia \u00ab\u00a0should know that we can go back to the G-7 if they don&rsquo;t cooperate on things like Iran, North Korea, nuclear proliferation and the war on terror,&raquo; Kemp said on NBC&rsquo;s Meet the Press. The Council on Foreign Relations&rsquo; report said Russia&rsquo;s emergence as an increasingly authoritarian state could impair U.S.-Russian ability to cooperate on international security issues. Continuation of Russia&rsquo;s drift away from democratic norms under President Vladimir Putin \u00ab\u00a0will make it harder for the two sides to find common ground and harder to cooperate even when they do,\u00a0\u00bb said the report. The other co-chair of the report, former Senator John Edwards, told NBC that \u00ab\u00a0the reason our relationship with Russia matters is we want them working with us, not against us, to solve the world&rsquo;s problems.\u00a0\u00bb The Democratic candidate for vice president in 2004 added that, \u00ab\u00a0at least for now, we believe it&rsquo;s better to have\u00a0\u00bb Russia as a member of the G-8. Release of the report on Sunday was timed to coincide with the Washington visit of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. He arrives Monday and will meet the next day with President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The report urged that the United States preserve and expand cooperation on dealing with the threat posed by Iran&rsquo;s nuclear program and on coping with the risk of Russian nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands. On the whole, though, the report said relations are headed in the wrong direction. \u00ab\u00a0In particular, Russia&rsquo;s relations with other post-Soviet states have become a source of significantly heightened U.S.-Russian friction,\u00a0\u00bb it said. It urged that Washington counter Russian pressures that undermine the \u00ab\u00a0stability and independence\u00a0\u00bb of its neighbors by helping to secure the success of those states that \u00ab\u00a0want to make the leap into the European mainstream.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The report was especially critical of the Kremlin&rsquo;s energy export policy, accusing it of turning \u00ab\u00a0a prized asset of economic relations into a potential tool of political intimidation.\u00a0\u00bb The report recommended that Washington step up support for organizations committed to free and fair parliamentary and presidential elections in 2007-2008. Among many setbacks to Russian democracy in recent years, the subordination of the judiciary to executive power received particular importance in the study. \u00ab\u00a0Under President Putin, power has been centralized and pluralism reduced in every single area of politics. As a result, Russia is left only with the trappings of democratic rule &mdash; their form, but not their content,\u00a0\u00bb the report said.<\/em> &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p><p>Le document du CFR est int\u00e9ressant, d&rsquo;une part par sa fermet\u00e9 de ton, d&rsquo;autre part par son origine, et les deux facteurs appr\u00e9ci\u00e9s l&rsquo;un en fonction de l&rsquo;autre. Plut\u00f4t que parler de d\u00e9mocrates et de r\u00e9publicains dans le champ politique am\u00e9ricain, parlons de lib\u00e9raux et de conservateurs, de mod\u00e9r\u00e9s et de radicaux (tous ces \u00e9pith\u00e8tes ne renvoyant pas de fa\u00e7on coh\u00e9rente \u00e0 l&rsquo;une ou l&rsquo;autre \u00e9tiquette, et pour cette raison nous nous gardons de ces derni\u00e8res : un r\u00e9publicain peut \u00eatre lib\u00e9ral et radical, un d\u00e9mocrate peut \u00eatre conservateur et mod\u00e9r\u00e9 et ainsi de suite). Selon cette approche on dira que le CFR est lib\u00e9ral et mod\u00e9r\u00e9. Ses engagements ont toujours soutenu le multilat\u00e9ralisme et l&rsquo;internationalisme. Il repr\u00e9sente, dans la perception europ\u00e9enne conformiste, l&rsquo;alternative d\u00e9sirable \u00e0 GW Bush. Au terme d&rsquo;une discussion anim\u00e9e avec un diplomate, il y eut cette conclusion de notre interlocuteur : &laquo; <em>Nous attendons la fin de la d\u00e9testable administration Bush pour retrouver l&rsquo;Am\u00e9rique raisonnable que nous aimons.<\/em> &raquo; Cette pr\u00e9vision en forme de fervente pri\u00e8re (c&rsquo;est comme cela qu&rsquo;il faut l&rsquo;entendre) s&rsquo;adressait notamment \u00e0 un organisme comme le CFR.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>A la lumi\u00e8re de ce document, nous pouvons faire plusieurs constats qui serviront pour la pr\u00e9vision qu&rsquo;on peut faire de l&rsquo;\u00e9volution des USA.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&bull; L&rsquo;alternative que nous offre cette soi-disant \u00ab\u00a0Am\u00e9rique raisonnable\u00a0\u00bb est dans la m\u00eame illusion que celle qu&rsquo;entretenait l&rsquo;administration Bush apr\u00e8s 9\/11, et que certains de ses membres continuent \u00e0 entretenir (notamment Cheney, GW \u00e9tant hors comp\u00e9tition). Elle est dans l&rsquo;illusion de la toute-puissance am\u00e9ricaine, cette puissance \u00e9tant d&rsquo;ailleurs fond\u00e9e et morale, et d\u00e9crite par cet \u00e9trange paradoxe que les multilat\u00e9ralistes mod\u00e9r\u00e9s US ont la m\u00eame configuration psychologique unilat\u00e9raliste qu&rsquo;on trouve chez les autres, en plus de leur politique. Pour commenter le choix politique du moment de la publication de l&rsquo;\u00e9tude tel qu&rsquo;il nous est pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 (&laquo; <em>Release of the report on Sunday was timed to coincide with the Washington visit of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov<\/em> &raquo;), nous citerons un extrait de l&rsquo;article de <a class=\"gen\" href=\"http:\/\/www.wpherald.com\/storyview.php?StoryID=20060307-014025-4184r\">Martin Walker, de UPI<\/a> (\u00ab\u00a0<em>Multipolar World<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0) du 7 mars :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"normal\" style=\"font-size:1.05em;\">\n<p><p>&laquo; <em>America may still be first among equals, but the Chinese, Russian, Indian and European powers now all think of themselves of equals, or at least demand to be treated that way. And the United States has to grin and bear it; witness the way that Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov was given a private dinner with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Monday evening, and an unusual meeting with President George W. Bush in the Oval Office Tuesday.<\/em> &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p><p>&bull; La duret\u00e9 du document, dans ses intentions autant que dans les mesures qu&rsquo;il recommande, montre des \u00ab\u00a0mod\u00e9r\u00e9s multilat\u00e9ralistes\u00a0\u00bb bien plus durs \u00e0 l&rsquo;encontre de la Russie que les soi-disant \u00ab\u00a0radicaux unilat\u00e9ralistes\u00a0\u00bb que seraient les gens de l&rsquo;administration GW Bush. L&rsquo;extrait du texte de Walker, avec le contraste entre ce document et l&rsquo;accueil fait \u00e0 Lavrov, servira \u00e0 nouveau de d\u00e9monstration. Cet extr\u00e9misme des lib\u00e9raux internationalistes n&rsquo;a rien pour surprendre. Il renvoie au wilsonisme (Woodrow Wilson, pr\u00e9sident de 1912 \u00e0 1920), rebaptis\u00e9 \u00ab\u00a0n\u00e9o-wilsonisme\u00a0\u00bb ou \u00ab\u00a0turbo-wilsonisme\u00a0\u00bb, qui est exceptionnaliste, interventionniste, promoteur de l&rsquo;expansion de la d\u00e9mocratie et (surtout) du march\u00e9 libre, avec des moyens exp\u00e9ditifs (militaires) s&rsquo;il le faut, etc. ; l&rsquo;intervention contre la Serbie en 1999 du gentil Clinton en fut l&rsquo;illustration avant 9\/11. On comprend \u00e0 \u00e9noncer tout cela qu&rsquo;on \u00e9nonce une politique qui sied parfaitement aux n\u00e9o-conservateurs (lesquels sont d\u00e9mocrates d&rsquo;origine, voire trotskistes, et certainement lib\u00e9raux) ; et qui va aussi bien \u00e0 GW Bush, qui est encore d\u00e9nonc\u00e9 avec juste raison aujourd&rsquo;hui, par les conservateurs isolationnistes qui n&rsquo;ont aucune repr\u00e9sentation dans le syst\u00e8me washingtonien, comme un \u00ab\u00a0n\u00e9o-wilsonien\u00a0\u00bb.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&bull; En d&rsquo;autres mots : blanc bonnet et bonnet blanc. Ce qui a chang\u00e9 l&rsquo;Am\u00e9rique, &mdash; ce qui l&rsquo;a pr\u00e9cipit\u00e9 dans l&rsquo;extr\u00eame de tendances qu&rsquo;elle avait d\u00e9j\u00e0, &mdash; c&rsquo;est l&rsquo;effet produit par 9\/11, pas l&rsquo;administration GW Bush. Le successeur de GW Bush sera n\u00e9cessairement aussi dur que lui, sinon plus que lui (ce qui est le cas du r\u00e9publicain \u00ab\u00a0lib\u00e9ral\u00a0\u00bb McCain et de la \u00ab\u00a0progressiste\u00a0\u00bb Hillary Clinton).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&bull; Le document CFR nous dit encore ceci d&rsquo;int\u00e9ressant : l&rsquo;\u00e9tat de la pens\u00e9e strat\u00e9gique US. En prenant comme objectif central la Russie, le document nous d\u00e9crit l&rsquo;\u00e9tat de d\u00e9sordre actuel de la strat\u00e9gie US, \u00e9cartel\u00e9e entre des ambitions \u00e9clat\u00e9es, confuses et disproportionn\u00e9es, et des moyens en constante d\u00e9gradation. Qui est l&rsquo;Ennemi aujourd&rsquo;hui ? La Russie ? Mais pourquoi pas la Chine ? Ou l&rsquo;Iran ? Et le terrorisme international ? Et ainsi de suite. L&rsquo;extr\u00e9misme qui affecte toutes les tendances politiques, mod\u00e9r\u00e9s comme radicaux, lib\u00e9raux comme conservateurs, est le v\u00e9ritable caract\u00e8re de l&rsquo;Am\u00e9rique aujourd&rsquo;hui. Il nous en dit plus long sur la psychologie am\u00e9ricaniste que sur les menaces qui r\u00f4dent dans le monde. D&rsquo;ici 2008, cela ne s&rsquo;arrangera pas ; apr\u00e8s, non plus.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Le mythe d&rsquo;une alternative mod\u00e9r\u00e9e \u00e0 GW 9 mars 2006 &mdash; Le Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), prestigieux institut am\u00e9ricain de tendance mod\u00e9r\u00e9e et multilat\u00e9raliste, vient de publier un rapport sur la Russie : \u00ab\u00a0Russia&rsquo;s Wrong Direction: What the United States Can and Should Do\u00ab\u00a0. Le document, de 80 pages, est disponible depuis le 6&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":[3764,5166,3730,5167,1104,4140],"class_list":["post-67338","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-cfr","tag-modere","tag-multilateraliste","tag-neo-wilsonisme","tag-neocons","tag-wilson"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67338","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=67338"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67338\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67338"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67338"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67338"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}