{"id":67380,"date":"2006-03-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-03-23T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/03\/23\/ces-special-relationships-pourries\/"},"modified":"2006-03-23T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-03-23T00:00:00","slug":"ces-special-relationships-pourries","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/03\/23\/ces-special-relationships-pourries\/","title":{"rendered":"Ces \u201c<em>special relationships<\/em>\u201d pourries"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>Bien, les temps de la Grande Alliance churchillienne ne sont pas au beau fixe. Il n&#8217;emp\u00eache, le ton du <a href=\"http:\/\/www.guardian.co.uk\/usa\/story\/0,,1737394,00.html\" class=\"gen\">court commentaire<\/a> du chroniqueur des probl\u00e8mes de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 du <em>Guardian<\/em>, Richard Norton-Taylor, est singulier et exceptionnel, et particuli\u00e8rement frappant par sa vigueur et son m\u00e9pris (m\u00e9pris pour l&rsquo;alliance avec les USA, mais aussi, indirectement mais fortement, pour ceux qui, \u00e0 Londres, poursuivent cette politique).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em>The rancid relationship<\/em> \u00bb expose surtout la rancoeur des militaires britanniques, litt\u00e9ralement trait\u00e9s comme des chiens par des gens pour lesquels ils semblent d\u00e9sormais avoir l&rsquo;estime qu&rsquo;on a pour des criminels de guerre : \u00ab <em>A senior British military commander in the invasion of Iraq said the other day that Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, should be tried for war crimes. He was speaking in private and, I assume, did not mean to be taken literally. But there was no mistaking the anger in his voice.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tD&rsquo;o\u00f9 la question de Norton-Taylor: mais qu&rsquo;est-ce que nous faisons encore avec ces gens-l\u00e0? Et de mettre en cause tous les fondements de cette coop\u00e9ration anglo-am\u00e9ricaine dans le domaine essentiel de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9, en posant la question de l&rsquo;int\u00e9r\u00eat des Britanniques \u00e0 encore la pratiquer. (On note que, d\u00e9sormais, la querelle sur le JSF figure en bonne place dans cette sorte de commentaire. On note \u00e9galement les pr\u00e9cisions donn\u00e9es sur le fonctionnement interne des moyens d&rsquo;\u00e9coute britanniques, directement plac\u00e9es, par consigne \u00e9crite, au service des USA dans certains cas, ce qui implique des occurrences o\u00f9 cela serait fait aux d\u00e9pens des int\u00e9r\u00eats britanniques.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em>What is Washington doing in return for all Blair&rsquo;s help? Bush has blocked a billion-dollar deal with Rolls-Royce to build engines for the proposed joint strike fighter  which Britain wants for its two new aircraft carriers  despite repeated lobbying from Blair. The US still refuses to share advanced military technology with us. It is refusing to let British agencies question terrorist suspects, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged September 11 mastermind; it won&rsquo;t even say where they are being held.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab <em>There are two areas that traditionally are said to prove the value of the special relationship  the Trident strategic nuclear-missile system, and intelligence. Yet there are question marks over their value. What is Trident&rsquo;s purpose or worth in a post-cold-war world? GCHQ, meanwhile, spends time and money eavesdropping on targets at America&rsquo;s behest. As an internal GCHQ manual put it: making the relationship sufficiently worthwhile to the US may entail on occasion the applying of UK resources to the meeting of US requirements.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Is it in Britain&rsquo;s national interest to be so closely allied to a US that takes Britain for granted, to an administration that sets up Guant\u00e1namo Bay  where the treatment of prisoners led a high-court judge to remark that America&rsquo;s idea of what is torture is not the same as ours and does not appear to coincide with that of most civilised nations?<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tMis en ligne le 23 mars 2006 \u00e0 14H08<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Bien, les temps de la Grande Alliance churchillienne ne sont pas au beau fixe. Il n&#8217;emp\u00eache, le ton du court commentaire du chroniqueur des probl\u00e8mes de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 du Guardian, Richard Norton-Taylor, est singulier et exceptionnel, et particuli\u00e8rement frappant par sa vigueur et son m\u00e9pris (m\u00e9pris pour l&rsquo;alliance avec les USA, mais aussi, indirectement mais fortement,&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":[4229,250,5206,3345,569,3344,5207,4775],"class_list":["post-67380","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-gchq","tag-jsf","tag-norton","tag-relationships","tag-rumsfeld","tag-special","tag-taylor","tag-trident"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67380","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=67380"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67380\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67380"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67380"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67380"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}