{"id":67854,"date":"2006-08-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-08-08T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/08\/08\/tsahal-et-les-relations-publiques\/"},"modified":"2006-08-08T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-08-08T00:00:00","slug":"tsahal-et-les-relations-publiques","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/08\/08\/tsahal-et-les-relations-publiques\/","title":{"rendered":"Tsahal<\/em> et les relations publiques"},"content":{"rendered":"

Apr\u00e8s quelques semaines d’op\u00e9rations militaires incertaines, la campagne militaire de Tsahal<\/em> au Liban est d\u00e9sormais l’objet de diverses sp\u00e9culations. Certains auteurs et certaines r\u00e9v\u00e9lations tendent \u00e0 appr\u00e9cier l’\u00e9tonnante lenteur de Tsahal<\/em>, ou certaines de ses faiblesses op\u00e9rationnelles, comme des tactiques d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9es. Il faut consid\u00e9rer ces diverses appr\u00e9ciations \u00e0 la fois d’un esprit ouvert et avec un il critique (ce n’est pas des plus simples). Elles peuvent aussi bien faire partie du constat d’une complication tr\u00e8s r\u00e9elle du conflit que d’une campagne de d\u00e9sinformation, la premi\u00e8re explication pouvant d’ailleurs englober la seconde <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tUne affirmation de cette sorte vient du journaliste Thomas Ricks, du Washington Post<\/em>, un reporter de bonne r\u00e9putation. Ci-dessous, l’extrait de son intervention lors de l’\u00e9mission de CNN Reliable Sources<\/a>, le 6 ao\u00fbt. Ricks affirme que Tsahal<\/em> laisse intentionnellement actifs certains postes de tir du Hezbollah pour que les pertes essuy\u00e9es par Isra\u00ebl puissent m\u00e9diatiquement (moralement ?) justifier la poursuite des pertes civiles inflig\u00e9es aux Libanais.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t ()<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tHOWARD KURTZ<\/em><\/strong>: () And joining us now <\/em>[] Thomas Ricks, Pentagon reporter for The Washington Post and author of the new book Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTom Ricks, you’ve covered a number of military conflicts, including Iraq, as I just mentioned. Is civilian casualties increasingly going to be a major media issue? In conflicts where you don’t have two standing armies shooting at each other?<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTHOMAS RICKS<\/em><\/strong>: I think it will be. But I think civilian casualties are also part of the battlefield play for both sides here. One of the things that is going on, according to some U.S. military analysts, is that Israel purposely has left pockets of Hezbollah rockets in Lebanon, because as long as they’re being rocketed, they can continue to have a sort of moral equivalency in their operations in Lebanon.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tKURTZ<\/em><\/strong>: Hold on, you’re suggesting that Israel has deliberately allowed Hezbollah to retain some of it’s fire power, essentially for PR purposes, because having Israeli civilians killed helps them in the public relations war here?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tRICKS<\/em><\/strong>: Yes, that’s what military analysts have told me.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tKURTZ<\/em><\/strong>: That’s an extraordinary testament to the notion that having people on your own side killed actually works to your benefit in that nobody wants to see your own citizens killed but it works to your benefit in terms of the battle of perceptions here.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tRICKS<\/em><\/strong>: Exactly. It helps you with the moral high ground problem, because you know your operations in Lebanon are going to be killing civilians as well.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 8 ao\u00fbt 2006 \u00e0 15H38<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Apr\u00e8s quelques semaines d’op\u00e9rations militaires incertaines, la campagne militaire de Tsahal au Liban est d\u00e9sormais l’objet de diverses sp\u00e9culations. Certains auteurs et certaines r\u00e9v\u00e9lations tendent \u00e0 appr\u00e9cier l’\u00e9tonnante lenteur de Tsahal, ou certaines de ses faiblesses op\u00e9rationnelles, comme des tactiques d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9es. Il faut consid\u00e9rer ces diverses appr\u00e9ciations \u00e0 la fois d’un esprit ouvert et avec… <\/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":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3642,4472,5713,2766,5023,4714],"class_list":["post-67854","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-cnn","tag-hezbollah","tag-publiques","tag-relations","tag-ricks","tag-tsahal"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67854","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=67854"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67854\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67854"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67854"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67854"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}