{"id":68072,"date":"2006-10-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-10-06T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/10\/06\/un-sujet-majeur-de-mesentente-entre-britanniques-et-americains-les-livraisons-darmes-iraniennes-en-irak\/"},"modified":"2006-10-06T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-10-06T00:00:00","slug":"un-sujet-majeur-de-mesentente-entre-britanniques-et-americains-les-livraisons-darmes-iraniennes-en-irak","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/10\/06\/un-sujet-majeur-de-mesentente-entre-britanniques-et-americains-les-livraisons-darmes-iraniennes-en-irak\/","title":{"rendered":"Un sujet majeur de m\u00e9sentente entre Britanniques et Am\u00e9ricains : les livraisons d&rsquo;armes iraniennes en Irak"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>Il existe un sujet majeur de m\u00e9sentente entre Britanniques et Am\u00e9ricains. Il n&rsquo;est pas expos\u00e9 comme une m\u00e9sentente ; simplement, les deux versions cohabitent sans jamais vraiment \u00eatre confront\u00e9es. Elles sont pourtant diam\u00e9tralement oppos\u00e9es.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLes Am\u00e9ricains affirment que les Iraniens ravitaillent massivement et r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement les insurg\u00e9s irakiens en armes et munitions. Les Britanniques affirment le contraire. Un article (4 octobre) du <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2006\/10\/03\/AR2006100301577_pf.html\" class=\"gen\">Washington Post<\/a> expose cette m\u00e9sentente de fa\u00e7on tr\u00e8s pr\u00e9cise.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab<em>Britain, whose forces have had responsibility for security in southeastern Iraq since the war began, has found nothing to support the Americans&rsquo; contention that Iran is providing weapons and training in Iraq, several senior military officials said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>I have not myself seen any evidence  and I don&rsquo;t think any evidence exists  of government-supported or instigated armed support on Iran&rsquo;s part in Iraq, British Defense Secretary Des Browne said in an interview in Baghdad in late August.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>It&rsquo;s a question of intelligence versus evidence, <\/em>[] <em>Brig. James Everard of Britain&rsquo;s 20th Armored Brigade, said last month at his base in the southern region&rsquo;s capital, Basra. One hears word of mouth, but one has to see it with one&rsquo;s own eyes. These are serious consequences, aren&rsquo;t they?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>They are. Allegations that Iran or its agents are providing military support for Iraqi Shiite Muslim militias and other armed groups is one of the most contentious issues raising tensions between Washington and Tehran. Most gravely, U.S. generals and diplomats accuse Iran of providing infrared triggers for special explosives that are capable of piercing heavy armor.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>Evidence of Iranian armed intervention in Iraq is irrefutable, one U.S. commander in Iraq, Brig. Gen. Michael Barbero, told Pentagon reporters in August. The lead U.S. military spokesman in Iraq renews the allegation almost weekly in Baghdad.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>Iraq&rsquo;s remote Maysan province is a funnel for Iranian munitions, said Wayne White, who led the State Department&rsquo;s Iraq intelligence team during the war and now is an adjunct scholar at the Washington-based Middle East Institute. White said that in the first year of the occupation a well-placed friend had seen considerable physical evidence of it, and just about everyone in al-Amarah knew about it. Al-Amarah is the commonly used name of Maysan province.<\/em> ()<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab<em>But Maj. Dominic Roberts of the Queen&rsquo;s Dragoons said: We have found no credible evidence to suggest there is weapons smuggling across the border.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tC&rsquo;est un sujet important de m\u00e9sentente. S&rsquo;il s&rsquo;agit \u00e0 premi\u00e8re vue d&rsquo;une question op\u00e9rationnelle et d&rsquo;une question de simples faits (ou <em>evidence<\/em>), sa dimension politique est tr\u00e8s r\u00e9elle. La question de l&rsquo;aide iranienne aux insurg\u00e9s pourrait \u00eatre utilis\u00e9e comme un des arguments de soutien les plus importants en cas d&rsquo;une attaque US contre l&rsquo;Iran. Il s&rsquo;agirait m\u00eame d&rsquo;un argument op\u00e9rationnel central en cas d&rsquo;option d&rsquo;attaque US plus limit\u00e9e, servant comme avertissement aux Iraniens. Dans ce cas, on se trouve dans un cas classique de droit de suite, utilis\u00e9 notamment par les Fran\u00e7ais contre des forces (l&rsquo;ALN) du FLN alg\u00e9rien stationn\u00e9es en Tunisie, ou par les Am\u00e9ricains eux-m\u00eames contre le Cambodge et le Laos durant la guerre du Viet-n\u00e2m.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tAux USA, un tel argument aurait un effet \u00e9motionnel et politique \u00e9vident et tr\u00e8s fort en raison de l&rsquo;importance pour les Am\u00e9ricains du conflit irakien et des pertes US.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tDans cette perspective, la m\u00e9sentente am\u00e9ricano-britannique prend elle-m\u00eame une dimension tr\u00e8s particuli\u00e8re et int\u00e9ressante. Elle peut laisser pr\u00e9sager, dans certaines hypoth\u00e8ses de situations extr\u00eames, des tensions s\u00e9rieuses entre les deux alli\u00e9s, voire un d\u00e9saccord complet sur une possibilit\u00e9 d&rsquo;action contre l&rsquo;Iran.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tMis en ligne le 6 octobre 2006 \u00e0 12H54<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Il existe un sujet majeur de m\u00e9sentente entre Britanniques et Am\u00e9ricains. Il n&rsquo;est pas expos\u00e9 comme une m\u00e9sentente ; simplement, les deux versions cohabitent sans jamais vraiment \u00eatre confront\u00e9es. Elles sont pourtant diam\u00e9tralement oppos\u00e9es. Les Am\u00e9ricains affirment que les Iraniens ravitaillent massivement et r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement les insurg\u00e9s irakiens en armes et munitions. Les Britanniques affirment le&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":[3992,857,5983,5984,2758,2671],"class_list":["post-68072","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-armes","tag-irak","tag-livraison","tag-mesentente","tag-uk","tag-us"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68072","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=68072"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68072\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68072"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68072"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68072"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}