{"id":68403,"date":"2007-01-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-01-12T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/01\/12\/la-reelle-situation-dautonomie-des-forces-us-en-irak-et-le-pouvoir-chiite-a-bagdad\/"},"modified":"2007-01-12T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2007-01-12T00:00:00","slug":"la-reelle-situation-dautonomie-des-forces-us-en-irak-et-le-pouvoir-chiite-a-bagdad","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/01\/12\/la-reelle-situation-dautonomie-des-forces-us-en-irak-et-le-pouvoir-chiite-a-bagdad\/","title":{"rendered":"La r\u00e9elle situation d’autonomie des forces US en Irak et le pouvoir chiite \u00e0 Bagdad"},"content":{"rendered":"

Certaines d\u00e9clarations, du s\u00e9nateur Kennedy et auparavant du conseiller de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale Ben Bartlett, jettent une lumi\u00e8re \u00e9tonnante sur les conditions dans lesquelles \u00e9voluent les forces US en Irak.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tVoici ce qu’en rapporte RAW Story<\/em>, dans ses \u00e9ditions du 11 janvier<\/a> :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abDuring an appearance on the Ed Schultz Show today <\/em>[11 January], Senate Armed Forces Committee member Ted Kennedy (D-MA) will say that it was news to Congressional members that US troops are restricted by the Iraqis, RAW STORY has learned, after receiving a copy of the prerecorded interview.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe most-listened to liberal talk show host is set to break the news on his 12pm-3pm EST show.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbI was startled to find out that our servicemen and women in cleaning out Baghdad have been restricted by the Iraqis, Kennedy says, and about where they can go, the battles that they can fight.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbSchultz asks the senator if retiring CENTCOM Commander General John Abizaid had ever told Congress.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbNo, but we’ve heard that now from the national security adviser, Kennedy says. Mr. Bartlett said that yesterday on CNN and this is all news to us.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbBefore President Bush’s speech on Wednesday, White House conselor Dan Bartlett had said that troops were handcuffed by political interference by the Iraqi leadership.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe rules of engagement, where those troops can go, who they can go after, Bartlett had said, we’re severely restricted by politics in Baghdad.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThat’s going to change as well, Bartlett added. Prime Minister Maliki has made that very clear.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl nous int\u00e9resse moins, ici, de savoir si ces r\u00e8gles d’engagement d\u00e9termin\u00e9es par les Irakiens vont changer, que d’apprendre qu’elles existent. Ce qui en est dit implicitement signifie que les forces US ont \u00e9t\u00e9 et sont encore soumises \u00e0 un contr\u00f4le d’une autorit\u00e9 \u00e9trang\u00e8re, en l’occurrence le pouvoir irakien en place \u00e0 Bagdad. Cela peut para\u00eetre stup\u00e9fiant si l’on a \u00e0 l’esprit l’insistance extr\u00eame que portent les USA sur l’autonomie et la souverainet\u00e9 de leurs forces, et le peu de cas qu’ils font eux-m\u00eames de l’autonomie et de la souverainet\u00e9 des autres, et, \u00e9ventuellement, du peu de respect qu’ils ont pour les consignes des autres lorsqu’ils op\u00e8rent sur un territoire soumis \u00e0 la souverainet\u00e9 de ces autres.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPourtant, il y a tout lieu de croire \u00e0 la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 des dispositions signal\u00e9es par Bartlett et Kennedy, si l’on consid\u00e8re les circonstances et le niveau o\u00f9 ces dispositions sont d\u00e9battues (notamment le fait que leur existence est utilis\u00e9e par Kennedy comme argument contre l’administration). On ne voit pas l’int\u00e9r\u00eat que l’administration aurait \u00e0 se diminuer et \u00e0 s’affaiblir aux yeux de son opposition dans le climat tendu qu’on conna\u00eet \u00e0 Washington, en inventant de telles dispositions.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl faut plut\u00f4t envisager que les rapports entre l’administration GW et le gouvernement irakien sont tr\u00e8s diff\u00e9rents de ce qu’on croit ; que le gouvernement irakien est beaucoup plus en position de force et beaucoup plus autonome dans son action que l’image qui en est pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e ; que les Am\u00e9ricains acceptent beaucoup plus de contraintes et de restrictions qu’on ne croit, parce que leur position de faiblesse en Irak les y contraint, ce qui, enfin, nous en dit long \u00e0 ce propos. Cela laisse beaucoup \u00e0 penser sur la force r\u00e9elle de l’influence des USA sur le pouvoir chiite \u00e0 Bagdad.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 12 janvier 2007 \u00e0 16H24<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Certaines d\u00e9clarations, du s\u00e9nateur Kennedy et auparavant du conseiller de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale Ben Bartlett, jettent une lumi\u00e8re \u00e9tonnante sur les conditions dans lesquelles \u00e9voluent les forces US en Irak. Voici ce qu’en rapporte RAW Story, dans ses \u00e9ditions du 11 janvier : \u00abDuring an appearance on the Ed Schultz Show today [11 January], Senate… <\/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":[6318,6319,4256,857,1356,2746],"class_list":["post-68403","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-autonomie","tag-bertlett","tag-chiite","tag-irak","tag-kennedy","tag-souverainete"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68403","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=68403"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68403\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68403"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68403"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68403"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}