For the first time in America’s history, the next president will come to office inheriting two ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – that is the situation we are in<\/em>»). L’article nous confirme la profondeur de la crise \u00e0 Washington m\u00eame s’il se contente de s’en tenir aux perspectives \u00e9lectorales, et, notamment, \u00e0 la col\u00e8re montante parmi les parlementaires r\u00e9publicains.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n«Such is the Democratic party’s confidence that some Democrats are talking of bringing about the same kind of splits in the Republican party that so damaged their own party’s electoral fortunes following the Vietnam war a generation ago. \u00ab\u00a0There are a lot of people on the Republican side who are not happy with the situation,\u00a0\u00bb said Trent Lott, a normally hardline Republican Senate leader.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n»As a result Republican lawmakers are now wondering aloud about the contents of the Iraq war \u00ab\u00a0Plan B\u00a0\u00bb that Pentagon officials and US generals have hinted will be provided in September should the troop \u00ab\u00a0surge\u00a0\u00bb fail to achieve its purpose. More than 300 US soldiers have died since Mr Bush unveiled the \u00ab\u00a0new way forward\u00a0\u00bb in January.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n»\u00ab\u00a0The assumption has always been that Mr Bush was planning to bequeath the Iraq war to his successor and that the Republicans in Congress would go along with him,\u00a0\u00bb says Charlie Cook, a leading political analyst. \u00ab\u00a0But that looks increasingly difficult by the day. We could be facing a Nixon in 1975 situation where senior Republicans ultimately prevail on George Bush to change course.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n»This week a Newsweek poll put Mr Bush’s approval rating at a new low of 28 per cent, making him the most unpopular US president since Jimmy Carter registered similar scores during the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979. Almost two-thirds of those polled said his actions in Iraq showed he was \u00ab\u00a0stubborn and unwilling to admit mistakes\u00a0\u00bb.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n»An even stronger measure of Mr Bush’s declining sway within his own party came on Thursday night when he addressed his party’s official convention at a gala fund-raising evening in Washington. \u00ab\u00a0Our mission is to keep the White House in 2008 and retake the Senate and the House,\u00a0\u00bb he said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n»Mr Bush managed to raise $10.5m for his party at the event compared to $17m last year and $38.5m the year before. For the first time in many years both the Democratic presidential field and the Democratic congressional leadership are out-fundraising their Republican opponents by about 50 per cent.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n»In the next 10 days Mr Bush will have another opportunity to demonstrate his immunity to the US public’s backlash against the Iraq war, when Congress sends him its second version of the Iraq and Afghanistan war funding bill he vetoed in its first incarnation last month.<\/em>»<\/p>\n<\/p>\nOn demande un nouveau FDR<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
Dans l’\u00e9trange \u00e9pop\u00e9e catastrophique de l’Irak, qui semble progresser comme une fatalit\u00e9 indomptable, la situation am\u00e9ricaniste est en train de prendre le dessus. Les d\u00e9comptes \u00e9lectoraux du FT<\/em> ne doivent pas nous tromper. Les mots dramatiques de Holbrooke correspondent fort peu \u00e0 l’homme d’un parti qui tient \u00e0 port\u00e9e de main une victoire \u00e9crasante, en 2008. Ils mesurent l’ambigu\u00eft\u00e9 de la situation.<\/p>\n<\/p>\nLorsque le FT<\/em> termine son article \u00e0 propos du \u00ab\u00a0czar wars<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0que GW ne parvient pas \u00e0 recruter parce que les candidats au suicide politique sont rares, on se prend \u00e0 imaginer que ces propos pourraient concerner un futur candidat \u00e0 la pr\u00e9sidence, — en rempla\u00e7ant Bush par le peuple am\u00e9ricain, \u00e0 la recherche d’un nouveau pr\u00e9sident capable et pr\u00eat \u00e0 prendre cette crise \u00e0 sa charge, et les candidats se d\u00e9filant : «Meanwhile, Mr Bush is searching for someone credible to fill the new post of Iraq war \u00ab\u00a0tsar\u00a0\u00bb in the White House. Up to six US generals have reportedly rebuffed the White House’s overtures. \u00ab\u00a0You’d have to be very patriotic to take on a job like that at a time like this,\u00a0\u00bb says Mr Cook.<\/em>»<\/p>\n<\/p>\nC’est un cap psychologique fondamental qui est en train d’\u00eatre franchi. Il s’agit de la r\u00e9alisation que la crise irakienne est d’une telle ampleur, d’une profondeur si horrible, qu’elle est promise \u00e0 d\u00e9passer la pr\u00e9sidence Bush. Ce n’est plus la crise de Bush, c’est la crise de l’am\u00e9ricanisme. Cette sp\u00e9culation ne date pas d’hier, notamment en Europe, entre ceux qui pensent que la crise am\u00e9ricaniste commencera \u00e0 r\u00e9gresser avec le d\u00e9part de Bush, qu’elle n’est qu’un accident dû \u00e0 un pr\u00e9sident, — et ceux qui pensent le contraire. Aux USA, \u00e9galement, on d\u00e9bat sur ce th\u00e8me, mais dans les milieux dissidents ou proches. Mais il s’agit ici d’une appr\u00e9ciation venue du cœur de l’establishment<\/em>, et c’est toute la diff\u00e9rence.<\/p>\n<\/p>\nL’intervention de Holbrooke sur le fond d’une situation compl\u00e8tement bloqu\u00e9e \u00e0 Washington fixe le franchissement de ce cap psychologique. Elle est elle-m\u00eame une sorte de d\u00e9tonateur psychologique. Elle pose en termes ouverts et clairs la question de la succession, qu’on pourrait d’ailleurs r\u00e9sumer par cette image : l’Am\u00e9rique trouvera-t-elle son nouveau Franklin Delano Roosevelt, son nouveau FDR? On comprend combien poser cette question c’est n’\u00eatre pas loin d’y r\u00e9pondre, tant le niveau psychologique de la direction am\u00e9ricaniste s’est abîm\u00e9 dans la d\u00e9cadence et la corruption.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Certes, notre analogie avec l’affaire du \u00ab\u00a0czar wars<\/em>\u00a0\u00bb est plus une boutade qu’une r\u00e9alit\u00e9. Il ne manque pas de candidats et il y aura bien des pr\u00e9sidentielles avec des candidats, aboutissant \u00e0 une \u00e9lection. Ce qui nous int\u00e9ressait, on s’en doute, c’est l’esprit de la chose. D\u00e9sormais, c’est une hypoth\u00e8que majeure, d\u00e8s lors qu’il est apparu que l’hypoth\u00e8se de la crise syst\u00e9mique, d\u00e9passant le cadre de la seule administration actuelle, est consid\u00e9r\u00e9e comme tr\u00e8s probable, sinon d\u00e9j\u00e0 v\u00e9rifi\u00e9e.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n(*) Certes, il y a eu des pr\u00e9sidents investis alors que le pays se trouvait dans une crise ou au bord d’une crise. Mais chaque fois, sauf dans le cas de FDR en 1933, il s’agit d’une crise contr\u00f4l\u00e9e ou contr\u00f4lable. Lincoln en 1861 n’est pas confront\u00e9 \u00e0 une crise d\u00e9j\u00e0 en route. C’est lui qui va d\u00e9clencher la crise ouvrant la Guerre de S\u00e9cession, avec sa politique qui conduit aux d\u00e9clarations de s\u00e9cession et \u00e0 l’attaque du Fort Sumter, ouverture de la guerre en avril 1861. Nixon en 1968 h\u00e9rite d’un pays d\u00e9chir\u00e9 mais la guerre qui en est la cause (le Vietnam), si elle est en train de ressembler de plus en plus \u00e0 un enlisement, reste n\u00e9anmoins contr\u00f4l\u00e9e au niveau militaire et contr\u00f4lable au niveau diplomatique (ouverture des pourparlers de Paris en juin 1968). Comme le dit Holbrooke, rien \u00e0 voir avec l’Irak.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Mesure de la crise 13 mai 2007 — Reprenons la d\u00e9claration de Holbrooke. Pour la premi\u00e8re fois, un personnage officiel du syst\u00e8me, de l’establishment, \u00e9voque l’id\u00e9e de la crise US devenant syst\u00e9mique, d\u00e9passant le cadre de l’administration, — cela, lorsqu’il dit : «We must assume … that the next president will inherit the most difficult… <\/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":[6673,3253,3228,4300,3080,6277],"class_list":["post-68791","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-6673","tag-americanisme","tag-crise","tag-holbrooke","tag-roosevelt","tag-systemique"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68791","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=68791"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68791\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68791"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68791"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68791"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}