Guardian<\/em>, confirme que le DoJ envisage effectivement une enqu\u00eate de corruption sur BAE.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abThe US Congress has lifted blocks on BAE Systems arms transfer requests after the company assured key committees that the deals were unrelated to a scrapped UK investigation into bribery allegations involving Saudi Arabia.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t(…)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\t\u00bbThe US justice department has taken an interest in the case and held informal talks with UK investigators. However US officials on Wednesday night refused to say whether they were planning to launch a full investigation.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbCongressional aides said the House and Senate foreign relations committees had lifted the technology transfer blocks after BAE North America said none of the assets involved was the subject of the abortive investigation by Britain’s Serious Fraud Office, which was probing allegations the company bribed Saudi officials to win work worth billions of pounds over 20 years.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe decision frees up a proposal by Mojave, a BAE business unit, to transfer two A-4N Skyhawk aircraft to the German air force. Other deals involve a technical assistance agreement to upgrade systems on Australian F\/A-18 fighter jets, and a plan by BAE and Japanese partner companies to make transponders.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe committees had stepped up scrutiny of BAE last month on news of the formal US government protest in January against the decision to halt the inquiry. BAE has denied wrongdoing.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tLes deux journaux font un lien serr\u00e9 entre ces agitations US autour du cas de corruption de BAE et l’expansion de BAE aux USA, notamment avec l’achat projet\u00e9 de Armor Holdings pour $2,4 milliards. Il est bien entendu \u00e9vident que c’est la position et les ambitions de BAE aux USA qui sont en cause dans le cas d’une enqu\u00eate de corruption qui ne laverait pas BAE de tout soup\u00e7on, performance qui para\u00eet difficile. Le Guardian<\/em> donne un historique de diverses pol\u00e9miques qui ont d\u00e9j\u00e0 oppos\u00e9 les USA \u00e0 BAE et au MoD sur d’autres affaires de cette sorte, expliquant ainsi un \u00e9ventuel acharnement US contre la firme britannique am\u00e9ricanis\u00e9e. Il ne fait gu\u00e8re de doute qu’il existe nombre de groupes d’int\u00e9r\u00eat et de pression (notamment dans l’industrie) qui prennent ombrage de la progression de BAE aux USA, et qui voudraient la voir stopp\u00e9e.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 14 juin 2007 \u00e0 13H32<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Le scandale BAE-Yamamah a incontestablement, et de plus en plus, une dimension am\u00e9ricaine. De deux fa\u00e7ons, ce matin : Le Guardian affirme ce matin qu’il est pratiquement assur\u00e9 que le d\u00e9partement de la justice (DoJ) va ouvrir une enqu\u00eate pour fait de corruption contre BAE. Les Am\u00e9ricains r\u00e9agissent aux derni\u00e8res informations concernant Prince Bandar et… <\/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":[3792,3858,6640,4739,6766,2804],"class_list":["post-68903","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-bae","tag-corruption","tag-doj","tag-enquete","tag-mod","tag-usa"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68903","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=68903"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68903\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68903"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68903"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68903"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}