Le nombre de porte-avions US dans le Golfe est consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme un signe important des intentions US, belliqueuses ou pas, \u00e0 l’encontre de l’Iran. R\u00e9cemment, des sources de l’U.S. Navy avaient annonc\u00e9 l’envoi dans la zone du porte-avions Enterprise<\/em>, ce qui aurait port\u00e9 le nombre de ces unit\u00e9s \u00e0 trois (le Nimitz<\/em> et le Stennis<\/em> \u00e9tant d\u00e9j\u00e0 sur place), signe \u00e9vident de l’aggravation de la tension.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tLe Pentagone n’a pas \u00e9t\u00e9 long \u00e0 pr\u00e9ciser les choses dans le sens de la d\u00e9tente, en fait c’est un remplacement, et peut-\u00eatre plus, et l’on pourrait se retrouver avec le seul Enterprise<\/em> dans la zone. Selon AFP (par RAW Story<\/a> du 10 juillet) :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abThe aircraft carrier USS Enterprise is deploying to the Gulf region where it will replace one and possibly both carriers already there, Pentagon officials said Tuesday.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbNavy officials had earlier raised the possibility that the Enterprise would increase the number of carriers in the region to three, which would be the biggest US naval presence in the Gulf since the US invasion of Iraq.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbBut Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman denied that US Defense Secretary Robert Gates has decided to up the number of carriers to three, and said the deployment of the Enterprise was part of a routine swap.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbHas the department made a decision for 3.0 carriers in the Gulf? No. They haven’t, Whitman said. What Secretary Gates has said is still the current guidance with respect to the level of effort in the Centcom area of responsibility.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThere is an allocation plan for major assets like carriers, and the secretary would be involved in any decisions with respect to that, he said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbDefense officials later told reporters that the carrier USS Stennis is expected to have left the region by the time the Enterprise arrives, and that the new carrier will replace the USS Nimitz.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbI don’t think it’s a one for one replacement. But Enterprise is coming in and one would logically conclude that both (the Stennis and Nimitz) are leaving in the not too distant future, said a Pentagon official.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tLes pr\u00e9cisions op\u00e9rationnelles parlent \u00e0 nouveau d’un second porte-avions (le Truman<\/em>) mais pas avant la fin de l’ann\u00e9e. L’U.S. Navy a d’autres priorit\u00e9s de d\u00e9ploiement ou bien, et c’est plut\u00f4t cette explication qu’on retiendra, la situation avec l’Iran ne n\u00e9cessite pas (plus) deux porte-avions constamment. Un porte-avions dans le Golfe, c’est le d\u00e9ploiement minimal, et bien loin d’un d\u00e9ploiement pr\u00e9curseur d’une attaque. La tension d\u00e9cro\u00eet dans la r\u00e9gion et, avec elle, la possibilit\u00e9 d’une attaque selon les normes op\u00e9rationnelles US.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tQuoi qu’il en soit, on a ainsi une confirmation de plus de l’attitude tr\u00e8s mod\u00e9r\u00e9e du Pentagone et du secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense Gates<\/a> (et de la Navy<\/a>) vis-\u00e0-vis de toute possibilit\u00e9 d’attaque US contre l’Iran, voire leur opposition pure et simple. Conclusion g\u00e9n\u00e9rale : la tension tombe encore d’un cran dans les relations USA-Iran, sauf peut-\u00eatre pour Cheney, ses amis necons<\/em> et GW.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 11 juillet 2007 \u00e0 12H50<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Le nombre de porte-avions US dans le Golfe est consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme un signe important des intentions US, belliqueuses ou pas, \u00e0 l’encontre de l’Iran. R\u00e9cemment, des sources de l’U.S. Navy avaient annonc\u00e9 l’envoi dans la zone du porte-avions Enterprise, ce qui aurait port\u00e9 le nombre de ces unit\u00e9s \u00e0 trois (le Nimitz et le Stennis… <\/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":[6840,3984,2773,3319,3704,5733,2671],"class_list":["post-68996","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-enterprise","tag-gates","tag-iran","tag-navy","tag-porte-avions","tag-tension","tag-us"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68996","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=68996"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68996\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68996"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68996"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68996"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}