le mouvement brownien<\/a> va \u00eatre acc\u00e9l\u00e9r\u00e9 par la situation \u00e0 Washington. Ce que l’histoire retiendra peut-\u00eatre, outre la fin de la soi-disant volont\u00e9 de vaincre de Washington, c’est combien le d\u00e9part de l’illusionniste Blair a ouvert les vannes \u00e0 la mar\u00e9e de la r\u00e9alit\u00e9, combien, \u00e0 Londres \u00e9galement, c’est le retour \u00e0 la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 et que cette r\u00e9alit\u00e9 implique n\u00e9cessairement une r\u00e9vision peut-\u00eatre radicale de la politique US du Royaume-Uni.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbWhile the White House was dealing with its own row over Iraq, the first wobble of the new regime in Downing Street broke out. Douglas Alexander, the secretary of state for international development, a close ally of the prime minister, delivered a speech in Washington which was said to reorder Britain’s relationship with America.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbAlexander’s call for a multilateralist, not unilateralist foreign policy was cast as a dig at Blair’s unquestioning support for Bush. In the 20th century a country’s might was too often measured by what they could destroy, he said. In the 21st century strength should be measured by what we can build together.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbHad Brown sided with the waverers to win votes back home? The headlines on Friday morning sparked a flurry of panic at No 10. Brown called a meeting with his advisers shortly after lunch, where there was talk of sacking one of Alexander’s aides for spinning the speech a sin in the supposedly new spin-free zone in Downing Street.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbAt the White House and State Department, senior officials went ballistic and demanded explanations from their British counterparts. It has severely irritated the administration, said a senior British source. Douglas Alexander and his team caused a lot more problems for the prime minister than they knew.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbNo 10 tried to play down suggestions of Britain taking a more independent line. Blaming spin, however, is too easy an explanation for the miscommunication. Sources acknowledge that Alexander intended to deliver a subtle message in Washington for British consumption just not with the megaphone that the White House heard loud and clear.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbBesides, 24 hours later, another of Brown’s new ministers stoked the suspicions. Malloch-Brown, former deputy secretary-general of the United Nations, said: What I really hate is the effort to paint me as antiAmerican, but I am happy to be described as antineocon. If they see me as a villain, I will wear that as a badge of honour.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbHe went on to say that he hoped British foreign policy under Brown would become much more impartial.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbBrown is now preparing to fly to Washington in the next couple of weeks to reassure Bush about the strength of the alliance. He may need to come out quicker than he intended, a British official said. He will have to undo some of the damage.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbDavid Miliband, the foreign secretary, is also said to be furious and might arrive in Washington before Brown. Simon MacDonald, No 10’s foreign policy adviser, will fly out this week to meet Stephen Hadley, the US national security adviser.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 15 juillet 2007 \u00e0 05H46<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Dans l’article du Sunday Times que nous d\u00e9crivons comme si pessimiste et si catastrophique dans la recension qu’il fait de la d\u00e9route de l’esprit \u00e0 Washington, un passage est consacr\u00e9 \u00e0 l’attitude britannique, \u00e0 ce qu’on per\u00e7oit de plus en plus comme un tournant de la politique britannique. Le passage donne une version avec des… <\/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":[4875,4038,4111,5899],"class_list":["post-69016","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-britannique","tag-brown","tag-nervosite","tag-realite"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69016","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=69016"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69016\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69016"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69016"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69016"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}