{"id":69026,"date":"2007-07-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-07-17T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/07\/17\/malloch-brown-explication-de-texte\/"},"modified":"2007-07-17T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2007-07-17T00:00:00","slug":"malloch-brown-explication-de-texte","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/07\/17\/malloch-brown-explication-de-texte\/","title":{"rendered":"Malloch Brown : explication de texte"},"content":{"rendered":"

Les d\u00e9clarations faites au Daily Telegraph<\/em> par le ministre du gouvernement Gordon Brown, Mark Malloch Brown (que de Brown, sans compter le Browne qui est \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense), ont soulev\u00e9 bien des temp\u00eates discr\u00e8tes entre Londres et Washington. Nous avons parl\u00e9 de cette interview dans notre Bloc-Notes<\/em> du 14 juillet<\/a> ainsi que dans notre F&C<\/em> du 15 juillet<\/a>. A cette lumi\u00e8re, l’article de Rachel Sylvester, de ce jour<\/a>, dans le m\u00eame Daily Telegraph<\/em>, est du plus haut int\u00e9r\u00eat. Sylvester est l’une des deux journalistes qui ont interview\u00e9 Malloch Brown et sign\u00e9 l’article initial.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tDans l’article d’aujourd’hui, Sylvester analyse les premi\u00e8res semaines du gouvernement Brown et conclut : plus facile \u00e0 dire qu’\u00e0 faire (de gouverner). Plusieurs sujets sont abord\u00e9s, mais les autres sont l\u00e0, surtout, pour encadrer et mettre d’autant plus en \u00e9vidence ce long passage sur Malloch Brown et, d’une fa\u00e7on plus g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, sur ce qui est per\u00e7u comme un mouvement brownien<\/a> d’un distanciement de Washington Nous citons in extenso<\/em> ce long passage de l’article de Sylvester.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abYesterday, David Miliband prompted a furious reaction from Moscow by announcing that four Russian diplomats would be expelled from this country. But it is relatively easy to decide that you can’t please Vladimir Putin all the time. It is more dangerous to risk alienating the White House.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe Prime Minister has done all he can to stamp on the suggestion made by two ministers last week that the special relationship between Britain and the United States might be watered down. But the reality is more complicated. In private, those around Mr Brown have for months been making clear that there would be no more Colgate cosiness when he takes over.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbOne of his closest Cabinet allies told me, just days before he moved into Number 10, that Britain would, under Mr Brown, be more independent of the White House. There has been a view that Britain should always remain publicly supportive of America and that any criticisms should be voiced in private and the balance needs to be redressed, he said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbIt is not that Mr Brown is anti-American quite the opposite: Cape Cod has replaced Tuscany as the Labour luvvie holiday destination of choice, now that he is in charge. But he wants to see more equality in the Anglo-American marriage. He is also keener on propriety in international relations I do not think, for example, that he would have backed Mr Bush in going into Iraq without a UN resolution. Most importantly, he wants to deal with the perception that Mr Blair was the president’s poodle by making clear to British voters that he will not respond to the call: Yo, Brown.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbIndeed, the appointment of Lord Malloch Brown as a Foreign Office minister was in itself what Mr Blair once called a Love Actually moment. When Alice Thomson and I interviewed the new peer last week, we were not surprised to hear him describing himself as anti-neocon or saying that Mr Brown would not be joined together at the hip with Mr Bush: he has for years been waging a war, on behalf of the United Nations, against certain parts of the White House. As one Foreign Office insider said after our interview: Mark is Mark.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe Prime Minister, a close student of American politics, knew precisely what the former UN man stood for we’ve talked a lot, Lord Malloch Brown told us. And these conversations have ranged far beyond the peer’s ministerial responsibilities of Africa, Asia and the UN. He did not give up a lucrative job as manager of George Soros’s hedge fund to fiddle around with policy on Outer Mongolia. He has, he told us, just completed a book about how to govern in a globalised era, which argues that issues such as migration, public health, terrorism and security can be dealt with only through international co-operation. Domestic policy is foreign policy, he said. Despite the youthful Foreign Secretary’s best efforts, his wise eminence will not easily be put back in his box.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr Brown must have known that the former UN deputy secretary general’s appointment would annoy some in Washington, but he still wanted him badly enough in his government of all the talents that he agreed to his demand that he should attend Cabinet. The appointment was a deliberate signal to his party and the public that things would be different now that he was in charge.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThere was a similar dog-whistle message in Douglas Alexander’s speech to the Council on Foreign Relations. I find it inconceivable that the International Development Secretary and the Prime Minister both astute political strategists did not realise that a speech in Washington calling for a greater emphasis on soft power and multilateralism would not be interpreted as a coded warning to the White House.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbWhatever else Mr Brown is, he is not politically na\u00efve. But once the message was out there, it took on a life of its own. The whistle intended to call the domestic dogs to heel became too audible and started to drive the American hounds wild. The Prime Minister had to drown it out by shouting his allegiance to the stars and stripes.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl y a beaucoup de choses dans cet extrait de l’article de Sylvester, ayant \u00e0 l’esprit que le Telegraph<\/em> est, \u00e0 Londres, l’un des plus s\u00fbrs soutiens de l’alignement sur les USA, voire d’\u00e9pousailles sans conditions par Londres des conceptions neo-con<\/em> du monde.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t Il appara\u00eet \u00e9vident que l’interview de Malloch Brown, apr\u00e8s le discours d’Alexander \u00e0 Chicago, a soulev\u00e9 une temp\u00eate \u00e0 Washington et dans les relais les plus directs des USA \u00e0 Londres. Il n’y a pas eu d’\u00e9chos publics tr\u00e8s explicites mais la chose a \u00e9t\u00e9 exprim\u00e9e droitement par les canaux officieux. L’article de Sylvester le dit entre les lignes et constitue aussi bien une tentative d’att\u00e9nuer l’effet de l’interview de Malloch Brown qu’une pression (US) relay\u00e9e vers Gordon Brown. Il n’est pas s\u00fbr que Sylvester n’ait re\u00e7u que des f\u00e9licitations de ses patrons apr\u00e8s l’interview et ses effets, d’autant que Malloch Brown reste en place et ne retire rien de ce qu’il a dit.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t Cette partie de l’article de Sylvester est en soi un aveu que la situation des relations USA-UK est, avec l’arriv\u00e9e de Gordon Brown, devenue incontr\u00f4lable quant aux effets des actes des uns et des autres. L’interpr\u00e9tation est reine, par cons\u00e9quent les parano\u00efas diverses et dans tous les sens. Sylvester \u00e9crit : \u00abI find it inconceivable that the International Development Secretary and the Prime Minister both astute political strategists did not realise that a speech in Washington calling for a greater emphasis on soft power and multilateralism would not be interpreted as a coded warning to the White House.<\/em>\u00bb On pourrait en dire autant de son interview de Malloch Brown, quand on en mesure les effets. Si bien que la remarque qu’elle fait pour Gordon Brown (\u00abBut once the message was out there, it took on a life of its own<\/em>\u00bb) vaut aussi bien pour elle (pour son article) et pour toute autre intervention un tant soit peu substantielle sur les relations USA-UK. Le soup\u00e7on d’un c\u00f4t\u00e9 et l’exasp\u00e9ration rentr\u00e9e de l’autre sont tels qu’effectivement les actes et les mots sont aussit\u00f4t interpr\u00e9t\u00e9s et acqui\u00e8rent leur propre signification, qui est l’addition de ce que l’auteur de l’acte ou du mot a voulu y mettre et des diff\u00e9rentes interpr\u00e9tations qu’on en donne, si possible dans le sens de la dramatisation.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t L’Independent<\/em> d’hier<\/a> avait d\u00e9j\u00e0 not\u00e9 cette confusion qui semble d\u00e9sormais devoir caract\u00e9riser les relations sp\u00e9ciales : \u00abGordon Brown has been accused of sending out conflicting signals over cooling the relationship with the Bush White House after David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, was forced to slap down another minister yesterday.<\/em> [ ]<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr Miliband stepped in after the new Foreign Office minister Mark Malloch Brown, a sharp critic of the Blair-Bush policy on Iraq, said at the weekend that Mr Brown would no longer be joined at the hip to Mr Bush. It is very unlikely that the Brown-Bush relationship is going to go through the baptism of fire and therefore be joined together at the hip like the Blair-Bush relationship was, Lord Malloch Brown said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr Miliband used an article in the News of the World to scotch claims that it was the second attempt in 48 hours to hint that Brown is cooling relations with Bush. And on BBC TV, he said: Our commitment to work with the Bush administration is resolute. Pressed on whether there had been a change of tone, he said: No … If we want to say something you will hear it from the Prime Minister.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tDu temps de Tony Blair, cette sorte de chose ne survenait pas, tant l’all\u00e9geance aux USA \u00e9tait impos\u00e9e d’une main de fer, curieux amalgame d’une volont\u00e9 de fer mise au service de l’abdication de toute volont\u00e9 nationale. Qu’importe, les d\u00e9mentis auront beau s’empiler, ils n’emp\u00eacheront plus le poison du soup\u00e7on de se r\u00e9pandre dans le bel \u00e9difice qu’avait \u00e9difi\u00e9 Tony Blair.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 17 juillet 2007 \u00e0 10H30<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Les d\u00e9clarations faites au Daily Telegraph par le ministre du gouvernement Gordon Brown, Mark Malloch Brown (que de Brown, sans compter le Browne qui est \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense), ont soulev\u00e9 bien des temp\u00eates discr\u00e8tes entre Londres et Washington. Nous avons parl\u00e9 de cette interview dans notre Bloc-Notes du 14 juillet ainsi que dans notre F&C… <\/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":[4038,3617,5147,6851,3345,6808,3344,6866,4199],"class_list":["post-69026","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-brown","tag-daily","tag-gordon","tag-malloch","tag-relationships","tag-soupcon","tag-special","tag-sylvester","tag-telegraph"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69026","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=69026"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69026\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69026"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69026"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69026"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}