Le compte-rendu \u00e9clair\u00e9 et bien inform\u00e9 des circonstances qui ont conduit au sommet de Bucarest se trouve notamment dans un texte du 4 avril<\/a> du site WSWS.org<\/em>. La description concerne particuli\u00e8rement l’affrontement entre les USA et l’Allemagne sur la question de l’\u00e9largissement \u00e0 l’Ukraine et \u00e0 la G\u00e9orgie, et la d\u00e9faite US. On lira ce texte comme compl\u00e9ment bienvenu de notre F&C<\/em> de ce jour<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abAt this week’s NATO summit in the Romanian capital of Bucharest, US President George W. Bush has faced concerted European opposition to his plans for a further eastward expansion of the alliance. Only a last minute compromise allowed the American president to save face. German politicians in particular were reported to be angry and disconcerted at the insistence by the American president on the speedy inclusion of Georgia and the Ukraine into the ranks of the NATO.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbDuring a summit dinner party held on Wednesday evening German and French opposition to Bush’s plans received additional backing from Italy, Hungary and the Benelux countries. Even Bush’s closest ally in Europe, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, stated it was too soon for NATO to accept the two former Soviet republics.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbAt the dinner, which ran for an extra two hours, Bush is reported to have finally acknowledged that he would be unable to push through his proposal. According to a senior US administration official: The debate was mostly among Europeans, with several European allies balking at Bush’s stance. Evidently attempting to put the dispute in a favourable light the same official declared: It was quite split, but it was split in a good way.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tL’analyse de WSWS.org<\/em> s’\u00e9largit \u00e0 tout le contentieux entre l’Europe et les USA, le pla\u00e7ant dans la perspective d’un refus de plus en plus affirm\u00e9 des Europ\u00e9ens (Allemands en t\u00eate) d’un affrontement avec la Russie. Or, c’est bien la direction que prend la politique am\u00e9ricaniste, cela avec Bush et, sans doute, au-del\u00e0 de Bush.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tL’analyse de WSWS.org<\/em> est extr\u00eamement pessimiste quant aux perspectives des relations entre l’Europe et les USA, avec deux axes de tension dont les effets s’ajoutent: d’une par, la question des relations avec la Russie mine les relations diplomatiques \u00e0 cause d’une diff\u00e9rence d’optique et d’int\u00e9r\u00eat tenant \u00e0 des situations strat\u00e9giques compl\u00e8tement diff\u00e9rentes et un refus d\u00e9sormais affirm\u00e9 des USA, au contraire de la situation de la Guerre froide, de prendre en compte le point de vue europ\u00e9en. D’autre part, la question de l’Afghanistan emp\u00eache toute am\u00e9lioration de cette situation de tension en confinant l’activit\u00e9 militaire de l’Alliance \u00e0 un conflit o\u00f9 les perceptions, les m\u00e9thodes et les structures des Europ\u00e9ens et des Am\u00e9ricains sont \u00e9galement contradictoires. L’insuffisance extraordinaire de l’effort militaire jug\u00e9 n\u00e9cessaire en Afghanistan t\u00e9moigne de la profondeur de cette crise. (Le commandant US en Afghanistan, le g\u00e9n\u00e9ral McNeill, a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 fin mars qu’il faudrait 400.000 hommes pour l’emporter en Afghanistan. Il en a moins de 60.000.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tLa conclusion de WSWS.org<\/em> refl\u00e8te \u00e9videmment ce pessimisme g\u00e9n\u00e9ral.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abDuring Bush’s last months in office, the foreign policy of the American president is assuming an increasingly unpredictable and aggressive character. This has sounded the alarm bells in European political circles and at the same time forced European powers to take an increasingly independent stand on security and defence.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbAlready in the run up to the Bucharest summit, the influential German political magazine IP ran a debate on the future of NATO. Speaking against the continuation of the alliance, a Dutch defence expert, Peter van Ham, argued: It seems to be just a matter of time before the EU replaces NATO as the guarantor of security and defence in Europe. Ham accuses the US of debasing NATO: For them NATO is nothing more than a sort of security saloon where the American sheriff rustles up his posse to go hunt down the bad guys. In drawing up its alliance the US is able to acquire the stamp of international legitimacy without having to make any major incursions on its foreign policy playing field.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbArguing against this position, a more experienced security expert, Professor Karl Kaiser, recalled that the original notion behind the setting up of the NATO alliance was not to combat an external threat, but in fact to prevent war amongst its constituent members. In other words, the centrifugal pressures evident in Bucharest, which are now threatening to tear NATO apart, also create the conditions for renewed military confrontation between the major imperialist powers.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 5 avril 2008 \u00e0 09H52<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Le compte-rendu \u00e9clair\u00e9 et bien inform\u00e9 des circonstances qui ont conduit au sommet de Bucarest se trouve notamment dans un texte du 4 avril du site WSWS.org. La description concerne particuli\u00e8rement l’affrontement entre les USA et l’Allemagne sur la question de l’\u00e9largissement \u00e0 l’Ukraine et \u00e0 la G\u00e9orgie, et la d\u00e9faite US. On lira ce… <\/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":[7509,3228,4255,4633,3045,2671,3952],"class_list":["post-69808","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-bucarest","tag-crise","tag-defaite","tag-merkel","tag-sommet","tag-us","tag-wsws"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69808","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=69808"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69808\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69808"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69808"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69808"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}