9 mai<\/a> donne quelques extraits marquants du discours de Hagel.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abThe world does not want an America that imposes, that dictates, that lectures, that preaches, that invades, nor occupies. I think the world does want a clear-thinking America that will lead with a consensus of purpose. That’s what we’ve done most of the time since World War II and we can do that again, Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) told a packed crowd at the Center for American Progress this morning. Hagel, who will retire from the Senate next year at the end of his second term, discussed his new book, America: Our Next Chapter, and the tough choices that America will have to make in the coming years as it defines and redefines its place in the world.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbReintroducing America to the world will be as important as any one thing this next president has to do, Hagel asserted. In order to do this, he said, we need to reverse the optics, concentrating less on how we see the world, and more on how the world sees us.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbHagel described the current moment as one of the most transformational times in the history of man, citing the fall of the Berlin Wall and the attacks of September 11 as two events that have redefined the way we see the world. The great challenges that we face today such as energy, security, and the economy, are interconnected, Hagel argued, adding that each year we become more dependent; we’re dependent on the world. The United States must therefore begin to address these issues by developing a consensus of governance of this country, in the world.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbHagel called on the United States to renew international institutions and diplomacy, returning to a model built after World War II, when we defined our relationships not by our differences, but by our common interests. The United Nations, in particular, Hagel said, will be more relevant today, in the next 25 years, than it has ever been, because it is the one full world institution where people can bring issues.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tLe discours de Hagel est un classique d’une politique ext\u00e9rieure mod\u00e9r\u00e9e US, comme on en a vu des exemples durant certaines p\u00e9riodes de la Guerre froide. Hagel pr\u00e9sente un programme optimiste, qui implique la capacit\u00e9 des USA de se relever de la plus catastrophique p\u00e9riode politique de son histoire, \u00e0 la condition que les USA adoptent une attitude fondamentalement diff\u00e9rente, ouverte sur la coop\u00e9ration, la concertation, l’abandon de l’attitude arrogante et supr\u00e9matiste qui a caract\u00e9ris\u00e9 jusqu’ici leur politique. Pourtant, il ne dissimule pas une certaine inqui\u00e9tude lorsqu’il fixe l’importance de cette ambition de r\u00e9introduire l’Am\u00e9rique dans le concert mondial, lorsqu’il en fait la premi\u00e8re priorit\u00e9 du futur pr\u00e9sident et qu’il \u00e9voque la situation qui se cr\u00e9erait si cette d\u00e9marche n’\u00e9tait pas faite ou ne r\u00e9ussissait pas: \u00ab[R]eintroducing America to the world will be as important as any one thing this next President has to do, because if we lose the next generation of the world, the problems will then be so immense that we will never be able to get out from under them.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tLe discours de Hagel a le m\u00e9rite de bien situer l’enjeu, d’en mesurer l’importance et les perspectives. Sur ces points, on ne peut \u00eatre que d’accord avec lui, jusqu’\u00e0 toutes les implications: s’ils veulent sauver ce qu’il leur reste de puissance, les USA doivent imp\u00e9rativement se r\u00e9introduire dans le concert mondial… La seule r\u00e9serve qu’on fera, et elle est de taille, est de savoir si les USA furent jamais dans le concert mondial, s’ils furent jamais dans le monde, s’ils furent jamais capables de l’\u00eatre. Hagel l’affirme mais on peut raisonnablement avoir certains doutes. La politique mod\u00e9r\u00e9e et r\u00e9ussie que Hagel rappelle et qu’il voudrait voir \u00e0 nouveau appliqu\u00e9e (\u00abThat’s what we’ve done most of the time since World War II and we can do that again<\/em>\u00bb) repr\u00e9sente une politique o\u00f9 les USA dominaient le monde d’une fa\u00e7on \u00e9crasante; mais alors ils avaient d\u00e9cid\u00e9 d’exercer cette domination d’une fa\u00e7on moins brutale, aid\u00e9s en cela par une situation g\u00e9n\u00e9rale o\u00f9 leur domination \u00e9tait accept\u00e9e plus ais\u00e9ment parce qu’elle avait une sorte de caract\u00e8re objectif dans le camp du monde libre, o\u00f9 les USA \u00e9taient naturellement (\u00e0 cause du probl\u00e8me de la subversion communiste) \u00e0 la t\u00eate de tous ces pays qu’ils dominaient. Ce n’est plus du tout le cas aujourd’hui, o\u00f9 les USA sont per\u00e7us comme brutaux, agressifs, parfois insupportables, et avec leur puissance en d\u00e9clin acc\u00e9l\u00e9r\u00e9e. La formule du docteur Hagel, c’est la raison m\u00eame; il n’est pas s\u00fbr que la raison suffise, dans un syst\u00e8me si compl\u00e8tement d\u00e9cadent, o\u00f9 le pouvoir est si compl\u00e8tement victime de tous les tares des puissances en d\u00e9clin par ses concurrences internes, son \u00e9clatement, la force d\u00e9structurante des int\u00e9r\u00eats particuliers. Enfin, il y a le probl\u00e8me essentiel de savoir si les USA sont capables de comprendre le monde, de comprendre tout ce qui est ext\u00e9rieur \u00e0 eux, ce qui est la condition sine qua non<\/em> de la formule Hagel. On se permettra de douter grandement qure cela soit le cas.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en lmigne le 10 mai 2008 \u00e0 12H52<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
On conna\u00eet le s\u00e9nateur r\u00e9publicain du Nebraska Chuck Hagel. Personnalit\u00e9 de qualit\u00e9, mod\u00e9r\u00e9, qui ne craint pas d’avoir la dent dure vis-\u00e0-vis de l’administration Bush, anti-guerre sans timidit\u00e9. Le discours de Hagel devant le Center for American Progress, le 8 mai (video disponible), est consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme important. Hagel, se posant en sage de la politique… <\/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":[6379,4841,5166,4607,2804],"class_list":["post-69887","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-exterieure","tag-hagel","tag-modere","tag-politique","tag-usa"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69887","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=69887"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69887\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69887"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69887"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69887"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}