Nous appr\u00e9cions beaucoup, pour l’exp\u00e9rience diplomatique et la vieille sagesse indienne de l’auteur, les commentaires de M.K. Bhadrakumar, ancien ambassadeur de l’Inde en Ouzbekistan et en Turquie, sur les questions li\u00e9es \u00e0 la situation dans l’arc de crise du Moyen-Orient et du sous-continent indien. D’o\u00f9 notre int\u00e9r\u00eats pour ce commentaire sur la situation au Pakistan de Bhadrakumar, repris le 10 mai<\/a> par Information Clearing House<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tBhadrakumar se r\u00e9f\u00e8re \u00e0 un discours du diplomate US John Negroponte (diplomate muscl\u00e9, pour ceux qui connaissent ses exploits dans les pays d’Am\u00e9rique Latine, lorsqu’il aidait \u00e0 l’interrogatoire de tel ou tel r\u00e9gime \u00e9galement muscl\u00e9 de tel ou tel pays ami). Cela se tenait le 5 mai, \u00e0 un forum sur le Pakistan du National Endowment for Democracy (NED), institution publique US qui sert de courroie de transmission \u00e0 diverses actions subversives US, y compris de la CIA. (C’est la NED, comme le rappelle Bhadrakumar, qui a jou\u00e9 un grand r\u00f4le dans les diverses r\u00e9volutions de couleur, dans les anciens pays de l’Est ces derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es, en Ukraine, en G\u00e9orgie, etc.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abIt is extraordinary that a seasoned diplomat like Negroponte has chosen the NED forum to make such a major speech on Pakistan. But then, promoting democracy – the motto of NED – also happens to be a stated objective of US policy towards Pakistan. Over the past quarter century, the US government-funded NED has specialized as a handmaiden of American regional policies.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe NED is well known for covertly funding and supporting politicians in Latin American countries with strong support to the military. Its activities in many countries are known to run parallel to those of the Central Intelligence Agency. Its sensational role in conceptualizing and orchestrating the color r\u00e9volutions in Ukraine and Georgia was a high-water mark in the organization’s history since its inception in 1983, mitigating to an extent its dismal failures in Iran, Venezuela and Cuba.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbRarely does a top diplomat speak so openly from a public forum as Negroponte did on the centrality of Pakistan for the US’s national security. He spoke in Winston Churchill terms. More than ever, our [US] national security depends on the success, security and stability of Pakistan … We recognize that our fate – that is, our security, our freedom, our prosperity – is linked to the fate of the people of Pakistan, Negroponte said, echoing the gravitas of the British statesman during World War II.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbWhat Negroponte implied was that Washington will categorically assure Pakistan that no matter the change of administration in the White House next year, the US commitment to a long-term, substantial and compr\u00e9hensive partnership with Pakistan will remain a cornerstone of American regional policies.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbNegroponte seems to have perceived that allies like Pakistan are increasingly beginning to look beyond the Bush administration and that is not going to do the "war on terror" in Afghanistan any good. In his recent visit to China, President Pervez Musharraf’s mind desultorily wandered, inviting the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) to come and help stabilize the Afghan situation. But, why go to the SCO when the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) could still do a first rate job? The SCO comprises China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n