{"id":69911,"date":"2008-05-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-05-21T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2008\/05\/21\/et-meme-aviation-week-est-tres-inquiet\/"},"modified":"2008-05-21T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2008-05-21T00:00:00","slug":"et-meme-aviation-week-est-tres-inquiet","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2008\/05\/21\/et-meme-aviation-week-est-tres-inquiet\/","title":{"rendered":"Et m\u00eame Aviation Week<\/em><\/strong> est tr\u00e8s inquiet\u2026"},"content":{"rendered":"

Peu apr\u00e8s que nous ayons mis en ligne la nouvelle concernant la question du Pentagone par rapport \u00e0 la future nouvelle administration (voir notre Bloc-Notes<\/em> de ce jour<\/a>), nous recevions le num\u00e9ro du 19 mai de Aviation Week & Space Technology<\/em> (AW&ST<\/em>). L’\u00e9ditorial (acc\u00e8s payant<\/a>) qui y figure est tr\u00e8s int\u00e9ressant. L’hebdomadaire ne dissimule pas son inqui\u00e9tude…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abLast week, The Washington Post and ABC News issued another of their monthly public opinion polls. The questions were standard and the results predictable for the most part, but one of them stood out. When people were asked whether things in the U.S. were generally going in the right direction or had gotten pretty seriously off on the wrong track, they broke 16% and 82%, respectively. This outlook is the most pessimistic since June 1992, and we at Aviation Week & Space Technology believe the country’s sour mood is a danger to the generally pro-defense consensus that has prevailed through George W. Bush’s two terms as President.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tAW&ST<\/em> rappelle ce qu’il a r\u00e9p\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e0 plusieurs reprises, notamment dans deux autres \u00e9ditoriaux dont nous nous sommes faits l’\u00e9cho le 14 janvier 2008<\/a>. Il s’agit de l’\u00e9chec complet de l’administration GW Bush de proc\u00e9der \u00e0 une r\u00e9forme que tout le monde jugeait imp\u00e9rative, Rumsfeld<\/a> plus que n’importe qui.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abThe Bush administration took office promising to bring the U.S. military into the 21st century. Doctrine and equipage were to transform a lean, technology-rich force capable of fighting enemies small as well as great. In 2003, the Pentagon set out to transform acquisition as well.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbNone of this happened…<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tMoyennant quoi, AW&ST<\/em> est extr\u00eamement inquiet pour les perspectives qui attendent le Pentagone (et le consensus<\/em> du public sur la d\u00e9fense). Il est inquiet parce que les dossiers spectaculaires comme les guerres ext\u00e9rieures vont tenir le devant de la sc\u00e8ne, tandis que l’essentiel, c’est-\u00e0-dire les nouveaux syst\u00e8mes d’armes et le processus d’acquisition, vont rester \u00e0 l’arri\u00e8re-plan. Il sera tr\u00e8s difficile de plaider leur cause. Quels que soient les objectifs du pr\u00e9sident \u00e9lu, et on a vu d\u00e9j\u00e0 qu’ils seront tr\u00e8s probablement tr\u00e8s r\u00e9formistes, ce sera la position de l’opinion publique qui comptera.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab…The public knows little more than it is told at the time an issue moves onto the front burner, and therein lies the main problem.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe public backed Ronald Reagan’s defense buildup nearly a generation ago, correcting what the President called a decade of neglect. This time, the public will be looking at a bloated budget that accounts for more than half the world’s military spending. Instead of a supposed Soviet military juggernaut, the public will see asymmetrical warfare and the possibility that China will be a long-term threat to the U.S. Depending on whether they believe China or Pentagon analysts, China’s new budget is 10-30% of the U.S.’s. And China is more of an economic power than a military power; through enormous economic growth, adept diplomacy and savvy business judgment, it has become a huge trading partner and holder of U.S. debt, a far cry from the Russian bear.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe Pentagon blew opportunities this year to get its budget in order. It has less than six months before a new administration’s transition team starts a serious examination of national security. It had better be ready to respond to pointed questions about threats and military strategies, as well as acquisition performance that inspires confidence.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tComme on le sait, et comme on le voit \u00e0 nouveau dans ces extraits, AW&ST<\/em> n’est pas du parti des colombes. L’hebdomadaire a une influence consid\u00e9rable et refl\u00e8te les vues des milieux r\u00e9publicains qui veulent en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral une d\u00e9fense forte; mais il y a aussi l’exigence constante d’une gestion contr\u00f4l\u00e9e du Pentagone, de son syst\u00e8me d’acquisition et des co\u00fbts des syst\u00e8mes en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral. On accordera donc une r\u00e9elle importance \u00e0 cet \u00e9ditorial, comme significatif d’une opinion importante d’une partie importtante de l’establishment<\/em> washingtonien. Le fait qu’il soit publi\u00e9 si t\u00f4t dans le cours de la campagne pr\u00e9sidentielle indique la force de la pression qui s’exerce dans le sens d’une r\u00e9forme importante. (Il est \u00e9videmment acquis qu’on reparlera de ce probl\u00e8me dans les mois \u00e0 venir, au long de la partie ultime de la campagne.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tOn voit confirm\u00e9e l’id\u00e9e qu’une politique de r\u00e9forme radicale du Pentagone sera \u00e0 l’ordre du jour \u00e0 partir de janvier 2009, avec le Pentagone en position d’accus\u00e9. La nouvelle administration trouvera dans ce courant que refl\u00e8te l’\u00e9ditorial un soutien important, face \u00e0 la puissante bureaucratie du d\u00e9partement. La perspective d’une crise au sein du complexe militaro-industriel, en son coeur m\u00eame, se confirme comme une hypoth\u00e8se tr\u00e8s probable, avec une bataille extr\u00eamement violente autour des nouveaux syst\u00e8mes d’armes, en plus de la question de la strat\u00e9gie \u00e0 suivre pour les USA apr\u00e8s la pr\u00e9sidence GW Bush.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 21 mai 2008 \u00e0 09H31<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Peu apr\u00e8s que nous ayons mis en ligne la nouvelle concernant la question du Pentagone par rapport \u00e0 la future nouvelle administration (voir notre Bloc-Notes de ce jour), nous recevions le num\u00e9ro du 19 mai de Aviation Week & Space Technology (AW&ST). L’\u00e9ditorial (acc\u00e8s payant) qui y figure est tr\u00e8s int\u00e9ressant. L’hebdomadaire ne dissimule pas… <\/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":[4195,4851,3127,3228,3019,3194,4247],"class_list":["post-69911","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-aviation","tag-awst","tag-budget","tag-crise","tag-defense","tag-pentagone","tag-week"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69911","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=69911"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69911\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69911"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69911"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69911"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}