{"id":70002,"date":"2008-06-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-27T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2008\/06\/27\/et-gates-entre-dans-la-fosse-aux-lions-ultimately-hes-the-boss\/"},"modified":"2008-06-27T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2008-06-27T00:00:00","slug":"et-gates-entre-dans-la-fosse-aux-lions-ultimately-hes-the-boss","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2008\/06\/27\/et-gates-entre-dans-la-fosse-aux-lions-ultimately-hes-the-boss\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2026Et Gates entre dans la fosse aux lions : \u00abUltimately, he’s the boss.<\/em>\u00bb"},"content":{"rendered":"

La controverse autour de l’affaire GAO\/KC-45 s’\u00e9tend au secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense Robert Gates lui-m\u00eame, comme on pouvait d\u00e9j\u00e0 l’envisager ce matin<\/a>. Le Daily Report<\/em> de l’Air Force Association d’aujourd’hui<\/a> signale la nouvelle, pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e lors de la conf\u00e9rence de presse du Pentagone du 25 juin. Il semble qu’on puisse penser que Gates va lui-m\u00eame entrer dans le processus de d\u00e9cision de l’USAF, d’abord pour statuer sur ce que l’USAF va faire apr\u00e8s l’intervention du GAO. Ensuite, il pourrait s’impliquer personnellement dans le processus concernant le programme KC-45, qui pourrait impliquer autant la d\u00e9cision (le processus de la d\u00e9cision \u00e0 relancer) qu’une \u00e9ventuelle enqu\u00eate interne sur les responsabilit\u00e9s. Le premier effet marquant de cette \u00e9volution de la position de Gates revient bien entendu \u00e0 radicaliser l’antagonisme entre lui et l’USAF.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCi-dessous, une partie de la nouvelle du Daily Report<\/em>, puis un extrait de la conf\u00e9rence de presse du porte-parole de Gates.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abPentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell offered the view during a press briefing that Defense Secretary Robert Gates will put his full imprint on the Air Force’s tanker program rather than leaving the decision over the next course of action to the Air Force alone. That came as a surprise to some veteran journalists, one of whom tried to get some clarity, asking, So the decision will come up to him, rather than staying internally within the Air Force? To which Morrell replied, This is something the Secretary is going to be involved in.\u00a0\u00bb And, he emphasized, It’s a procurement issue that’s been going on seven years now, seven years probably too long.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t()<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abFrom June 25, 2008 Pentagon Press Brief <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbQuestion:<\/em><\/strong> Has the secretary been briefed? Is he going to get counsel from Mr. Young or from Ms. Payton? When can we expect him to weigh in on this? Will he be the ultimate arbiter of this, how’s it going to work out?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr. Morrell:<\/em><\/strong> Probably by the time I get off this podium, this stage, he will begin his first briefing with Mr. Young, who heads up AT&L, with the Air Force, with our lawyers.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbIt will be the first time he has had a chance to hear from them, about the GAO’s recommendations as well as the preliminary analysis that’s been done within the department on how those recommendations would potentially impact the Air Force’s February decision to award the new tanker contract to Northrop Grumman and EADS. So that will begin a few moments from now.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbAnd I think though, Luis, although we have 60 days with which to, in which to respond to the GAO, I think you will see, the secretary wants to move as quickly as possible.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbBut keep in mind, this is a complicated matter. I think the GAO decision was nearly 70 pages long, and it only dealt with a small slice of this massive contracting process.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThat said, the secretary is just about to begin reviewing the various options available to him and will chart a course as to the way ahead as soon as possible.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbQuestion:<\/em><\/strong> So the decision will come up to him, rather than staying internally within the Air Force.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr. Morrell:<\/em><\/strong> I mean, this is something the secretary is going to be involved in.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbQuestion:<\/em><\/strong> Does the secretary have the final decision on this? I mean, it’s a procurement issue.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr. Morrell:<\/em><\/strong> It’s a procurement issue that’s been going on seven years now, seven years probably too long. And we have been our men and women in uniform, who depend on this now-ancient fleet of tankers, needs a new tanker as soon as possible.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThis delay will certainly not help matters, and he is determined to make sure that we are able to figure out the best course ahead in the wake of these recommendations as quickly as possible. <\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbQuestion:<\/em><\/strong> He’ll be the decision-maker on<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr. Morrell:<\/em><\/strong> Well, I’m not going to get into who’s going to be the decision-maker. He is intimately involved in this process. It’s something that is that warrants his involvement. He wants to make sure that there are no further delays to replacing this vitally important piece of equipment, on which our warfighters depend every single day.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbQuestion:<\/em><\/strong> Is it your understanding, Geoff, that the GAO report suggests that the process has to start over again, or is that what the secretary’s determining with the lawyers right now?<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr. Morrell:<\/em><\/strong> Well, I think the GAO has recommended that the contracts be opened up and rebid and the whole process begin be opened up again.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbListen, at this point, we are still of the mind that this was a full this was a fair and transparent process that produced the best tanker for our warfighters at the best cost to the taxpayer. That said, the GAO has identified some areas of concern in the contracting process, and we are going to closely examine the areas of their concern and the recommendations that they’ve provided and see what the best course of action is from here.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbQuestion:<\/em><\/strong> Geoff, just to clarify, if there would be a decision to rebid or something, can the secretary make that decision and just say, Okay, no, I think we want to rebid, or does he need any other authorities, or can he just do that on his own?<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr. Morrell:<\/em><\/strong> Ultimately, he’s the boss. And ultimately, if it requires his decision, he will make sure that a decision is made that moves this process on as quickly as possible, while at the same time addressing concerns raised by some of the watchdog groups.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t…Tout cela pour avoir une id\u00e9e de l’ambiance au Pentagone, plus qu’apporter une information d\u00e9cisive. Il n’emp\u00eache, l’affaire GAO-KC-45 s’\u00e9tend, s’\u00e9largit, prend l’allure d’une pol\u00e9mique de premi\u00e8re dimension, avec des orientations politiques diverses, o\u00f9 s’entrecroisent des antagonismes contradictoires. (Gates versus<\/em> USAF, Pentagone versus<\/em> Congr\u00e8s, Boeing versus<\/em> Pentagone, GAO versus<\/em> personne mais craint par tout le monde, avec les Europ\u00e9ens d’EADS \u00e9bahis, suivant avec angoisse ce scandale qui se d\u00e9veloppe, avec les candidats aux pr\u00e9sidentielles, notamment McCain, pr\u00eatant une oreille attentive).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl semble d\u00e9sormais que l’affaire KC-45 devenue l’affaire GAO\/KC-45 soit partie vers des dimensions nationales et vers des interf\u00e9rences majeures dans certains grands domaines de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale: la crise du Pentagone en premier lieu, avec sa tangente de la crise de l’USAF, l’affrontement du Pentagone et du Congr\u00e8s, les relations transatlantiques, etc., etc. Il appara\u00eett bien difficile de croire que cette affaire ne deviendra pas une crise majeure en acqu\u00e9rant des caract\u00e9ristiques syst\u00e9miques et une potentialit\u00e9 explosive consid\u00e9rable. Elle est une fen\u00eatre soudain largement ouverte sur le d\u00e9sordre du Pentagone, sur l’inefficacit\u00e9 du centre de la puissance am\u00e9ricaniste.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tGates, qu’on croyait promis \u00e0 la gestion tranquille d’un interr\u00e8gne tout entier tourn\u00e9 vers les batailles \u00e0 venir d’apr\u00e8s janvier 2009, lorsque lui-m\u00eame serait parti, se trouve brusquement propuls\u00e9 au cur de la pol\u00e9mique, apr\u00e8s quelques semaines d\u00e9j\u00e0 difficiles. Sa personnalit\u00e9 s’y r\u00e9v\u00e8le de jour en jour plus dure et plus affirm\u00e9e, comme on l’a vu avec l’affrontement avec l’USAF et comme on le voit d\u00e9sormais avec l’affaire GAO-KC-45. Gates est d\u00e9sormais un acteur majeur de la crise syst\u00e9mique \u00e0 Washington, mais plus pour son r\u00f4le int\u00e9rieur que pour son r\u00f4le dans les affaires de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 27 juin 2008 \u00e0 15H24<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

La controverse autour de l’affaire GAO\/KC-45 s’\u00e9tend au secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense Robert Gates lui-m\u00eame, comme on pouvait d\u00e9j\u00e0 l’envisager ce matin. Le Daily Report de l’Air Force Association d’aujourd’hui signale la nouvelle, pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e lors de la conf\u00e9rence de presse du Pentagone du 25 juin. Il semble qu’on puisse penser que Gates va lui-m\u00eame entrer… <\/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":[4248,3984,4581,3194,41],"class_list":["post-70002","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-gao","tag-gates","tag-kc-45","tag-pentagone","tag-usaf"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70002","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=70002"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70002\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=70002"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=70002"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=70002"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}