{"id":70912,"date":"2009-07-15T06:37:55","date_gmt":"2009-07-15T06:37:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2009\/07\/15\/des-anti-neocons-us-en-ukraine\/"},"modified":"2009-07-15T06:37:55","modified_gmt":"2009-07-15T06:37:55","slug":"des-anti-neocons-us-en-ukraine","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2009\/07\/15\/des-anti-neocons-us-en-ukraine\/","title":{"rendered":"Des anti-neocons<\/em> US en Ukraine"},"content":{"rendered":"

Dans un article de Russian Profile<\/em>, une publication de commentaire d\u00e9pendant de Novosti, l’auteur Graham Stack publie, le 13 juillet 2009<\/a>, un article pr\u00e9sentant un institut US nouvellement install\u00e9 en Ukraine, l’AIU (American Institute in Ukraine, qui dispose lui-m\u00eame de son site<\/a>). Cet institut se caract\u00e9rise par un engagement extr\u00eamement marqu\u00e9, essentiellement contre l’entr\u00e9e de l’Ukraine dans l’OTAN, et contre toute la logique politique qui l’accompagne. Pour faire court, il s’agit d’un engagement qu’on pourrait d\u00e9finir comme absolument anti-neocon<\/em> et, plus g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement, oppos\u00e9 \u00e0 l’un des th\u00e8mes centraux pour l’Europe de ce que nous nommons, d’apr\u00e8s la proposition de Harlan K. Ullman<\/a>, la politique de l’id\u00e9ologie et de l’instinct.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’AIU est pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 comme assez proche du Nixon Center (align\u00e9 mais pas affil\u00e9). A en juger par les interventions que ce site pr\u00e9sente et favorise (\u00e0 partir de conf\u00e9rences sur place ou sous la forme d’articles), notamment celles de Doug Bandow et de Ivan Eland, on pourrait identifier sa tendance politique comme assez proche de celle de la droite US anti-interventionniste, antiguerre, et assez proche notamment de la droite libertarienne. (Bandow et Eland font partie du Cato Institute, institut repr\u00e9sentatif de la droite libertarienne US. Ils publient r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement sur Antiwar.com<\/em>.) La logique politique qui sous-tend cette tendance est la recherche d’un all\u00e9gement des d\u00e9penses du gouvernement, et d’un gouvernement r\u00e9duit. Il est manifeste que la crise financi\u00e8re et \u00e9conomique offre des conditions tr\u00e8s favorables \u00e0 cette approche. Dans cette logique \u00e9galement, les tendances de cette sorte r\u00e9clament un d\u00e9sengagement US de nombre de ses points d’appui strat\u00e9giques et militaires, et notamment d’Europe. Toujours selon cette logique, un activisme hostile \u00e0 l’entr\u00e9e de l’Ukraine dans l’OTAN a toute sa place.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tVoici quelques observations sur l’AIU, avec des interventions de personnes impliqu\u00e9es.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abFollowing the Russian-U.S. reset, a new American policy institute has opened in Kiev to dissuade Ukraine from its bid to Join NATO. Its fellows argue that Ukrainian NATO membership would be bad for both the United States and Ukraine. But while their message is in tune with Ukrainian public opinion, they face an up-hill struggle convincing the foreign policy establishment in both countries.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbUkraine’s NATO membership is not in Ukraine’s interests. Nor is it in U.S. interests. All that it will create is a nuclear trip wire at the heart of Europe, argued Anthony Salvia, director of the American Institute in Ukraine (AIU), a non-commercial organization founded this year in Kiev, funded by U.S. citizens. In Ukraine, U.S. opinion is often represented as being monolithically in favor of Ukraine’s future membership of NATO, he added. We’re here in Kiev to show this is definitely not the case.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbAIU is unique in being an American organization campaigning overseas against NATO expansion. Other American organizations in Ukraine, many of which are funded by the U.S. government, actively promote Ukraine’s entry into NATO at the earliest possible date, despite the fact the majority of Ukraine’s population is opposed to NATO accession, said Salvia, who served in Ronald Reagan’s White House.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe AIU is aligned, but not affiliated, with the Nixon Center, headed by legendary former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and which publishes the influential journal National Interest. In March 2009, the Nixon Center released a review of Russian-U.S. relations arguing that Ukrainian or Georgian NATO membership could decrease rather than increase Europe’s overall security. The review called for U.S. policy makers to work closely with U.S. allies to develop options other than NATO membership to demonstrate a commitment to<\/em> [Ukrainian and Georgian] sovereignty.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe U.S. should refrain from making promises to Ukraine it cannot honor, but which might embolden Ukraine to provoke a conflict. The Ukrainians should realize that the US will never fight Russia over Ukraine, argued Doug Bandow, senior analyst at the conservative Cato institute, and a recent AIU guest speaker in Kiev. The August 2008 Georgian war looms in the minds of all those warning against extending NATO deep into the unstable former Soviet Union. Ukraine must learn to rely on its own resources for securing its sovereignty, and not to trust to U.S. promises, said Bandow.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbUkrainian NATO membership, by ruining relations with Russia, would make Ukraine less secure than it is, not more. And it would also harm U.S. security, by ruining the chances for cooperation with Russia over vital issues such as Afghanistan, North Korea and Iran, all issues that the new administration has said it will prioritize, agreed Salvia.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThere are other mechanisms available for strengthening Ukrainian security, he added. One is a new European security treaty, similar to that being proposed by Dmitry Medvedev. The other is for European Union membership. The Kremlin is basically open toward Ukraine’s future EU membership, especially if it is an alternative to Ukraine’s NATO membership.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’AIU constate que la population ukrainienne, tr\u00e8s largement hostile \u00e0 l’entr\u00e9e de l’Ukraine dans l’OTAN, est la principale cible de sa campagne d’information. Au contraire, l’establishment<\/em> de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale ukrainien est totalement repli\u00e9 sur une position anti-russe, et donc favorable \u00e0 cette entr\u00e9e dans l’OTAN. C’est un ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne souvent renouvel\u00e9 dans ces pays, notamment d’Europe de l’Est, o\u00f9 les directions politiques sont compl\u00e8tement acquises aux influences ext\u00e9rieures, occidentalistes et am\u00e9ricanistes.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abForeign ministry officials are ideologically anti-Russian and nationalist to the extent that they may not always be able to objectively assess Ukraine’s real national interests, said Biberman, who has interviewed many top foreign ministry officials. They believe that Russia is inherently imperialistic and bent on regaining control over Ukraine as a step to rebuilding its empire, and NATO membership is the only way to stop this. Even for a new Ukrainian president, it will be very hard to change their perspective.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThis means that for AIU, it is work with opinion makers in the media that matters most. We don’t engage in lobbying, but work exclusively in the public field holding conferences, talks and round table discussions, said Salvia. What we are trying to tell Ukrainians is simply that you can be pro-America and pro-European without having to want to join NATO.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl est remarquable, mais pas vraiment \u00e9tonnant, que l’AIU ait \u00e9t\u00e9 aussit\u00f4t la cible de diverses attaques. Les accusations sont diverses, parfois avec documents \u00e0 l’appui, accusations de lobbying, d’influence, de quelque chose qui est identifi\u00e9e comme absence d’ind\u00e9pendance, etc. Par exemple, on peut trouver cette sorte d’informations \u00e9difiantes sur le site Ukrainamania<\/em> en date du 2 juillet 2009<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abYou’d think that the only Washington spin doctor to promote Yanukovych and his anti-NATO\/pro-Kremlin platform would be Paul Manafort. You shouldn’t. Meet the American Institute in Ukraine! In his recent article, Ukrayinska Pravda’s Serhiy Leshchenko exposes this pseudo-independent organization, whose talent did business with Yanukovych as early as in 2003.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbJames George Jatras. The American (read: Appeasement) Institute in Ukraine (AIU) lists him as one of his associates, and so does Squire Sanders Public Advocacy, LLC. (Public advocacy…hmmm…sounds so much sweeter than lobbying, doesn’t it?)<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tEt ainsi de suite, et fascinant en v\u00e9rit\u00e9. Il s’agit d’une description des manigances comme les n\u00e9oconservateurs nous ont appris \u00e0 fr\u00e9quenter pendant huit pleines et bonnes ann\u00e9es. Il est manifeste que, pour intervenir d’une mani\u00e8re efficace dans l’environnement politique tel qu’il s’est d\u00e9velopp\u00e9 ces derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es, notamment et principalement \u00e0 l’initiative des n\u00e9oconservateurs pour la m\u00e9thode comme pour le fond, il faut effectivement appliquer ces m\u00e9thodes d’intervention de communication, d’influence, de relations publiques, etc. La chose est hors du domaine du jugement moral puisque ce type de fonctionnement est aujourd’hui universel, et qu’il semble que ceux qui l’ont mis en place (o\u00f9 les n\u00e9oconservateurs ont eux-m\u00eames une place consid\u00e9rable) ont toujours conditionn\u00e9 leur vertu \u00e0 leur buts politiques bien plus qu’\u00e0 ces m\u00e9thodes. Par cons\u00e9quent, pour juger de la vertu de la chose, jugeons des buts politiques mis en avant. Il est int\u00e9ressant de voir qu’une institution US agissant en Ukraine plaide effectivement en faveur de l’abandon de l’id\u00e9e de faire entrer l’Ukraine dans l’OTAN, en faveur de la prise en compte de la proposition Medvedev d’un nouvel arrangement de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 europ\u00e9en, recommande au public et au monde politique que les hommes politiques recommandant, dans ces pays de l’Europe de l’Est, l’entr\u00e9e dans l’OTAN, soient tenus pour responsables de leurs engagements et tenus de s’en expliquer<\/a>, notamment \u00e0 propos des cons\u00e9quences de la politique qu’ils recommandent.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 15 juillet 2009 \u00e0 06H41<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Dans un article de Russian Profile, une publication de commentaire d\u00e9pendant de Novosti, l’auteur Graham Stack publie, le 13 juillet 2009, un article pr\u00e9sentant un institut US nouvellement install\u00e9 en Ukraine, l’AIU (American Institute in Ukraine, qui dispose lui-m\u00eame de son site). Cet institut se caract\u00e9rise par un engagement extr\u00eamement marqu\u00e9, essentiellement contre l’entr\u00e9e de… <\/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":[8474,3612,6799,3921,5076,3090,3923,8475,1104,584,1296],"class_list":["post-70912","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-aiu","tag-american","tag-bandow","tag-eland","tag-in","tag-influence","tag-institute","tag-jatras","tag-neocons","tag-otan","tag-ukraine"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70912","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=70912"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70912\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=70912"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=70912"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=70912"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}