\t30 juillet 2009 C’\u00e9tait para\u00eet-il l’Am\u00e9rique de Joe Biden<\/a> qui allait accueillir les Chinois lundi et mardi, l’Am\u00e9rique qui va manipuler \u00e0 sa guise la Russie r\u00e9duite \u00e0 merci (en l’avertissant de la chose), qui r\u00e9ussit tous ses complots et fait ce qu’elle veut, partout o\u00f9 elle veut, en r\u00e9ussissant des coups fameux (Irak, Afghanistan) derri\u00e8re des faux-\u00e9checs camoufl\u00e9s en vraies d\u00e9routes. Dans cet \u00e9tat d’esprit, on peut consid\u00e9rer que la lecture du rapide commentaire de Robert Scheer, le 28 juillet 2009<\/a>, sur Truthdig.com<\/em>, est un excellent exercice pour r\u00e9tablir l’esprit, ses neurones et son inspiration.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abWhat a hoot. The Chinese Communists invaded Washington on Monday demanding not that we sacrifice our freedoms but rather that we balance our budget. Creditors get to make that kind of call. And the Marxists of Beijing, who have turned out to be the world’s most prudent bankers, are worried about their assets invested in our banana republic.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbChina has a huge amount of investment in the United States, mainly in the form of Treasury bonds. We are concerned about the security of our financial assets was the way China’s assistant finance minister put it. Briefing reporters at the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, he added, We sincerely hope the U.S. fiscal deficit will be reduced, year after year. Quite sincerely, one suspects, given a U.S. budget shortfall this year that is slated to reach $1.85 trillion.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbSuddenly, it was U.S. officials who were promising deep reform to their disgraced economic system rather than demanding it from incompetent foreigners. President Barack Obama’s economic team of Clinton-era holdovers, who a decade ago had hectored China on the virtues of fiscal responsibility, now were falling over themselves to reassure the Chinese that their $1.5 trillion stake in U.S. government-issued securities is safe, and that they should buy more at this week’s $200 billion Treasury auction. If they don’t, we’re in big trouble.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbU.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner promised to behave, saying the U.S. is committed to taking the necessary measures to bring our fiscal deficits down to a more sustainable level once recovery is firmly established. Now let’s hope that the Chinese Communists and their natural allies among congressional deficit hawks will be able to keep him to his word.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tScheer rappelle justement que cette sorte de rencontre, o\u00f9 les USA se pr\u00e9sentent en qu\u00e9mandeur, avec un \u00abnew conciliatorynay, deferentialtone toward China<\/em>\u00bb, n’est pas une sp\u00e9cialit\u00e9 d’Obama, de la sorte que les conservateurs et r\u00e9publicains repprochent \u00e0 Obama (voir notre Bloc-Notes<\/em> de ce 30 juillet 2009<\/a>, sur un commentaire de Jeffrey T. Kuhner, du Washington Times<\/em>, le 25 juillet 2009<\/a>). C’est Hank Paulson qui a inaugur\u00e9 la chose dans cette fa\u00e7on si voyante et humiliante, comme nous le rapportions le 5 d\u00e9cembre 2008<\/a>, en pr\u00e9sentant la visite du secr\u00e9taire US au tr\u00e9sor \u00e0 P\u00e9kin. Il ne s’agit pas d’une politique (celle d’Obama en l’occurrence) mais d’une situation politique d\u00e9sormais confirm\u00e9e.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tAu reste, cette m\u00eame humilit\u00e9 de fond est pr\u00e9sente dans le commentaire, plus grave et moins sarcastique que Scheer, parfois m\u00eame nettement inquiet, lorsqu’on \u00e9largit le spectre politique.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t Le Wall Street Journal<\/em>, par exemple et bon exemple, le 29 juillet 2009<\/a>, observe gravement combien les Chinois sont d\u00e9sormais des gens importants, qu’il importe d’\u00e9couter avec gravit\u00e9 et un certain respect Egalement, avec une crainte certaine. Il suffit de lire les deux premi\u00e8res et la derni\u00e8re phrases de l’\u00e9dito.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abWe exercise our leadership best when we are listening, President Obama said in April, when asked how his foreign policy differs from that of George W. Bush. Let’s hope that he and Congress were listening when Chinese officials visited the U.S. this week.<\/em> [] The Chinese have economic problems of their own, but when they come visiting with a message of sound money and spending restraint, Americans ignore them at our peril.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t Une source neutre, ou pr\u00e9tent\u00e9e comme telle dans tous les cas? Reuters, par exemple, Simon Denyer le 29 juillet 2009<\/a>. L\u00e0, pas d’explication technique, pas de th\u00e9orie mon\u00e9taire, simplement un constat, \u00ab the balance of power is shifting.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abIt’s too early to tell whether President Barack Obama’s new approach to China will be more successful than his predecessor’s. But this week’s high-level dialogue in Washington underlined how the balance of power is shifting.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe U.S. side, determined to be more respectful and less confrontational, tiptoed around the sensitive issue of China’s currency, avoiding any public appeal for an upwards revaluation in the yuan. There was a passing reference to the rights of China’s ethnic and religious minorities, but no sign the other side would take any more notice of foreign interference in its internal affairs than it has in the past.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n