7 septembre 2009<\/a>, rapporte un affrontement grandissant entre les USA et l’Allemagne \u00e0 propos de cette affaire. Les premiers reprochent \u00e0 la seconde d’avoir d\u00e9clench\u00e9 cette op\u00e9rations donc, avec deux F-15 de l’USAF.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abBerlin defended the raid as militarily necessary to protect German troops, even though it went against the express orders of the new US commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, to safeguard civilians.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe raid was carried out by the US air force but McChrystal distanced himself from it, apologising to the Afghan government and saying he had not ordered it. The strike was called in by a senior German officer. The German government said the officer feared two hijacked oil tankers, stuck in a riverbed, were to be used for a suicide bombing of the German base at Kunduz, in the north of the country<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe rift between the US and its European allies comes as the Taliban extends its influence in the country. The US and European countries involved are facing domestic pressure to withdraw, and Germany, Britain and France yesterday proposed a conference to discuss how to get the Afghan government to take more responsibility for its own security.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe US has expressed private criticism of the German commander in Kunduz for calling in an air strike based on the assessment of one Afghan informant on the ground that all those people around the tankers were Taliban and on grainy aerial photographs. At the time of the attack, the two tankers were stationary in a riverbed, with the local populace apparently helping themselves to free oil.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbRear Admiral Gregory Smith, a US spokesman in Afghanistan, said German troops had allowed too many hours to pass before visiting the site of the attack on Friday, saying it was important to reach the scene quickly to establish what had happened before the enemy got the chance to deliver its version.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe German defence minister, Franz Josef Jung, said civilian casualties could not be ruled out but defended the attack, calling it militarily necessary and correct. If there were civilian casualties or injuries of course we deeply regret that, he said, adding that the attack was carried out on the basis of reconnaissance showing that the Taliban planned to launch an assault with the hijacked trucks on German troops. It was clear that our soldiers were in danger. Consequently I stand clearly behind our commander’s decision to order the air strike. We had clear information that the Taliban had seized both fuel trucks about six kilometres away from our base in order to launch an attack against our soldiers in Kunduz, he said.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tCe qu’il ressort de cette querelle, c’est une situation peu ordinaire du point de vue US, alors que, depuis l’arriv\u00e9e de McChrystal, la premi\u00e8re n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de la guerre devrait \u00eatre un contr\u00f4le extr\u00eamement strict des interventions a\u00e9riennes pour \u00e9viter des incidents avec pertes de civils. En g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, on conna\u00eet la propension obsessionnelle des USA \u00e0 conserver le contr\u00f4le exclusif de leurs forces arm\u00e9es, dans toutes les circonstances, particuli\u00e8rement dans les circonstances de ces coalitions qu’ils dominent de la t\u00eate et des \u00e9paules; \u00e0 plus forte raison, pouvait-il sembler, dans le cas de ces interventions a\u00e9riennes, durant cette p\u00e9riode extr\u00eamement tendue \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard, au moment o\u00f9 la guerre en Afghanistan est devenue un sujet de crise centrale \u00e0 Washington, o\u00f9 les rapports entre Washington et leur marionnette Karza\u00ef sont d\u00e9testables, etc. Pourtant, voici McChrystal, le nouveau commandant en chef, que tout le monde conna\u00eet bien comme un dur de dur, expliquant piteusement \u00e0 la marionnette Karza\u00ef que ce n’est pas de sa faute, qu’il n’\u00e9tait pas au courant bref, qu’on dispose, ici et l\u00e0, de ses F-15 sans le consulter. (Mais peut-\u00eatre dira-t-on que ces F-15 sont \u00e0 l’USAF, pas \u00e0 l’U.S. Army, et que McChrystal c’est l’U.S. Army. Cette remarque en vaut bien une autre.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tIl y aura certes tous les arguments op\u00e9rationnels habituels, sur la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de la rapidit\u00e9 des interventions, voire celui de f\u00e9liciter les Am\u00e9ricains pour d\u00e9l\u00e9guer leurs forces \u00e0 d’autres qu’eux-m\u00eames. Mais le fait est que nous ne sommes pas essentiellement dans une situation op\u00e9rationnelle mais d’abord dans une situation politique de crise, \u00e0 un moment crucial du conflit, o\u00f9 m\u00eame Washington est secou\u00e9; le fait est que, dans cette situation politique de crise, l’autorit\u00e9 doit plus que jamais contr\u00f4ler ses moyens op\u00e9rationnels pour emp\u00eacher des situations accidentelles qui aggravent la crise. Rien de tout cela n’est manifeste dans cet incident, qui montre au contraire un d\u00e9sordre consid\u00e9rable, dans une guerre dont il ne semble plus tr\u00e8s bien qu’on sache qui la dirige, avec quels moyens, dans quel but sinon les talibans et assimil\u00e9s, certes, qui semblent par contre savoir ce qu’ils veulent. Comme le note le Guardian<\/em>: \u00abThe rift between the US and its European allies comes as the Taliban extends its influence in the country.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tEffectivement, si les guerriers am\u00e9ricanistes ne contr\u00f4lent m\u00eame plus leurs bavures, voil\u00e0 une situation originale.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 8 septembre 2009 \u00e0 12H38<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Il y a un seul passage qui ne soit pas trop d\u00e9favorable aux montreurs de marionnettes US, dans l’interview de Karza\u00ef dont nous parlons aujourd’hui. Il concerne l’attaque a\u00e9rienne de la semaine derni\u00e8re en Afghanistan, qui a fait pr\u00e8s de ou plus d’une centaine de morts et qui provoque une \u00e9motion consid\u00e9rable. \u00abQuelle erreur 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":[3236,2748,6807,8644,3302,4575,8321],"class_list":["post-71051","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-afghanistan","tag-allemagne","tag-bavures","tag-camions-citernes","tag-f-15","tag-karzai","tag-mcchrystal"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71051","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=71051"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71051\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71051"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71051"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71051"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}