{"id":71057,"date":"2009-09-10T11:14:20","date_gmt":"2009-09-10T11:14:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2009\/09\/10\/londres-et-lafghanistan-desordre-et-confusion\/"},"modified":"2009-09-10T11:14:20","modified_gmt":"2009-09-10T11:14:20","slug":"londres-et-lafghanistan-desordre-et-confusion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2009\/09\/10\/londres-et-lafghanistan-desordre-et-confusion\/","title":{"rendered":"Londres et l&rsquo;Afghanistan: d\u00e9sordre et confusion"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>La guerre d&rsquo;Afghanistan fait des ravages, certes, on le sait. Elle en fait en Afghanistan mais elle en fait aussi, et c&rsquo;est relativement nouveau, dans les deux capitales anglo-saxonnes. (Cela met \u00e9vidence combien ces deux pays, UK et USA, sont effectivement les deux principales sinon uniques parties prenantes dans ce conflit qui est leur uvre. Pour les autres pays de l&rsquo;OTAN engag\u00e9s, la chose a toujours \u00e9t\u00e9 marginale et reste marginale en termes d&rsquo;effets domestiques.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tPour Washington, on sait d\u00e9j\u00e0 depuis un certain temps que la crise afghane est devenue une crise <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article-la_fin_de_bizarro__10_09_2009.html\" class=\"gen\">domestique<\/a>. Pour Londres, on s&rsquo;en doutait, et <em>The Independent<\/em> de ce <a href=\"http:\/\/www.independent.co.uk\/news\/uk\/politics\/exclusive-afghanistan-now-the-political-fighting-breaks-out-1784483.html \" class=\"gen\">10 septembre 2009<\/a> met en \u00e9vidence combien la crise afghane est devenue une v\u00e9ritable crise politique et domestique.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLe quotidien londonien annonce, dans un article exclusif, que les diverses forces politiques commencent \u00e0 se diviser d&rsquo;une fa\u00e7on formelle et radicale sur la politique \u00e0 suivre en Afghanistan.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab<em>The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are preparing to call for the Afghan election to be re-run amid growing evidence of vote-rigging and intimidation. Their move puts Gordon Brown in a difficult position, because Hamid Karzai, the Afghan President, is utterly opposed to holding another election.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>And Mr Brown is trying to prevent Labour activists staging a debate at this month&rsquo;s conference demanding that British troops be withdrawn from Afghanistan. Tensions over the war could dent Mr Brown&rsquo;s plans for a show of Labour unity at the last annual gathering before the general election.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>If Mr Cameron becomes prime minister, he would send more troops to Afghanistan so that the training of the Afghan army and police could be quickened  and British forces withdrawn more quickly. His approach is described as \u00ab\u00a0send them in, train them up and get out\u00a0\u00bb in Tory circles. Senior Tories believe such a strategy is backed by Britain&rsquo;s military chiefs, whose call for up to 2,000 extra troops was blocked by the Government earlier this year. An extra 900 were sent for the Afghan election period only.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>In a conversation with the shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague picked up by a BBC microphone, Mr Cameron said: The things that seem to have happened are so naked, you know, you just saw the number of votes and the number of people who actually turned up at polling stations, it just couldn&rsquo;t possibly be right &#8230; We should be very clear about that.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>The Tories are expected to call for the election to be re-run after the Independent Electoral Commission has published its findings on the first round of the contest.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>The Liberal Democrats called for a second round whatever the official result of round one because there were so many doubts about the process. Nick Clegg, the party leader, said: It now seems very clear that the elections in Afghanistan have been plagued by fraud and we need a second round to establish some credibility in any government. This is necessary to ensure Afghanistan gets a president with legitimacy without which the conflict against the Taliban will be all the more difficult.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tOn comprend que Gordon Brown est, dans cette affaire afghane, largement \u00e0 la d\u00e9rive. Il propose, avec les Fran\u00e7ais et les Allemands, une conf\u00e9rence sous l\u00e9gide de l&rsquo;ONU pour examiner l&rsquo;avenir de l&rsquo;Afghanistan. Il s&rsquo;agit d&rsquo;appr\u00e9cier l&rsquo;aspect d\u00e9mocratique et humanitaire de la situation, de leur donner une nouvelle orientation, glorieuse, plus occidentaliste, plus \u00e0-la-Kouchner, croiser les doigts pour que \u00e7a marche et, vite, vite, quitter l&rsquo;Afghanistan. Bonne chance.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tBonne chance \u00e9galement, pour en revenir \u00e0 Londres, aux conservateurs, puisqu&rsquo;ils devraient assumer le pouvoir, si les sondages disent vrai, au printemps prochain. Ils mettent en cause les \u00e9lections, le r\u00e9gime Karza\u00ef, etc., et, en m\u00eame temps, veulent faire un effort maximum (avec envoi de nouvelles troupes), pour former l&rsquo;arm\u00e9e afghane et, vite, vite, quitter l&rsquo;Afghanistan. On comprend cette logique-l\u00e0, y compris d&rsquo;un point de vue politicien: Cameron aimerait bien que Brown mette en pratique le premier volet (liquider Karza\u00ef et son r\u00e9gime corrompu) et que lui-m\u00eame, Cameron, n&rsquo;ait plus qu&rsquo;\u00e0 appliquer le second volet (formation de l&rsquo;arm\u00e9e afghane et, vite, vite, on s&rsquo;en va); tout cela, bien entendu, apr\u00e8s qu&rsquo;un r\u00e9gime miraculeusement d\u00e9mocratique et arrangeant ait surgi des sombres montagnes afghanes.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLe probl\u00e8me est que Karza\u00ef est un gros morceau, qu&rsquo;il va se battre comme un beau diable, qu&rsquo;il va de plus en plus monter \u00e0 l&rsquo;extr\u00eame, et un extr\u00eame anti-OTAN, mais surtout anti-US et anti-UK. Or, les troupes afghanes, jusqu&rsquo;\u00e0 nouvel ordre, d\u00e9pendent notamment de lui, de Karza\u00ef. L&rsquo;ordre de bataille des conservateurs pour, vite, vite s&rsquo;en aller, est bel et bon, si cela marche. Le risque est d&rsquo;une confrontation avec Karza\u00ef et, pourquoi pas, pendant qu&rsquo;on y est, avec l&rsquo;arm\u00e9e afghane? Bref, le risque c&rsquo;est, \u00e0 c\u00f4t\u00e9 de la contre-gu\u00e9rilla qui pi\u00e9tine il faut voir comme, une nouvelle sorte de guerre civile ou, dans tous les cas, un d\u00e9sordre multipli\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLes Anglais, que ce soit les actuels travaillistes ou les (peut-\u00eatre) futurs conservateurs, sont dans de beaux et tristes draps, \u00e0 l&rsquo;image de leurs cousins US. Les autres, r\u00e9p\u00e9tons-le, sont moins conceptuellement engag\u00e9s dans cette guerre, qui devient de plus en plus la forme centrale temporaire de la crise des pays anglo-saxons et de leurs ambitions.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tMis en ligne le 10 septembre 2009 \u00e0 11H17<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>La guerre d&rsquo;Afghanistan fait des ravages, certes, on le sait. Elle en fait en Afghanistan mais elle en fait aussi, et c&rsquo;est relativement nouveau, dans les deux capitales anglo-saxonnes. (Cela met \u00e9vidence combien ces deux pays, UK et USA, sont effectivement les deux principales sinon uniques parties prenantes dans ce conflit qui est leur uvre.&hellip;&nbsp;<\/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":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3236,5315,3998,2825,4575,3575],"class_list":["post-71057","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-afghanistan","tag-cameron","tag-conservateurs","tag-democratie","tag-karzai","tag-royaume-uni"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71057","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=71057"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71057\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71057"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71057"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71057"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}