Deux commentateurs US, Spencer Ackerman, le 1er octobre 2009<\/a> sur The Washington Independent<\/em> et Stephen M. Walt, le 6 octobre 2009<\/a> sur Foreign Policy.com<\/em>, se relaient pour noter le m\u00eame passage de l’intervention de g\u00e9n\u00e9ral McChrystal (commandant des forces US et de l’OTAN en Afghanistan), \u00e0 Londres, lors de son discours \u00e0 l’IISS le 1er octobre 2009. Ce passage fait de McChrystal une sorte de colombe, de partisan de l’apaisement de l’Iran par la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de s’entendre avec ce pays, pour le bien de la situation en Afghanistan.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tWalt \u00e9crit: \u00abAs Spencer Ackerman noted a few days ago, U.S. Afghan commander Stanley McChrystal offered this intriguing comment during his remarks at IISS headquarters in London last week:<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbIran, of course, being, you know, in such proximity to Afghanistan and having significant influence inside Afghanistan, is a big player. They, in my view, they have a lot of very positive influence inside Afghanistan, some of it cultural, some of it financial, just things that any neighbor would have to try to build the stability. I think that if Iran takes a very mature look at a stable Afghanistan and support the government of Afghanistan, then we’ll be we’ll be in good shape. If they were to choose not to do that, and they were to choose to support insurgents, I think that would be a significant miscalculation.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abI don’t think this comment was an idle remark by McChrystal. What he’s telling us is that Iran could be a positive influence in Afghanistan, and that it could also be a real hindrance to our efforts. And that means that an attack on Iran would make our situation in Afghanistan even worse than it is already, because Iran would have both the capacity and the incentive to retaliate.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThere’s no love lost between Iran and the Taliban, in part because the Taliban murdered ten Iranian diplomats in Mazari Sharif back in 1998. But Iran does retain some influence there as McChystal points out –and they would undoubtedly be looking for some way to pay us back if we were foolish enough to strike them. McChrystal is probably aware that advocates of a hardline approach to Tehran have a lot of clout in the Obama administration, and that plenty of other voices such as GOP Senator Lindsay Graham continue to wave the big stick even as negotiations get underway.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t Nous avons d\u00e9j\u00e0 mentionn\u00e9 ce fait dans notre Note d’analyse<\/em> du 29 septembre 2009<\/a>: \u00abDe l’autre c\u00f4t\u00e9, g\u00e9ographiquement, on sait qu’il y a, pour les militaires US, un lien contradictoire explosif entre la guerre en Afghanistan et un affrontement avec l’Iran. Si l’Iran d\u00e9cide de prendre une attitude antagoniste, la situation empirera pour les forces US (et de l’OTAN) en Afghanistan.<\/em>\u00bb De ce point de vue, McChrystal est en complet accord avec son sup\u00e9rieur et complice, David Petraeus, le chef de Central Command, qui plaidait en janvier 2009 pour une bonne entente avec l’Iran et une coop\u00e9ration avec ce pays dans les op\u00e9rations en Afghanistan.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n