{"id":73010,"date":"2011-05-16T12:29:06","date_gmt":"2011-05-16T12:29:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2011\/05\/16\/libye-terra-incognita\/"},"modified":"2011-05-16T12:29:06","modified_gmt":"2011-05-16T12:29:06","slug":"libye-terra-incognita","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2011\/05\/16\/libye-terra-incognita\/","title":{"rendered":"Libye, terra incognita<\/em>"},"content":{"rendered":"

A la fin de la semaine derni\u00e8re, le secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense US Robert Gates faisait visite \u00e0 Camp Lejeune, une base des Marines. Il y eut un discours, puis un temps de questions-r\u00e9ponses.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPhilip Erving, de DoDBuzz.com<\/em>, a not\u00e9, ce 13 mai 2011<\/a>, cette question et la r\u00e9ponse qui va avec, de la transcription officielle. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tQuestion<\/em><\/strong>: \u00abGood morning, sir. Corporal Edwards from 2nd Reconnaissance Battalion. My question is in regards to the conflict in Libya. I read article in the U.K. newspaper the Telegraph a little over a month ago, and it was an interview with one of the rebel leaders. He explicitly said that some of his fighters had fought with the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan. I found this to be somewhat disheartening, since we as a country were supporting the rebels militarily and through public opinion. Who are these rebels in Libya? And how do we know that they won’t be like the mujahedeen in Afghanistan, where we’re supporting them today and then getting blown up by them tomorrow?<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tGates<\/em><\/strong>: \u00abWell, I think that the honest answer to your question is that with the exception of some of the people at the top of the opposition or the rebels in Libya, we don’t know who they are. And I think this is one of the reasons why there has been such reluctance, at least on our part, to provide any kind of lethal assistance to the opposition.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbClearly, after the way that Gadhafi has treated his own people, as the president has said, he needs to go. But I think most of us are pretty cautious when it comes to who who the opposition is. The truth is, my impression is that it’s extraordinarily diverse. We deal with a handful of people in Benghazi, but we forget about those who led the uprisings in cities all over Libya when this whole thing started. And who are they? And are they genuinely anti-Gadhafi? Are they tribal representatives? Are they kind of who are they? And we have no idea who those people are, but they were the ones that led the major uprisings in Tripoli and a variety of the other cities.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThere are tribal elements to this, and I don’t think we know very much about the tribes that are involved and where their loyalties lie between Gadhafi and between the opposition and so on. So I and we have seen reports that there are some extremists that are fighting for the opposition. We see information and we hear from the opposition that they’re trying to isolate those people and get them out of the movement because they realize the risks associated with that in terms of international support. But the truth is, I think, frankly, one of the reasons that we have been as cautious as we have in terms of providing other than humanitarian support and some non-lethal assistance to the opposition is because of what we don’t know. And I think we have to keep a wary eye on it in terms of how this thing progresses.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tEn une courte phrase : Non, nous ne savons pas, pour l’essentiel, qui se trouve dans le CNT, qui regroupe la direction des rebelles anti-Kadhafi en Libye. L\u00e0-dessus, Erving, le r\u00e9dacteur de DoDBuzz.com<\/em> entonne l’air du on ne nous la fait pas. Il estime que les USA, avec leurs capacit\u00e9s de renseignement uniques, notamment expos\u00e9es lors de l’op\u00e9ration Geronimo<\/em>, d’autre part l’OTAN, avec ses vertus nombreuses, que tout ce beau monde ne peut pas ne pas savoir aujourd’hui qui sont les gens de CNT. Erving, finaud, en d\u00e9duit qu’il y a manuvre habile de Washington : Washington dit qu’il ne conna\u00eet pas le Who’s Who<\/em> du CNT alors qu’il le conna\u00eet, et sachant effectivement qu’on y trouve des individus suspects ; alors, Washington laisse faire, accueillant le CNT \u00e0 Washington mais ne le reconnaissant pas comme repr\u00e9sentant l\u00e9gal de la Libye, attendant l’une ou l’autre issue, de fa\u00e7on \u00e0 faire tout avantage pour lui, selon que le CNT l’emporte et qu’il sera alors facile de marquer les individus suspects, selon que Kadhafi l’emporte et qu’alors le probl\u00e8me sera r\u00e9gl\u00e9 on imagine comment<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abHere’s a theory: American officials know exactly who the rebels are, which is the actual reason they want to provide only non-lethal aid. From a cold-eyed, Eisenhower administration perspective, it could be a good compromise: If the rebels overthrow Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi, there’s a bad guy taken care of; the international community can swoop in and make sure the terrorist elements in the rebellion are put in check. If Qaddafi crushes a rebellion riven with al Qaeda fighters or other bad eggs, that takes care of them. Either outcome thins out the world rogue’s gallery.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCette th\u00e9orie a tout le charme des th\u00e9ories du complot courant, washingtonien cette fois ; le charme, dans ce que rien ne peut \u00eatre d\u00e9montr\u00e9, ni dans un sens ni dans l’autre, et dans ce que, au contraire, si Washington \u00e9tait exactement dans la situation que d\u00e9crit Gates, les choses seraient exactement similaires. Pour nous, l’op\u00e9ration Geronimo<\/em> n’est pas la preuve du g\u00e9nie du renseignement US, mais celle que le g\u00e9nie du renseignement US est bien tardif, et si tardif qu’il est peut \u00eatre bien manipul\u00e9<\/a> par d’autres. (Th\u00e9orie pour th\u00e9orie, n’est-ce pas) Pour nous encore, et d’apr\u00e8s les \u00e9chos venus de l’OTAN et de l’UE, o\u00f9 flottent, entrecrois\u00e9s, des \u00e9chos des capitales impliqu\u00e9es dans l’affaire libyenne, la m\u00e9connaissance du Who’s Who<\/em> du CNT est totale et compl\u00e8te, si l’on veut parler de certitudes ; la question de la pr\u00e9sence possible de suspects identifiables comme proches du terrorisme ou d’al Qa\u00efda sp\u00e9cifiquement, reste compl\u00e8tement ouverte et sans r\u00e9ponse. Chacun a ses sources, ses informations, souvent contradictoires, et certains n’ont rien du tout. En ce sens, on pourrait dire que, pour une fois, existe une unanimit\u00e9 transatlantique et partag\u00e9e, face \u00e0 une aventure dont le sens, l’ambition et les modalit\u00e9s sont l’objet d’une enqu\u00eate de plus en plus angoiss\u00e9e de la part de ceux qui l’ont lanc\u00e9e.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tDans tous les cas, et pour en finir sur la politique US \u00e0 nouveau, il semble bien que l’administration Obama suive la m\u00eame attitude dubitative que celle que montre implicitement Gates (lequel ne fait que poursuivre l’attitude qu’il avait avant le lancement de l’op\u00e9ration en Libye, lorsqu’il s’opposait de toutes ses forces \u00e0 l’engagement US). Le fait signal\u00e9e plus haut, d’une repr\u00e9sentation du CNT \u00e0 Washington mais du refus de donner \u00e0 l’organisation le statut de repr\u00e9sentante l\u00e9gale de la Libye, semble bien montrer que l’analyse de Robert Gates est partag\u00e9e.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 16 mai 2011 \u00e0 12H28<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A la fin de la semaine derni\u00e8re, le secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense US Robert Gates faisait visite \u00e0 Camp Lejeune, une base des Marines. Il y eut un discours, puis un temps de questions-r\u00e9ponses. Philip Erving, de DoDBuzz.com, a not\u00e9, ce 13 mai 2011, cette question et la r\u00e9ponse qui va avec, de la transcription… <\/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":[3936,11081,3984,10891,584,4242],"class_list":["post-73010","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-al","tag-cnt","tag-gates","tag-kadhafi","tag-otan","tag-qaida"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73010","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=73010"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73010\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73010"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73010"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73010"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}