{"id":73672,"date":"2014-01-31T11:13:23","date_gmt":"2014-01-31T11:13:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2014\/01\/31\/lafghanistan-de-la-marionnette-a-la-bete-noire\/"},"modified":"2014-01-31T11:13:23","modified_gmt":"2014-01-31T11:13:23","slug":"lafghanistan-de-la-marionnette-a-la-bete-noire","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2014\/01\/31\/lafghanistan-de-la-marionnette-a-la-bete-noire\/","title":{"rendered":"L&rsquo;Afghanistan, de la marionnette \u00e0 la b\u00eate noire"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><h4 class=\"breve-de-crise\">L&rsquo;Afghanistan, de la marionnette \u00e0 la b\u00eate noire<\/h4>\n<p>Ceux qui ont la m\u00e9moire assez longue se rappellent de l&rsquo;installation de Hamid Karzai comme pr\u00e9sident d&rsquo;un Afghanistan pass\u00e9 sous la coupe des USA. C&rsquo;\u00e9tait en 2002 et il ne faisait aucun doute que l&rsquo;Afghanistan allait suivre au doigt et \u00e0 l&rsquo;il les consignes de Washington par l&rsquo;interm\u00e9diaire de la marionnette Karzai, qui pr\u00e9sentait toutes les garanties de servilit\u00e9 pour les USA et de manipulation par les USA, y compris des liens d&rsquo;affaires et de corrption avec le <em>business<\/em> US. Tout cela (notamment les liens de corruption) n&rsquo;est certainement pas faux, mais cela ne suffit plus. Par cons\u00e9quent, l&rsquo;on dut tr\u00e8s vite d\u00e9chanter, concluant par cons\u00e9quent que les marionnettes n&rsquo;\u00e9taient plus ce qu&rsquo;elles avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 (voir le <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article-karza_ou_les_limites_de_la_servilit__22_05_2005.html\" class=\"gen\">22 mai 2005<\/a> et le <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article-l_impasse_des_marionnettes_24_08_2007.html\" class=\"gen\">24 ao\u00fbt 2007<\/a>). Aujourd&rsquo;hui, Washington n&rsquo;a pas de plus grand adversaire en Afghanistan que Karzai, \u00e0 un point o\u00f9 certains envisagent un retrait US sans l&rsquo;accord d&rsquo;occupation du contingent US habituel.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tCoach\u00e9 par sa bureaucratie-Syst\u00e8me qui l&rsquo;a compl\u00e8tement dissous dans ses exigences, le secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense Hagel ne cesse de temp\u00eater contre Karzai. Jason Ditz, d&rsquo;<em>Antiwar.com<\/em>, observe, ce <a href=\"\/%E2%80%AAhttp:\/\/news.antiwar.com\/2014\/01\/30\/hagel-afghans-must-stop-foot-dragging-on-troop-deal\/%E2%80%AC\" class=\"gen\">31 janvier 2014<\/a> : \u00ab<em>Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel expressed growing frustration about the Karzai government&rsquo;s refusal to sign the Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA), saying they can&rsquo;t just keep deferring and deferring because it&rsquo;s screwing up Pentagon plans. The BSA would keep US troops in Afghanistan through 2024 and beyond, and US officials have repeatedly demanded President Hamid Karzai sign the pact,  though he has insisted he won&rsquo;t do so until after the April election that ends his term in office. Hagel claimed Karzai&rsquo;s position on the BSA changes constantly and that he isn&rsquo;t sure what the Afghan president&rsquo;s current position is. In every public statement for months, Karzai has said he won&rsquo;t sign the deal.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLa tension est \u00e0 son comble. Karzai suspecte publiquement les USA d&rsquo;\u00eatre derri\u00e8re des attentats pr\u00e9sent\u00e9s comme des attaques terroristes, et que lui, Karzai, juge \u00eatre manipul\u00e9s par les USA pour miner son pouvoir (voir AFP\/<em>Defense News<\/em>, le <a href=\"http:\/\/www.defensenews.com\/article\/20140128\/DEFREG02\/301280026\" class=\"gen\">28 janvier 2014<\/a>). Le s\u00e9nateur Levin, puissant pr\u00e9sident de la commission des forces arm\u00e9es et du S\u00e9nat US et absolument partisan, selon les consignes du Pentagone, du maintien d&rsquo;une forte pr\u00e9sence US en Afghanistan (donc au moins de l&rsquo;accord BSA que Karzai refuse), sugg\u00e8re que Washington laisse tomber Karzai et s&rsquo;arrange avec son successeur issu des \u00e9lections du <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Afghan_presidential_election,_2014\" class=\"gen\">5 avril 2014<\/a>. (Le pr\u00e9sident Karzai ne peut se repr\u00e9senter et il y a onze candidats, dont Quayrum Karzai, fr\u00e8re cadet de Hamid.) Il n&rsquo;est pas \u00e9vident que les USA puissent trouver, ni m\u00eame s&rsquo;offrir le candidat id\u00e9al, tant leur statut est d\u00e9consid\u00e9r\u00e9 en Afghanistan,  et puisque les marionnettes ne sont plus ce qu&rsquo;elles \u00e9taient.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tMais le fait le plus remarquable, sans doute, est qu&rsquo;un sentiment d&rsquo;\u00e9chec et de fatalisme s&rsquo;insinue dans certains commentaires US, sur cette possibilit\u00e9 que les USA \u00e9vacuent l&rsquo;Afghanistan \u00e0 la fin de 2014 sans accord de stationnement d&rsquo;un contingent US. C&rsquo;est l&rsquo;interpr\u00e9tation que donne <em>The Moon of Alabama<\/em>, le <a href=\"http:\/\/www.moonofalabama.org\/2014\/01\/leak-of-cia-in-afghanistan-a-sign-of-us-retreat.html#comments\" class=\"gen\">27 janvier 2014<\/a>, d&rsquo;un article du New York <em>Times<\/em> du <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2014\/01\/27\/world\/asia\/afghanistan-exit-is-seen-as-peril-to-drone-mission.html?hp&#038;_r=1\" class=\"gen\">26 janvier 2014<\/a>, o\u00f9 l&rsquo;hypoth\u00e8se du retrait des bases CIA du pays est \u00e9voqu\u00e9 \u00e0 cause du manque de troupes pour les prot\u00e9ger, impliquant que les troupes US restantes seraient insuffisantes pour cette t\u00e2che. Justin Raimondo estime (ce <a href=\"http:\/\/original.antiwar.com\/justin\/2014\/01\/30\/obama-the-reluctant-realist\/\" class=\"gen\">31 janvier 2014<\/a>) qu&rsquo;Obama lui-m\u00eame est convaincu qu&rsquo;il faudra finalement retirer l&rsquo;essentiel des forces US d&rsquo;Afghanistan, \u00e0 part quelques \u00e9l\u00e9ments r\u00e9siduels pour des missions strictement limit\u00e9es :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab<em>One paragraph into the foreign policy section Obama had already begun touting his record of making good on his promises to withdraw American troops from combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan. Citing the (doubtful) possibility that a security agreement with the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai will be signed, he warns us  almost apologetically  that a small force of Americans could remain in Afghanistan with NATO allies to carry out two narrow missions: training and assisting Afghan forces, and counterterrorism operations to pursue any remnants of al Qaeda. He didn&rsquo;t add: Sorry about that, folks, but you could hear it in his tone&#8230;<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tMis en ligne le 31 janvier 2014 \u00e0 11H16<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>L&rsquo;Afghanistan, de la marionnette \u00e0 la b\u00eate noire Ceux qui ont la m\u00e9moire assez longue se rappellent de l&rsquo;installation de Hamid Karzai comme pr\u00e9sident d&rsquo;un Afghanistan pass\u00e9 sous la coupe des USA. C&rsquo;\u00e9tait en 2002 et il ne faisait aucun doute que l&rsquo;Afghanistan allait suivre au doigt et \u00e0 l&rsquo;il les consignes de Washington par&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":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[5267,3236,15576,3104,2867,4141,4841,4780,2904,4337,4849],"class_list":["post-73672","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-breves-de-crise","tag-accord","tag-afghanistan","tag-bsa","tag-cia","tag-drones","tag-elections","tag-hagel","tag-levin","tag-president","tag-raimondo","tag-retrait"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73672","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=73672"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73672\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73672"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73672"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73672"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}