{"id":74274,"date":"2011-11-25T05:41:54","date_gmt":"2011-11-25T05:41:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2011\/11\/25\/la-crise-du-bmde-rebondit-a-condition-que-le-bmde-existe-encore\/"},"modified":"2011-11-25T05:41:54","modified_gmt":"2011-11-25T05:41:54","slug":"la-crise-du-bmde-rebondit-a-condition-que-le-bmde-existe-encore","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2011\/11\/25\/la-crise-du-bmde-rebondit-a-condition-que-le-bmde-existe-encore\/","title":{"rendered":"La crise du BMDE rebondit, \u00e0 condition que le BMDE existe encore\u2026"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><h3 class=\"titrebloc\">La crise du BMDE rebondit, \u00e0 condition que le BMDE existe encore<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tApr\u00e8s diverses vicissitudes ces deux derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es entre l&rsquo;OTAN, les USA et la Russie \u00e0 propos du syst\u00e8me anti-missiles, que nous avions baptis\u00e9 en son temps BMDE (<em>Ballistic Missile Defense Europe<\/em>),  qui a du changer d&rsquo;acronyme entretemps,  mais que nous importe dans ce chaos g\u00e9n\u00e9ral et au cur des susceptibilit\u00e9s bureaucratiques de l&rsquo;OTAN ? Nous conservons donc BMDE Pour noter que les Russes ont d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de montrer que tout se passe comme s&rsquo;ils se f\u00e2chaient tout rouge. Ainsi Medvedev a-t-il averti s\u00e9v\u00e8rement que la Russie \u00e9tait pr\u00eate \u00e0 pointer ses missiles de frappe tactique contre des sites du r\u00e9seau BMDE. Il s&rsquo;agit notamment de missiles \u00e0 courte port\u00e9e <em>Iskander<\/em> dont il a d\u00e9j\u00e0 \u00e9t\u00e9 <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article-moscou_le_bmde_et_la_fenetre_d_opportunite_d_obama_28_01_2009.html\" class=\"gen\">beaucoup<\/a> question ces derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es comme arme de dissuasion contre le r\u00e9seau BMDE.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLe <a href=\"http:\/\/rt.com\/politics\/medvedev-comments-missile-defense-031\/\" class=\"gen\">23 novembre 2011<\/a>, <em>Russia Today<\/em> rapporte l&rsquo;avertissement de Medvedev, qui marque la mauvaise humeur grandissante des Russes \u00e0 l&rsquo;encontre de l&rsquo;attitude des Am\u00e9ricains (et de l&rsquo;OTAN). Medvedev parle certes, <em>in fine<\/em>, des <em>Iskander<\/em>, mais aussi d&rsquo;autres mesures de riposte au niveau strat\u00e9gique.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab<em>Responding to Washington&rsquo;s failure to bring Russia on board the European missile defense system, President Dmitry Medvedev announces sweeping plans to address what Moscow is calling a threat to national security. Medvedev said he will deploy strike systems in the west and south of the country and deploy Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad region in order to counter the risk posed by the European missile defense system. By my order the Defense Ministry will run in a warning system radar station in Kaliningrad without delay, the Russian President said, commenting from his resident of Gorki on the outskirts of Moscow.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>Russia may also refuse to undertake additional steps toward disarmament in the event that its national security remains at risk. In the event of unfavorable developments (in regards to European missile defense), Russia reserves the right to halt further steps in the disarmament sphere and, respectively, weapons control, Medvedev said. Besides, given the inseparable interconnection between the strategic offensive and defensive weapons, grounds may appear for our country&rsquo;s withdrawal from the START treaty.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t A c\u00f4t\u00e9 de cela, le <a href=\"http:\/\/rt.com\/politics\/ballistic-russia-strikes-missile-041\/\" class=\"gen\">24 novembre 2011<\/a>, <em>Russia Today<\/em> d\u00e9veloppe \u00e9galement une analyse sur cette question des BMDE et de la riposte russe. Rogozine, l&rsquo;ambassadeur de la Russie \u00e0 l&rsquo;OTAN, y d\u00e9veloppe son discours fort peu accommodant, mena\u00e7ant de vider de tout contenu la coop\u00e9ration entre la Russie et l&rsquo;OTAN. Divers officiels et experts ont \u00e9galement la parole, d\u00e9veloppant le pour et le contre, exposant la crise et ce qui fait qu&rsquo;il n&rsquo;y a pas vraiment une crise, que la situation est grave mais qu&rsquo;elle n&rsquo;est pourtant pas si grave que cela Tout cela marquant finalement beaucoup plus la confusion consid\u00e9rable de la querelle que sa gravit\u00e9, ce qui est une \u00e9volution courante par les temps qui courent, le contenu et l&rsquo;activit\u00e9 des situations de crise voyant la tension des menaces remplac\u00e9e par le d\u00e9sordre de la confusion.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab<em>The <\/em>[<em>Russian<\/em>] <em>official noted that that despite disagreements, the two countries are not enemies. He observed that there have been differences in approaches when it comes to security issues even between closest allies.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>America says it is concerned with protecting its own homeland, yet it is deploying missiles along the Russian border. According to political analyst Igor Khokhlov, this policy of surrounding Russia and the former Soviet Union with missile bases actually dates back to the 50s and 60s. He added the United States has pulled the rug out from under its European allies by surrounding the Russian territory with missile bases.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>Russia has adequate responses, especially with its new generation of missiles like Iskander, which can be put in Europe and will endanger the European allies of the US. The European allies of the US, who joined this program, are putting their own populations at risk because before these events there was no danger from Russia, and now Russia has a response to America putting its missile bases around its territory, he said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>Glyn Ford, a former Member of the European Parliament, told RT Europe has an obligation to moderate any US plans that fail to take account of Russia&rsquo;s genuine security concerns over the ABM project<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>Despite the fact that the US calls for an anti-missile defense system, Moscow&rsquo;s concern is that Russia will be totally encircled and that it has the potential be used as an offensive system. According to political analyst Aleksandar Pavic, verification is very hard in these things. They can very easily and quickly be turned into offensive systems. We have to remember in 2002 US president George Bush unilaterally withdrew from the anti-ballistic missile treaty. This was the treaty that kept clear stability, not just in Europe but throughout the world for more than 30 years. Such threats actually increase the chances of a nuclear war or even accidental nuclear war. And the further way we get from that doctrine, which assured the peace, the more dangerous the whole international environment is becoming, he stressed. <\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>Alice Slater from the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation told RT it is unlikely the situation will lead to a new Cold War style arms race. I hope somebody will have some good sense because basically the US is a crumbling empire  it is in debt, it cannot fund its roads, it has wasted its national treasure on the military, and it is almost like it has to have a total shift into the 21st century. War is not the answer anymore and there are many problems America has to deal with. Hopefully this is a wake-up call, she said.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t Pendant ce temps, ou, plut\u00f4t, avant m\u00eame ce temps-l\u00e0, le site iranien <em>PressTV.com<\/em> s&rsquo;\u00e9tait empress\u00e9 de noter, le <a href=\"http:\/\/presstv.com\/detail\/211160.html\" class=\"gen\">20 novembre 2011<\/a>, que les possibles r\u00e9ductions budg\u00e9taires qui pourraient suivre un \u00e9chec de la super commission du Congr\u00e8s menaceraient, selon le secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense Panetta, le r\u00e9seau BMDE, du moins dans la forme o\u00f9 il est actuellement, c&rsquo;est-\u00e0-dire financ\u00e9 pour l&rsquo;essentiel par les USA. (Comme l&rsquo;on sait, l&rsquo;\u00e9chec de la super commission est, entretemps, av\u00e9r\u00e9, authentifi\u00e9, officialis\u00e9, etc.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab<em>A missile defense system for NATO? It&rsquo;s going to be hard to keep people committed if they think the US is picking up the tab for Europe, Associated Press quoted the former US ambassador to NATO, Kurt Volker as saying.<\/em> [] <em>While it is not known what military spending would be cut, an expensive program aimed primarily at defending Europe is unlikely to be spared.<\/em>\u00bb <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tAssez curieusement, il y a encore l&rsquo;un ou l&rsquo;autre pour se demander, \u00e0 propos du red\u00e9marrage des bonnes relations USA-Russie, un des axes politiques \u00e9l\u00e9gants du d\u00e9but du mandat Obama, si cette politique ne serait pas compromise par cette affaire de BMDE. Curieux, parce que, non seulement l&rsquo;affaire est cousue de fil de blanc depuis le d\u00e9but, mais parce qu&rsquo;elle est aujourd&rsquo;hui compl\u00e8tement pulv\u00e9ris\u00e9e par les conditions g\u00e9n\u00e9rales de la crise, \u00e9galement g\u00e9n\u00e9rale (la crise).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t Crise cousue de fil blanc, puisque le programme BMDE est en r\u00e9alit\u00e9 une entreprise du seul complexe militaro-industriel (CMI), qui n&rsquo;est appuy\u00e9e sur aucune coh\u00e9rence strat\u00e9gique d&rsquo;aucune sorte. Il s&rsquo;agit de d\u00e9velopper des syst\u00e8mes avanc\u00e9s pour entretenir le d\u00e9veloppement industriel et technologique du CMI, avec le soutien de la bureaucratie du Pentagone, avec notamment l&rsquo;argument de la menace de missiles quasiment balistiques et nucl\u00e9aires de l&rsquo;Iran contre l&rsquo;Europe et les USA. (Cette menace, construction int\u00e9grale des services de la communication des divers services du bloc BAO impliqu\u00e9s.) Ce fait m\u00eame de l&rsquo;activit\u00e9 du CMI pour des raisons de d\u00e9veloppement de ses activit\u00e9s de production explique les variations parfois surprenantes entre les \u00e9volutions technologiques et les diverses initiatives strat\u00e9giques d&rsquo;une part, et la recherche d&rsquo;accords avec Moscou, essentiellement de la part des USA (surtout dans la p\u00e9riode 2009-d\u00e9but 2010), pour tenter d&rsquo;arriver \u00e0 un \u00e9quilibre avec la Russie et am\u00e9liorer les relations USA-Russie. Depuis, il semble qu&rsquo;Obama ait pratiquement abandonn\u00e9 tout espoir de ce c\u00f4t\u00e9, devant la puissance de la pouss\u00e9e du CMI et l&rsquo;impuissance d\u00e9sormais av\u00e9r\u00e9e de sa propre politique \u00e9parpill\u00e9e dans une compl\u00e8te confusion dans la prolif\u00e9ration des crises diverses. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t Mais il existe d\u00e9sormais un \u00e9l\u00e9ment nouveau, qui est la <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article-moby_dick_alias_uss_titanic_sombre_22_11_2011.html\" class=\"gen\">panique<\/a> du Pentagone, avec la catastrophe budg\u00e9taire qui suit l&rsquo;\u00e9chec de la super commission et le d\u00e9sordre extraordinaire o\u00f9 va \u00eatre plong\u00e9e la programmation du m\u00eame Pentagone. La d\u00e9claration de Panetta n&rsquo;est, d&rsquo;une part, certainement pas \u00e0 prendre au pied de la lettre mais il est, d&rsquo;autre part, certainement assur\u00e9 qu&rsquo;il existe une menace contre le BMDE, effectivement parce que ce programme concerne des investissements qui ne concernent pas uniquement la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 des USA et qu&rsquo;il co\u00fbte tr\u00e8s cher (autour de $10 milliards par an). Il est \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s assur\u00e9 que Panetta va demander aux Europ\u00e9ens de participer substantiellement plus qu&rsquo;ils ne le font au financement du syst\u00e8me BMDE, l&rsquo;alternative \u00e9tant sa compl\u00e8te restructuration vers une r\u00e9duction notable et un repli sur la dimension continentale US, voire une possibilit\u00e9 d&rsquo;abandon qui serait un gel en l&rsquo;\u00e9tat et une r\u00e9duction aux croiseurs anti-missiles AEGIS d&rsquo;ores et d\u00e9j\u00e0 en service. De ce point de vue des d\u00e9penses militaires suppl\u00e9mentaires, surtout pour un tel projet dont tout le monde comprend bien l&rsquo;aspect alimentaire au profit du CMI, on conna\u00eet la situation des Europ\u00e9ens<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tAinsi a-t-on cette impression d&rsquo;un d\u00e9calage tout \u00e0 fait remarquable entre la position des Russes, qui est bien entendu compl\u00e8tement compr\u00e9hensible parce qu&rsquo;ils ne peuvent ni ne veulent prendre aucun risque strat\u00e9gique, et la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 de la situation US quant \u00e0 la capacit\u00e9 de continuer \u00e0 produire de ces grands syst\u00e8mes d&rsquo;arme dont fait partie le BMDE. C&rsquo;est d\u00e9sormais une situation classique, qu&rsquo;on ne cessera plus de rencontrer de plus en plus, qui rend extr\u00eamement d\u00e9licat de pouvoir faire des analyses de prospectives sur les possibilit\u00e9s strat\u00e9giques et technologiques. Le d\u00e9sordre ne cesse de gagner, il bouleverse tout, il rend les situations politiques et strat\u00e9giques, sinon incompr\u00e9hensibles, du moins totalement illisibles. Le BMDE n&rsquo;\u00e9chappe pas \u00e0 la r\u00e8gle et il en sera m\u00eame un des premiers affect\u00e9s.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tMis en ligne le 25 novembre 2011 \u00e0 05H42<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>La crise du BMDE rebondit, \u00e0 condition que le BMDE existe encore Apr\u00e8s diverses vicissitudes ces deux derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es entre l&rsquo;OTAN, les USA et la Russie \u00e0 propos du syst\u00e8me anti-missiles, que nous avions baptis\u00e9 en son temps BMDE (Ballistic Missile Defense Europe), qui a du changer d&rsquo;acronyme entretemps, mais que nous importe dans ce&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":[2],"tags":[3453,4314,8104,3806,2773,6582,2858,6197,7421],"class_list":["post-74274","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-anti-missiles","tag-bmde","tag-budgetaires","tag-cmi","tag-iran","tag-iskander","tag-medvedev","tag-panetta","tag-reductions"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74274","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=74274"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74274\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74274"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74274"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=74274"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}