L’excellent commentateur Robert Parry a un long article sur son site ConsortiumNews<\/em>, ce 11 septembre 2015<\/a>, \u00e0 propos de l’affaire syrienne impliquant la Russie. Il aborde cette crise sous le m\u00eame angle que nous prenons ce m\u00eame 11 septembre 2015<\/a>, mais en acceptant l’hypoth\u00e8se que le \u00ab\u00a0blocus\u00a0\u00bb du r\u00e9gime Assad r\u00e9ussisse, – c’est-\u00e0-dire que les Russes soient effectivement emp\u00each\u00e9s de venir \u00e0 son aide, ou bien d\u00e9cide dans ce sens. Il \u00e9voque alors la situation qui r\u00e9sulterait d’une prise de pouvoir \u00e0 Damas par tel ou tel mouvement djihadiste, Daesh<\/em> ou tel autre, c’est-\u00e0-dire un paysage de catastrophe absolue qui plongerait tout le Moyen-Orient dans le d\u00e9sordre le plus complet, avec effets et cons\u00e9quences partout…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Parry termine sur l’\u00e9nigme qui enveloppe pour l’instant cette crise, qui se r\u00e9sume \u00e0 ceci: \u00ab\u00a0Mais où est donc et que fait donc le pr\u00e9sident Obama?\u00a0\u00bb. Il indique qu’une de ses sources lui a indiqu\u00e9 qu’Obama ne bougerait pas tant que le vote du Congr\u00e8s permettant l’accord nucl\u00e9aire avec l’Iran de tenir n’aura pas eu lieu, c’est-\u00e0-dire d’ici le 17 septembre 2015. Par ailleurs, signale cette m\u00eame source \u00e0 Parry, Obama aurait encourag\u00e9 Poutine et les Russes \u00e0 augmenter leur engagement en Syrie aujourd’hui d\u00e9nonc\u00e9 avec quelle violence par l’administration (?) Obama. On comprend que les Russes doivent vraiment se demander avec quelle type de d\u00e9sordre mental il n\u00e9gocie actuellement… On donne ici la conclusion du texte.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n «Now, with Official Washington lining up behind a blockade of Russian assistance to the Syrian government – even if that would mean an Islamic State\/Al Qaeda victory – the great unknown is where President Obama stands. A source familiar with the back channels between the White House and the Kremlin told me that Obama had encouraged Putin to step up Russian aid to the embattled Syrian government as part of the fight against the Islamic State and that the Russians are now bewildered as to why Obama’s State Department is trying to sabotage those efforts.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n »As odd as that might sound, it would not be the first time that Obama has favored a less confrontational approach to a foreign crisis behind the scenes only to have neocon\/liberal-hawk operatives inside his own administration charge off in the opposite direction. For instance, in 2009, Obama bowed to demands for what turned out to be a useless \u00ab\u00a0surge\u00a0\u00bb in Afghanistan, and in 2014, he allowed neocon Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland to start a new Cold War with Russia by helping to orchestrate a \u00ab\u00a0regime change\u00a0\u00bb in Ukraine. <\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n »As Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Nuland would presumably be at the center of the recent arm-twisting in Bulgaria and Greece to get those countries to block Russian flights to Syria, which has been a longtime neocon target for \u00ab\u00a0regime change,\u00a0\u00bb a goal that the neocons now see as within their grasp. Typically, when his underlings undercut him, Obama then falls in line behind them but often in a foot-dragging kind of way. Then, on occasion, he’ll break ranks and make a foray into genuine diplomacy, such as Syria’s 2013 agreement to surrender its chemical-weapons arsenal or Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal – both of which were achieved with significant help from Putin. But Obama has proved to be an unreliable foreign-policy partner, bending to the hawkish pressure from many of his subordinates and even joining in their rhetorical insults.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n »Today, Obama may feel that he has gone as far as he dares with the Iran nuclear deal and that any foreign policy cooperation with Iran or Russia before Congress decides on the agreement’s fate by Sept. 17 could cause defections among key Democrats. Once the deadline for congressional review passes, Obama could get serious about collaborating with Iran and Russia to stabilize the situation in Syria. By strengthening the Syrian government’s military – which has protected Christians, Alawites, Shiites and other minorities – and incorporating reasonable Sunnis into a power-sharing arrangement, there would a chance to stabilize Syria and push for elections and constitutional reforms. But that would require dropping the slogan, \u00ab\u00a0Assad must go!\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n »So, while President Obama is saying little about his Syrian plans, his State Department has moved off on its own aggressive course hoping to finally achieve the neocon\/liberal-hawk dream of \u00ab\u00a0regime change\u00a0\u00bb in Syria – regardless of what nightmares might follow<\/em>.»<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Mis en ligne le 11 septembre 2015 \u00e0 11H42<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" La Syrie selon Robert Parry L’excellent commentateur Robert Parry a un long article sur son site ConsortiumNews, ce 11 septembre 2015, \u00e0 propos de l’affaire syrienne impliquant la Russie. Il aborde cette crise sous le m\u00eame angle que nous prenons ce m\u00eame 11 septembre 2015, mais en acceptant l’hypoth\u00e8se que le \u00ab\u00a0blocus\u00a0\u00bb du r\u00e9gime Assad… <\/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":[12206,1104,6208,4464,2730,3867],"class_list":["post-76102","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-breves-de-crise","tag-damas","tag-neocons","tag-obama","tag-parry","tag-russie","tag-syrie"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76102","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=76102"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76102\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=76102"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=76102"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=76102"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}