Le B-52 on the road, de Minot à Barksdale, avec six cruise missiles à têtes nucléaires…

Jamais, depuis 1968, dans tous les cas d’après ce qu’il en ait connu, un avion chargé d’armes nucléaires n’avait survolé le territoire des Etats-Unis, jusqu’au 30 août dernier. Il s’agit de l’incident, qui vient d’être révélé, d’un B-52, effectuant le 30 août un vol de la base de Minot à celle de Barksdale avec six ACM (Advanced Cruise Missiles) attachés à des pylones extérieurs, chacun avec une tête nucléaires de 150 kilotonnes (la BA d’Hiroshima faisait 15 kilotonnes). De Minot AFB (Dakota du Nord) à Barksdale AFB (Virginie), il y a une distance de plus de 3.000 kilomètres, supposant un vol de plusieurs heures. L’incident a fait l’objet d’une communication embarrassée du chef d’état-major de l’USAF, dont dépend le B-52, au secrétaire à la défense Gates. En principe, les vols d’armes nucléaires au-dessus du territoire US n’ont plus lieu depuis 1968 et, même, depuis 1991, la pratique de conserver des bombardiers en alerte, armés d'armes nucléaires et prêts à décoller sur les pistes des bases militaires, a été abandonnée.

Il s’agit d’une circonstance extraordinaire, une “erreur” qui soulève des questions particulièrement délicates. Les commentateurs de la presse non-MSM ont rapidement évolué vers deux hypothèses : l’erreur réelle ou l’“erreur” délibérée. A propos du premier cas, WSWS.org note aujourd’hui:

«In response to the episode, the Pentagon has announced that a munitions squadron commander at Minot has been relieved of his duties and several airmen have been decertified for handling nuclear weapons. It also reported that an investigation is continuing.

(…)

»Someone had to give the order to mount the missiles on the plane. The question is whether it was a local Air Force commander—either by mistake or deliberately—or whether the order came from higher up.

»The first scenario recalls nothing so much as the 1964 black comedy produced by filmmaker Stanley Kubrick, Dr. Strangelove. The film’s plot centered on the unilateral order given by a delusional air force commander, Gen. Jack D. Ripper, for an air wing to carry out an unprovoked nuclear first strike against the Soviet Union. The US president is shocked to find out that supposed failsafe systems barring any such strike without his direct order have been overridden.

»Given the Pentagon’s claim that the incident represented a “mistake,” the Minot-Barksdale flight indicates that the present failsafe systems—either deliberately or inadvertently—do not prevent a single commander from deploying nuclear weapons.

»Experts on nuclear weapons have described the episode as shocking and inexplicable. “It seems so fantastic that so many points, checks can dysfunction,” said Hans Kristensen, the Federation of American Scientists chief researcher on US nuclear forces. “That’s perhaps what is most worrisome about this particular incident—that apparently an individual who had command authority about moving these weapons around decided to do so.”

»Representative Edward Markey, a ranking Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, issued a statement declaring it “absolutely inexcusable that the Air Force lost track of these ... warheads, even for a short period of time.”

»Markey added, “Nothing like this has ever been reported before and we have been assured for decades that it was impossible.”

»The implication is that the threat of a nuclear holocaust is even greater today than at the height of the Cold War against the Soviet Union.

(…)

»There is another tactical consideration that makes the supposed mix-up at Minot Air Base even more chilling. The Air Force, as well as the Navy, is increasingly making dual use of its cruise missiles, changing nuclear warheads for conventional ones. Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missiles have been used extensively in recent US military interventions. If such a “mistake” is possible in a flight between two US air bases, presumably it is equally possible in a wartime situation, with the potential of a B-52 launching a nuclear strike against a target that was meant to be hit with a conventional weapon.

La deuxième hypothèse caractérisant la version de l’“erreur” est que cela n’en soit pas une… «The second possibility—that the flight was authorized at a higher level—poses an even more immediate threat.

»B-52s from Barksdale have been used repeatedly to strike targets in Iraq, firing cruise missiles at Iraqi targets in 1996 and 1998, and in the “shock and awe” campaign that preceded the 2003 invasion, carrying out some 150 bombing runs that devastated much of the southern half of the country.

»Moreover, the weapon that was fixed to the wings of the B-52 flying from Minot air base was designed for use against hardened targets, such as underground bunkers.

»Given the ratcheting up of the threats against Iran and the previous reports of plans for the use of “tactical” nuclear weapons against Iranian nuclear installations, there is a very real possibility that the flight to Barksdale was part of covert preparations for a nuclear strike against Iran.»

Dans le cadre de cette hypothèse, il faut signaler une note brève mais intéressante de Larry Johnson, du Booman Tribune, telle qu’elle nous est relayée par Information Clearing House du 6 sptembre. Elle reprend la deuxième hypothèse d’un vol volontaire, la renforce de certaines précisions et débouche sur une autre hypothèse concernant la “fuite” qui a permis de connaître l’incident.

«So I called a old friend and retired B-52 pilot and asked him. What he told me offers one compelling case of circumstantial evidence. My buddy, let’s call him Jack D. Ripper, reminded me that the only times you put weapons on a plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the weapons to a specific site.

»Then he told me something I had not heard before.

»Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations. Gee, why would we want cruise missile nukes at Barksdale Air Force Base. Can’t imagine we would need to use them in Iraq. Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations?

»His final point was to observe that someone on the inside obviously leaked the info that the planes were carrying nukes. A B-52 landing at Barksdale is a non-event. A B-52 landing with nukes. That is something else.»

Larry Johnson parle donc de «someone at Barksdale [who] try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran…». Hypothèse intéressante, qu’on doit placer dans un cadre général où la légitimité du pouvoir est aujourd’hui devenu un facteur bien incertain aux USA; dans ce cadre, effectivement, on peut fort bien envisager des initiatives individuelles pour dénoncer certaines manœuvres, voire certaines opérations secrètes pouvant mener à un conflit provoqué avec l’emploi du nucléaire.

Quant au reste de l’hypothèse, avec l’USAF agissant de sa propre initiative (sans contrôle du secrétaire à la défense) ou/et en connexion avec certains éléments de l’administration, on peut la rapprocher avec profit de tout ce qu’on sait des positions particulières qu’on connaît des différentes armes. On peut la rapprocher notamment de ce qui serait une position “en pointe ” de l’USAF, pour diverses raisons, aussi bien idéologiques que techniques. Dans l’univers aujourd’hui fantasmagorique de Washington, cette sorte de supputation n’est absolument pas déplacée, dès lors qu’effectivement un B-52 avec six ACM équipés de nucléaires a volé de Minot à Barksdale le 30 août.

Mis en ligne le 7 septembre 2007 à 15H03