Gordon Brown et sa politique US — à ses risques et périls

Il faut suivre la chronique de Irwin Stelzer dans le Daily Telegraph, parce qu’elle est une bonne mesure de l’attitude des milieux idéologiques les plus influents de Washington. Stelzer est un homme de Heritage Foundation et un proche de Rupert Murdoch, c’est-à-dire qu'il reflète une connexion vers deux des milieux les plus importants de la droite idéologique US.

On a déjà vu combien l’appréciation de Stelzer pouvait constituer une indication sérieuse du point de vue idéologique US sur le rôle et la politique de Brown. Le commentaire de ce jour du même Stelzer indique que la religion des idéologues washingtoniens évolue de plus en plus vers la confirmation du soupçon et la mise sous surveillance intensive, dernière étape avant la mise sous séquestre pure et simple de tout crédit d'allié privilégié. Cette évolution du jugement est claire, marquée du titre de l’article du 10 juillet (« Brown's foreign policy is still a mystery») à celui de l’article du 25 juillet («Brown spurns the US at his peril»). On juge que Brown a adopté une voie qui compromet sans aucun doute le niveau presque paradisiaque de ces mêmes relations sous Tony Blair, et qui constitue un pas vers un “aventurisme” dangereux du même Brown, — à ses risques et périls.

L’analyse se termine par un avertissement-menace qui est presque l’esquisse d’une stratégie. Si l’évolution de Brown devait se confirmer, la politique US évoluerait naturellement vers une sorte de substitution en forme de suppression. Le centre londonien de relais entre Washington et l’Europe serait purement et simplement supprimé, et les USA s’adresseraient directement à Bruxelles. Londres serait alors enfermé dans la politique néo-européaniste dont est soupçonné Gordon Brown. Ainsi raisonnent les idéologues de Washington.

«And now Gordon Brown goes to Washington — but for a very quick visit since, he claims, he must hurry back to begin his family holiday. The implication is that it is likely the PM will be asked to share the Colgate with the President, but Brown will claim a more pressing engagement with his family. Believe both that such an invitation is likely, and that it would be declined if extended, and I have a bridge to sell you immediately after the next visit of the tooth fairy.

»Don't misunderstand: Brown is a fan of America — but of its domestic economy. He admires American entrepreneurship; he prays that some day his countrymen will adopt the “everything is possible” attitude of Americans; he is a fan of Bill Gates and Alan Greenspan. But he has been somewhere between non-communicative and evasive when it comes to foreign policy.

»I have little doubt that when he says to friends that he will stand with America in a crisis, his intentions are honourable. But I also have little doubt that he would think long and hard before over-riding his cabinet colleagues, who will insist that any military intervention occur only with the approval of the UN — which Russia, China or some other member of the Security Council would certainly veto.

»And remember: his new security supremo, Admiral Sir Alan West, former First Sea Lord and like Malloch Brown to sit on the Labour benches in the Lords, praised British sailors for not resisting capture by the Iranians, because to have done so would have triggered a war, one that might be in the offing should the President decide to take military action to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran from carrying out its promise to wipe Israel from the face of the earth.

»Any student of history knows that there have been hiccups in the special relationship. If you doubt that, cast your eye over Sir Robin Renwick's Fighting with Allies, or recall the tension between our countries when Harold Wilson refused President Johnson's request for British troops to support the Americans fighting in Vietnam.

»And John O'Sullivan might prove right when, writing in these pages, he argues that the special relationship will survive temporary suspensions because it is rooted in a common culture, and in mutual defence cooperation that “suit[s] both … countries very well”.

»Let's hope so. But the Prime Minister plans to placate the Europeans whose currency he spurned by signing on to the new constitution-disguised-as-treaty without so much as a by-your-leave from British voters.

»Surely, this courting of the EU suggests that in an EU-vs-US dispute, America might not be his favourite. In which case, the White House switchboard might put crisis calls from Number 10 on auto-diversion to the European army and the EU bureaucracy in Brussels.»

Mis en ligne le 25 juillet 2007 à 14H15