Le déchirement britannique, — as usual , et encore plus qu’as usual, — jusqu’à leur Cronstadt…

Comme d’habitude, les Britanniques essuient les plâtres de leur alignement inconditionnel sur GW Bush et l’Amérique, Blair-style. Le site WSWS.org relève ce jour les gémissements et autres plaintes de la presse britannique : «The reaction of much of the media to the announcement was open despair. Though the decision had been trailed for weeks, this did not lessen its impact and the recognition of just how bad the situation now faced by Britain has become.»

Particulièrement marquant à cet égard, voici un article d’un des chroniqueurs du Times de Londres, Matthew Parris. Il décrit son doute absolument existentiel («Yes, America's my friend. Or is it? Suddenly I'm not sure») quant au bien-fondé de sa ferveur aveugle très britannique, très conforme à l’establishment, pour les relations spéciales avec le Royaume-Uni.

Voici donc que commence l’angoissant cas de conscience du chroniqueur, soudain interpellé par ce phénomène inconnu jusqu’alors : le libre jugement…

«… the moment the unconscious mind blurts it out. Typically this is associated either with a thought too awkward to acknowledge, or with a new opinion to which we are unconsciously moving but not quite ready to declare — even to ourselves.

»Such moments are precious. I believe I experienced one yesterday. A familiar remark had caught my eye. Hard upon it came an unfamiliar reaction. The familiar remark was between quotes on the front page of The Times: “If we’re going to follow the US or the EU, I’d take clumsy America any time.” The sentence came from an article within, by my fellow columnist, Gerard Baker.

»The unfamiliar reaction was mine. It was unfamiliar because it was negative. “Take America any time? No, I’m not sure I would. Not any more.”»

Et voilà le doute terrible infiltré dans l’allégeance qu’on croyait à jamais fixée. Et le doute terrible débouchant sur la terrible révision du jugement. Non moins terrible dilemme du chroniqueur. Matthew Parris le mène à son terme, à la lumière tragique des derniers échos washingtoniens, conclus par le discours de fer de Notre-Président. Enfin, l’esprit bascule.

Car tout se termine en apothéose, avec l’analogie entre l’URSS de Staline et les USA de GW. L’on a compris que le croyant est sur le point d’abjurer sa religion. Respectons sa peine et sa détresse.

«Will I see it as a natural ally? Will I feel sure, as I always have, that America is a force for good in the world? British socialists — the oldest among them, at any rate — may remember British socialism’s long affair with an emerging world power: the Soviet Union. They will recall their early confidence and trust; all of them will remember trying valiantly to find positive interpretations of each new item of news, domestic or international, about the USSR; and some will remember visiting Russia and being able to believe all was well.

»Painfully, they will be able to remember, too, their own personal Kronstadt moment. The Kronstadt uprising, put down with extraordinary brutality, opened the eyes of many on this side of the Iron Curtain.

»“What was your Kronstadt?” became a code phrase to find the point at which a European socialist or communist tipped from being a Soviet sympathiser.

»I am not comparing Guantanamo with Gulag, or America with the Soviet Union — it’s nothing like as bad as that. But if Washington does get us into a war with Iran, that will be my Kronstadt moment.»

Mis en ligne le 13 janvier 2007 à 12H04