L’édito du NYT au scalpel

Le fameux édito du New York Times du 8 juillet, qui ressemble à un article-fleuve et reflète la panique des élites washingtoniennes, est découpé au scalpel et examiné au microscope par le site WSWS.org de ce jour. L’article du NYT s’attache à exhorter la direction US à évacuer les troupes US d’Irak. WSWS.org, lui, s’attache essentiellement à y distinguer le sentiment de panique et le profond désarroi de l’establishment US qui sourdent.

Panique et désarroi sont notamment marqués par des contradictions qui émaillent le texte, entre ce qui devrait être fait et ce qui pourrait être fait, entre des exigences qui impliquent la reconnaissance d’une défaite formidable de l’impérialisme militariste US et d’autres exigences qui impliquent malgré tout la réaffirmation de la puissance de ce même impérialisme. Ce n’est d’ailleurs pas le premier texte d’opinion du NYT qui montre un tel sens de l’urgence, jusqu’ici suivi d’aucun effet. Ainsi certaines contradictions prennent-elles une allure de symbole de l’impuissance où se trouve désormais le système de l’américanisme.

«There is, however, an even more fundamental contradiction. In its opening passages, the editorial announces that the Times has dropped its previous opposition to setting a withdrawal date because, “It is frighteningly clear that Mr. Bush’s plan is to stay the course as long as he is president and dump the mess on his successor.”

»Thus the premise for the policy shift outlined by the Times is the unwillingness and inability of Bush and Cheney to change course and avert a full-scale catastrophe. Yet the statement repeatedly appeals to the White House to do precisely that.

»It states, for example, “Congress and the White House must lead an international attempt at a negotiated outcome. To start, Washington must turn to the United Nations, which Mr. Bush spurned and ridiculed as a preface to war.”

»The New York Times, considered the most authoritative organ of the US ruling elite, outlines a crisis of historic proportions and describes a level of irresponsibility, incompetence and criminality in the White House that has no precedent. A serious response, from the standpoint of the interests of American imperialism, would begin with the demand that the current government resign, or that Congress initiate immediate impeachment proceedings against both Cheney and Bush. That would be the prerequisite for the “candid and focused” conversation on the war which the newspaper claims to desire.

»But the Times proposes nothing of the kind. In fact, it proposes no measures to hold any of those responsible for dragging the country into an “unnecessary” war accountable. This, above all, is what gives its entire pronouncement an aura of unreality.

»There are many reasons for this glaring silence. In the first place, the entire political establishment, including its liberal wing, is implicated in the Iraq disaster. The Times itself supported the invasion, with whatever tactical quibbles, and played a critical role in promulgating the lies about weapons of mass destruction that were used to justify the invasion. To this day, it has concealed from the American people the scale of the death and destruction the US was wreaked on the Iraqi people.

»Beyond that, there is the organic cowardice of the liberal, Democratic Party establishment, and its fear of the political consequences within the US of an attempt to dislodge the current administration. These sections of the ruling elite sense that an open attack on Bush and Cheney could unleash pent-up social anger and popular forces that could spiral out of the control of the entire political establishment.

»An international disaster for US imperialism of such magnitude as that which the Times describes cannot but have the most far-reaching economic and political consequences within the US itself. This side of the matter is not even broached by the newspaper.

»But the US debacle in Iraq will have profound ramifications for which American working people must prepare…»

Mis en ligne le 9 juillet 2007 à 18H10