Les neocons désertent

GW de plus en plus seul. La veille de son important discours du 6 octobre où il exaltait envers et contre tous la puissance de la démocratie en train de transformer l’Irak en un oasis de liberté et de stabilité, les néo-conservateurs tenaient colloque à l’American Enterprise Institute (AEI), leur think tank-fétiche, sur le thème douloureux de “The day after: planning for a post-Saddam Iraq”. Ce fut dévastateur.

Le site WSWS.org rend bien compte aujourd’hui de cet événement qui, s’il fut discret, n’en fut pas moins significatif. Les néo-conservateurs laissent éclater leur rancœur devant ce qu’ils jugent être leur “révolution trahie” (et leurs regards se portent surtout vers Donald Rumsfeld, qu’ils accusent de n’avoir pas voulu utiliser les moyens nécessaires pour vaincre l’insurrection en Irak). WSWS.org cite notamment un texte de Danielle Pletka : « The official voice of the AEI at the conference was that of Danielle Pletka, the institute’s vice president for foreign and defense policy studies. In the period leading up to the war, she acted as a semi-official advocate of launching the US “war of choice.” Pletka summed up her views—and presumably those of the AEI—in an article published on the institute’s web site two days after the conference.

» “Because of the ongoing violence, and an increasingly obvious desire to exit Iraq, Bush administration officials have urged Iraqis to move forward with their political process in the face of confusion and disarray,” she wrote. “The Iraqi constitution, arguably one of the most important documents for the future of the Middle East, was hustled along. Attempts by Iraqi drafters to slow deliberations and wrangle through problems were nixed by interfering US Embassy officials.” Describing the document as “flawed,” Pletka said that it left “unresolved vital questions of power-sharing.” Most Iraqis, she added, will vote without having a “clue how the new constitution differs from the old.”

» Her conclusion was an unsparing right-wing denunciation of the Bush administration’s policy as one of accommodation and retreat: “The lesson from Iraq is clear: the United States’ staying power is waning.” “The Bush revolution has indeed lost its energy,” she wrote. “Perhaps the president of the United States is tired...but if fatigue results in the dilution of the central tenets of what is now known as the Bush doctrine, then one must question why it was that Bush so desired reelection in 2004.” »

Mis en ligne le 11 octobre 2005 à 09H40