L’Irak pour cacher l’Iran ?

La situation actuelle, dans sa confusion, dans l’incertitude des buts et des moyens, a ceci de séduisant qu’elle permet bien des interprétations. En voici une, de Paul Craig Roberts, aujourd’hui sur Antiwar.com : le renforcement (“surge”) en Irak comme écran de fumée pour dissimuler l’attaque qui se prépare contre l’Iran, et pour détourner l’attention du Congrès à cet égard.

Paul Craig Roberts fait d’abord le décompte des signes de préparatifs d’une attaque éventuelle, tout en observant au contraire que le renforcement en Irak n’a aucun sens militaire et peut donc être interprété comme une manœuvre de dissimulation.

Mais l’essentiel de la thèse de Roberts repose sur le rôle et l’influence d’Israël. Pour lui, c’est Israël qui veut cette attaque et c’est Israël qui manipule l’administration GW Bush dans ce but, par ses réseaux divers à Washington, que ce soit le “lobby” sioniste ou les néo-conservateurs.

… Et maintenant, maintenant ou jamais, existe pour Israël l’opportunité d’attaquer.

«Weapons inspectors have failed to find a nuclear weapons program in Iran. Most experts say it would be years before Iran could make a weapon even if the Iranian government is actively working on a weapons program. Since the danger, if any, is years away, why is Israel so determined to attack Iran now?

»The answer might be that Israel has the chance now. The Bush administration is in its pocket. The White House is working with neoconservatives, not with the American foreign policy community represented by the Iraq Study Group. Neoconservative propagandists are in influential positions in the media. The US Congress is intimidated by AIPAC. The correlation of forces are heavily in Israel’s favor.

»Part of the Israeli/neoconservative plan has already been achieved with the destruction of civilian infrastructure and spread of sectarian strife in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon. If Iran can be taken out with a powerful air attack that might involve nuclear weapons, Syria would be isolated and Hezbollah would be cut off from Iranian supplies.

»Israel has two years remaining to use its American resources to achieve its aims in the Middle East. How influential will Israel and the neoconservatives be with the next president in the wake of a US defeat in Iraq and Israeli defeat in Lebanon? If the US withdraws its troops from Iraq, as the US military and foreign policy community recommend and as polls show the American public wants, the only effect of Bush’s Iraq invasion will have been to radicalize Muslims against Israel, the US, and US puppet governments in the Middle East. Extremist elements will tout their victory over the US, and the pressures on Israel to accept a realistic accommodation with Palestinians will be overpowering.

»Now is the chance – the only chance – for Israel and the neoconservatives to achieve their goal of bringing Muslims to heel, a goal that they have been writing about and working to achieve for a decade.»

Mis en ligne le 10 janvier 2007 à 08H59