L’Iran sans préjugés : un modèle ?

L’Iran sans préjugés : un modèle ?

Au début février, à Téhéran, a eu lieu un séminaire sur l’hollywoodisme et le cinéma. Parmi les invités se trouvait l’ancien sénateur de l’Alaska (dans les années 1970) Mike Gravel, âgé de 83 ans mais toujours alerte. Gravel, démocrate de tendance libertaire, fut un original au Sénat des Etats-Unis, et son portrait vaut d’être lu. (D’origine québécoise et française, sa langue naturelle est le français. Il s’engagea trois ans dans le contre-espionnage militaire et “travailla” notamment à Orléans, en 1954, où, grâce à ses origines et à ses mœurs françaises, il parvint à infiltrer le PCF comme adhérent du Parti. Sénateur à partir de 1969, c’est lui qui, dans la commission sénatoriale qu’il présidait, appliqua la règle fameuse du filibuster pour commencer à lire pendant plusieurs heures les fameux Pentagon’s Papers “fuités” en 1971 par Daniel Ellsberg ; il épuisa ses collègues qui le laissèrent bientôt seul et il put ainsi décider “par consentement unanime” de la Commission l’insertion des 4.100 pages du document dans le Congressional Record.)

A son retour d’Iran, Gravel a donné une interview à Foreign Policy. Nous en donnons ici des extraits importants, qui éclatent d’originalité et d’esprit indépendant. Gravel y parle de nombreux aspects et nous avons choisi essentiellement les questions où il parle de la vie en Iran, la situation quotidienne en Iran, les effets des sanctions, l’évolution du pays à cause de ces sanctions et la forme même du gouvernement. Le plus grand motif d’admiration ironique de Gravel est que ces sanctions ont conduit l’Iran à développer de plus en plus d’activités industrielles, technologiques et infrastructurelles propres. Cela permet à ce pays de se rapprocher d’une telle autonomie qu’on pourrait presque parler d’un pays auto-suffisant, capable de vivre en autarcie tout en entretenant des relations extérieures sélectionnées avec les pays qui sont proches de lui. Sur la structure même du pays, Gravel considère l’Iran comme un “modèle” : «I look for models. Like Switzerland for direct democracy. They have an interesting model. They have married a theocracy and a political system, and it appears to work. Now, all I can say is that's nothing to cause fear. What we should do is encourage models like this to see how they operate and see what contributions they can make to human governments...»

L’interview est publiée dans Foreign Policy. le 22 février 2013. (Cette intervention a été reprise en résumé par PressTV.com, le 24 février 2013.) Voici les extraits choisis.

Foreign Policy: «What were your general impressions of Iran?»

Mike Gravel: «I can't tell you how warm the people were. How giving, considerate. And, the thing that was very surprising to me. If you follow American media, you think they're on the ropes. I gotta tell you, there's no question the sanctions are a discomfiture, but in the long run it is the best thing that's ever happened to Iran. It's made them totally independent, and forcing them to internalize their economic activity, to build machines. We rode for about 10 miles right through the heart of Iran where they're building an elevated highway. Boy, I'll tell you, that was an impressive work area. So the city is just like a normal thriving city. It has prosperity. You could tell by the traffic jams. The architecture's extremely attractive and imposing, and so what's happened to the country is it's being forced into independence. But that's exactly what a developing country does. You force domestic wares to be produced and then you turn around and you can export your product very competitively because your money is depressed, and so that's what's going on in Iran. And I don't think the United States has any inkling that what it's doing is counterproductive to arriving at a solution in that part of the world.»

Foreign Policy: «Were you able to talk to any opponents of the regime?»

Mike Gravel: «Nope. I know Trita Parsi here in the States but no, I didn't get any feel for any opposition. You know, we were staying at the hotel and then we would just go out to forays. My wife was with me and so she likes to see things. I would just rest in the hotel. You know, I'm 83 at this point, I don't need a whole lot of gallivanting around.»

»But, we were talking about meeting people from about 35 people from all over the world, motion picture people, writers, activists, and some were off the charts.»

Foreign Policy: «What do you mean "off the charts"?»

Mike Gravel: «Oh, their attitude toward Zionism. But that wasn't so much. They don't talk about the Jewish lobby, they talk about the Zionist lobby, in their terminology, which is interesting. I doubt there's any change that they'll be able to bring forth. But what they will bring forth is an independent, powerful nation able to defend itself, and will certainly be a leader of the non-aligned, and that's not always in the United States' best interests. And I resent a lot of our imperial attitude that we have to, we're the self-appointed policemen of the world. We police when it's our interests and if not, we don't police very well.»

Foreign Policy: «Did it seem like the officials you met with were open to opposing views? Were they tolerant of dissent?»

Mike Gravel: «Oh yeah. Yeah. They're very open. Because they know, from their public pinion, that they're operating in the blind. And, oh, there's one other thing I came away with that fascinates me. I, the last 25 or 30 years, I've focused my attention on structure of government, you know, how human beings in society attempt to govern themselves. I look for models. Like Switzerland for direct democracy. They have an interesting model. They have married a theocracy and a political system, and it appears to work. Now, all I can say is that's nothing to cause fear. What we should do is encourage models like this to see how they operate and see what contributions they can make to human governments.»

Foreign Policy: «So you think we can learn from the Iranian political model?»

Mike Gravel: «Oh yes I think we can. Not so much for ourselves. We say we've got separation of church and state. Well I've gotta tell you Joshua, when you pay your taxes, you are supporting all the churches in the United States. That's the nature of the beast. Since Islam is such a devotional kind of religion – I mean I was in a couple of meetings where I had to sit there and meditate while they were praying – this has something to tell us. They have a successful country, and make no mistake about it, they are a very successful country and are suffering as a result of our injustice.»

Les autres questions portent sur des thèmes intéressants, sur le cinéma US (hollywoodisme) vis-à-vis de l’Iran, avec une vision assez nuancée de Mike Gravel. Bien sûr, il y fut aussi question des possibilités de guerre… («First off, I think it'll happen by accident. I equate what's going on today as to what was going on in February and March of 1914. Everybody's psyched up to the hilt, armed to the hilt. All you need is an accident, all you need is an accident to just blow the whole thing wide open. And that's my fear.»)

dedefensa.org