Murtha et sa différence

Le député démocrate John Murtha marque une fois de plus sa différence, non seulement de l’administration GW Bush mais du courant politique général. Murtha s’est déjà signalé par ses pressions en faveur d’un retrait US de l’Irak. Sa voix a d’autant plus d’importance qu’il est un vieux parlementaire, ancien Marine, très proche des militaires du Pentagone. Souvent, ses prises de position sont considérées comme le relais de positions que la hiérarchie du Pentagone ne peut exprimer publiquement.

Cette fois, Murtha se prononce pour un cessez-le-feu immédiat dans la crise israélo-libanaise. Il le fait dans une interview qu’il donne au Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Murtha est député de la Pennsylvanie, dont la capitale est Pittsburgh).

Extraits :

« Pennsylvania's Rep. John Murtha said yesterday that he favored an immediate cease-fire in the fighting in Lebanon. His stand places the veteran Johnstown Democrat at odds with the Israeli government, and — on yet anther major Middle Eastern policy issue — at odds with the Bush administration as well.

(…)

» Mr. Murtha, speaking yesterday at a Post-Gazette editorial board meeting, was asked if he favored a cease-fire in the campaign north of Israel's border. “I think so,” he said. “I think it would be very difficult to justify continuing on.”

» Referring to the Bush administration's position, he said: “You know, they say, ‘Well, we want a long-term cease-fire.’ It seems to me you start with a cease-fire, and then you try to work out the details long term. If you don't, and you continue to have heavy-handed military action — and I support heavy-handed military action because it saves your own troops — but it creates enemies, and that's the problem we have.”

» Mr. Murtha said the fighting risked hardening against Israel the ‘hearts and minds’ of Lebanese civilians within the general population, beyond Israel's entrenched enemies in the Shiite militia.

» Mr. Murtha offered the analogy of U.S. fighting to defeat insurgents in the Iraqi city of Falujah: That battle was a military success, he said, but the inevitable destruction it caused alienated hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, turning a tactical victory into a setback for the broader strategy of trying to bring peace to Iraq. »

Mis en ligne le 2 août 2006 à 16H24