UK-USA et l’“oil spill” : on devient nerveux

UK-USA et l’“oil spill” : on devient nerveux

Malgré un coup de téléphone plein d’amicales banalités entre Cameron et BHO samedi dernier, les “special relationships”, désormais en première ligne dans la catastrophe du Golfe du Mexique (voir notre F&Cdu 12 juin 2010), continuent à se détériorer. Positions officielles et petits signes qui ne trompent pas…

• Mercredi, le Premier ministre Cameron a fait son intervention la plus ferme en faveur de BP, contre le rôle de bouc émissaire (assorti de paiements considérables) qu’Obama fait jouer au consortium nominalement britannique, et précisément important pour le Royaume-Uni à cause de son rôle dans le financement des pensions. Le Daily Telegraph du 16 juin 2010 rapporte cette intervention.

«The Prime Minister called for the company to be protected from excessive compensation claims as President Barack Obama made it agree to potentially unlimited damages.

»BP provisionally agreed the biggest compensation payment in corporate history, setting up a fund worth at least £13.5 billion to cover the damage caused by its leaking oil pipe in the Gulf of Mexico.

But the US president last night made it clear that BP's payments could be just the start, warning that the company could still face lawsuits from individuals and American states.

»On Wednesday, in his strongest show of support since the oil began leaking two months ago, Mr Cameron said the company should not be exposed to a string of future damages claims. “BP is an important company,” he said. “It is an important company for people's pensions, it employs thousands of people in the UK, it pays a lot of tax.

»“It's important to try to give some level of clarity and certainty so that the company can actually continue and be financially stable,“ he said. “They do need a level of certainty, and this is BP's worry, that there won't be claims entertained that are three or four times removed from the oil spill. This shouldn't be about going after BP for the sake of it.”

• La “gaffe” du président de BP, le Suédois Carl-Henric Svanberg (ancien patron d’Ericsson transféré à la tête de BP, selon une procédure très globalisante), mercredi à Washington, a fait des dégâts. Le système américaniste est sensible à l’apparence de la déférence qu’il importe de marquer à l’égard du bon peuple, qui joue un rôle important dans le financement des diverses folies du susdit système. Il importe de le couvrir d’éloges en permanence et parler des “petites gens” (“small people”), comme l’a fait Svanberg à propos des habitants de Louisiane, n’a pas fait remonter la côte de BP. Les dirigeants de la sociétés, désormais jugés “arrogants”, “insensibles” et éventuellement représentants des castes aristocratiques et réactionnaires britanniques (avec un ajout suédois), devraient la sentir passer aujourd’hui au Congrès, où l’inquisition anti-BP se poursuit. (Selon le Guardian du 17 juin 2010.)

«The chief executive and chairman of BP will face hostile questioning from Congress today after the oil company's efforts to co-operate with White House demands were marred by another public relations gaffe as the company's chairman referred to Gulf coast residents as “small people”.

»BP bosses agreed in full to the US government's demands after a four-hour meeting with Barack Obama, and agreed to suspend dividend payouts to shareholders until next year and to set up a $20bn fund over three years to meet clean-up costs and compensation claims following its catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

»But as he left the White House, BP's chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg provoked fresh irritation among the oil company's critics with a poorly worded apology to the American people. He pledged to repair the damage caused by the spill and to look after all the shrimpers, fishermen, tourist workers and property owners affected. “We care about the small people,” said Svanberg, a native Swedish speaker who was formerly the head of the telecoms company Ericsson. “I hear comments sometimes that large oil companies are greedy companies or don't care but that's not the case with BP. We care about the small people.”

»Svanberg's comment prompted criticism in the blogosphere and among locals in the region hit by the spill. Douglas Brinkley, a Gulf coast historian at Rice University, said it was another example of BP's insensitivity. “It's snotty and deeply condescending and it shows the kind of corporate arrogance that BP has been exuding ever since the Deepwater Horizon accident,” Brinkley said.»

• En sens contraire, les Britanniques sont plutôt furieux et frustrés (des parlementaires UK commencent à le dire tout haut), et notamment dans ce cas, de voir une partie des $5 millions alloués par BP à La Nouvelle Orléans passer en publicité pour promouvoir le tourisme, dont une diffuse un message nettement anti-anglais et remontant à la guerre USA-UK de 1814… (Toujours le Guardian du 17 juin 2010.)

«The B in BP may no longer mean British, but tell that to New Orleans. The city is using a $5m cheque from the company to launch what might be seen as only a slightly tongue-in-cheek anti-British campaign, aimed at luring tourists who might be discouraged by the approaching oil spill.

»New Orleans is using BP's money to launch a series of television and newspaper advertisements across the US on Friday, including one that declares: “This isn't the first time New Orleans has survived the British.” The slogan is set against a statue of General Andrew Jackson, who repelled a British assault on New Orleans back in 1814.

»But it says in the small print that “right now everyone is welcome, especially our friends from England”. (In the US, the terms British and English are often regarded as interchangeable even when it comes to the World Cup.)

»The advertising campaign is the brainchild of the New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau, which fears a sharp reduction in tourism and gatherings of other kinds, just as business was picking up after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in 2005.»

dedefensa.org