Forum

Par un journaliste du BBC, dans le journal le plus populaire du UK
America may have given the world the space shuttle and, er, condensed milk, but behind the veneer of civilization most Americans barely have the brains to walk on their back legs….
Unfortunately, on the street you’ve got some poor, starving souls helping themselves to a packet of food from a ruined, deserted supermarket. And as a result, finding themselves being blown to pieces by a helicopter gunship. With the none-too-bright soldiers urged on by their illiterate political masters, the poor and needy never stood a chance. It’s easier and much more fun to shoot someone than make them a cup of tea. Especially if they’re black.
http://www2.nationalreview.com/images/paperforgreg.jpg

New Orleans crisis shames Americans
By Matt Wells
BBC News, Los Angeles
At the end of an unforgettable week, one broadcaster on Friday bitterly
encapsulated the sense of burning shame and anger that many American
citizens are feeling…The uneasy paradox which so many live with in this country - of being
first-and-foremost rugged individuals, out to plunder what they can and
paying as little tax as they can get away with, while at the same time
believing that America is a robust, model society - has reached a crisis
point this week.

J’ai découvert votre site récemment, je le trouve tout a fait passionnant dans la perspective qu’il donne de la geopolitique actuelle. J’aprécie généralement vos analyses auquelles j’adhère en grande partie.
Néammoins je vous trouve exagérement sévère envers Cohn-Bendit__ Le mettre au niveau d’un Glucksman!!!__
Je suis d’accord pour reconnaitre qu’il s’est fourvoyé sur le probleme du Kosovo, mais tout le monde n’a t’il pas droit a l’erreur?
Depuis, il s’est prononcé clairement contre la monstruosité de la guerre Bushiste en Irak. il me semble donc qu’il ne mérite pas d’etre descendu plus bas que terre au niveau de l’abominable Glucksman.
Vraiment, Je ne considère pas DCB comme un “americaniste”, mais évidemment moi aussi, je peux me tromper!
Malgré ce point de désaccord, bravo pour votre travail, continuez!

Privatisation du décompte des morts

La FEMA a chargé la société Kenyon International du Body Count des victimes de l’ ouragan Katrina.
Pour la louisiane les frais s’élèvent à 119000 dollars par jour, sommes verée à Kenyon International
Kenyon International est une société subsidiaire de Service Corporation International (SCI). 
Mr. Waltrip, directeur de SCI est un vieil ami de Bush senior, surement un hazard, et est mèlée à des scandales.
Pour faire de la place dans les cimetières des centaines de tombes ont été violées, les corps enlevés et en Floride jetés dans une forêt. Pour éviter un procès, SCI a payé une 100 de millions au familles des défunts.

Plus de détails dans les articles suivants

La. to pay Kenyon $119,000 a day for body recovery
Wed Sep 14, 2005
http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2005-09-14T174247Z_01_N14659343_RTRIDST_0_KATRINA-KENYON-RECOVERY.XML

FEMA, La. outsource Katrina body count to firm implicated in body-dumping scandals
Miriam Raftery
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/FEMA_outsources_Katrina_body_count_to_firm_implicated_in_bodydumping_scan_0913.html

J’ai donné à lire ce texte sur un forum de mes fréquentations… et… le texte a été terriblement mal reçu.

Je me suis du coup aperçu que sans suivre régulièrement le site, il était tout à fait possible de conclure que le texte était fait d’un collage de bric et de broc, d’éléments s’auto-confirmant et que finalement, ce texte était écrit par un mec paranoïaque, aimant les formules compliquées et appréciant les théories du complot. En gros, que c’était n’importe quoi.

Une conclusion écrite sur ce forum que je me permets de recopier :

“Bref ce truc pour moi n’a pas plus de valeur critique que le gars qui a fait un livre sur l’avion qui ne se serait jamais écrasé sur le pentagone… et pourtant lui il avait bien plus de gens en référence que le gars du site.”

(le monsieur a aussi reproché que les articles ne sont pas signés)

Alors… Le nettoyage ethnique, volonté de choquer par exagération, fantasme ou réalité ?

La non reconstruction des quartiers inondables de la Nouvelle Orléans est une question de bon sens. Les motifs invoqués, par contre, sont inacceptables.
Souvenez-vous (vous qui vivez à Liège) de l’incendie de Valfil, sa reconstruction (alors qu’on le savait non rentable), puis de son démontage par des chinois (et je uppose qu’il tourne à plein régime là-bas). Cockerill (et le contribuable) aurait épargné beaucoup d’argent à ne pas reconstruire, mais ce n’était pas politiquement correct…

L’Union vise l’indépendance énergétique

Un groupe d’eurodéputés a annoncé la création d’une large plateforme pour créer aussi vite que possible une économie européenne centrée sur l’hydrogène et libérée des énergies fossiles.
Avec un baril de pétrole à 70 dollars, nous avons maintenant besoin d’action. Il est plus que temps de changer notre fusil d’épaule pour assurer la sécurité et l’indépendance de l’Europe en matière énergétique et relancer notre économie, a plaidé le libéral italien Vittorio Prodi. Afin de financer la recherche et stimuler le développement de cette énergie, les initiateurs, parmi lesquels le Belge Philippe Busquin, proposent notamment d’émettre une obligation européenne où investisseurs et particuliers pourraient placer leur argent.

Outre le développement de l’hydrogène, la plate-forme entend encourager l’efficacité énergétique et développer toutes les formes d’énergies renouvelables (solaire, biomasse, etc.) qui devront servir à produire de l’hydrogène. Si elle suivie, cette stratégie de l’hydrogène devrait conduire l’Europe à s’émanciper du pétrole, réduire ses émissions de CO2 responsables du changement climatique, et stimuler la croissance économique du Vieux continent, selon ses géniteurs. Mais il est hors de question pour nous de produire de l’hydrogène à partir du nucléaire, a toutefois insisté le Luxembourgeois Claude Turmes (Verts) après que le vice-président du Parlement européen, le conservateur espagnol Vidal Quadras, eut soutenu cette voie.

Signataire de l’initiative, le président du Parlement européen, Josep Borrell, a d’ailleurs profité de la présence de Stavros Dimas pour inviter ceux qui peuvent faire des propositions à écouter le Parlement. Partageant ce dossier avec ses collègues en charge de la Recherche et de l’Energie, le commissaire à l’Environnement a reconnu que beaucoup plus pouvait être fait au niveau européen pour stimuler l’hydrogène.

En 2003, à l’initiative de son président Romano Prodi, le précédent exécutif européen avait déposé une initiative similaire mais qui n’avait débouché que sur bien peu de résultats concrets. Invité à parrainer la plate-forme européenne, Jeremy Rifkin, auteur du célèbre livre ‘L’Economie Hydrogène’, ne cachait de son côté pas son enthousiasme. Je crois que l’Europe est en train de conduire le monde vers une nouvelle ère énergétique, a-t-il prophétisé. Alors que nous voyons aujourd’hui à la Nouvelle Orléans les effets des changements climatiques, nous avons l’obligation envers nos enfants de concrétiser cette nouvelle révolution industrielle, a-t-il conclu.

(D’après AFP)

Le Soir en ligne
url: http://www.lesoir.be/rubriques/economie/page_5720_365768.shtml

mise à jour le 13/09/2005 à 06h43 - Bruxelles - lundi 12 septembre 2005, 18:24

Bien sûr que si, il est tout à fait facile de prévoir la suite des évènements. Les extrêmistes qui sont au pouvoir et qui tirent les ficelles de Bush font avec l’ONU ce que Hitler a fait avec la SDN… l’histoire recommence… mais en pire…

On pourrait les penser en difficulté dans leurs mauvais desseins par rapport à l’Irak et à l’Afghanistan ou même Katrina. Il n’en est rien. Anticipons. Ils savent très bien que le temps leur est compté. Alors que vont-ils faire ? Mettre les bouchées doubles pour installer sur le monde entier la toile d’araignée qu’ils sont en train de tisser. Et Bolton, commandité par Cheney et consort, n’est qu’un des maillons qui va leur permettre d’y parvenir.

Ce que nous avons du mal à comprendre, c’est pourquoi les dirigeants européens n’anticipent pas sur ce que nous savons, nous… ils laissent les évènements s’installer sans faire quoi que ce soit pour y remédier. Ils ont mis Wolfowicz à la Banque Mondiale alors que… et maintenant Bolton.

Les élites qui nous gouvernent sont soit aveugles, soit dévoyées mais dans tous les cas inaptes à protéger les peuples et l’Humanité, bien au contraire…

Félicitations pour votre site, il est génial…

Cordialement

Adriana Evangelizt

http://www.oxan.com/display.aspx?StoryDate=20050912&ProductCode=OADB&StoryNumber=2&StoryType=DB

GERMANY: Coalition uncertainty grows as poll nears

EVENT: An opinion poll on September 10 suggested that the Christian Democrats and their Free Democrat allies may fail to secure a majority in the September 18 general election.
SIGNIFICANCE: The election will mark a significant turning point for the EU’s largest economy, bringing to an end seven years of rule by Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder’s ‘Red-Green’ government. While Christian Democrat challenger Angela Merkel is certain to become the next chancellor, the composition of the coalition she will lead remains unclear.

Je connais certains de ces mercenaires qui sont en Irak uniquement en raison de l’appat du gain. En fait les points chauds de l’Irak sont Kirkuk et Basra pour le moment car c’est la ou se trouve le petrole.
Ce que le texte ne dit pas c’est que ces mercenaires sont habituellement employes par Halliburton en tant que garde du corps. Ceux qui sont charges de la protection des contracteurs sont payes aux alentours des $500 par jour, et ceux qui sont specialises dans des offensives, genre attaque terroriste, sont payes dans les $1,500. En general la plupart de ces mercenaires ont des assurances vies a hauteur de 1 million de dollars car certains d’entre eux ne sont jamais retournes vivant de l’Irak. La duree de vie d’un mercenaire est generalement courte (5 ans, au pire).

Ils ont oublie de parler des mercenaires anglais aussi qui travaillent en collaboration avec les Americains a Basra.

“The emergence of European giant defense corporations does not mean that a truly united, credible common defense policy is finally taking shape in the EU, but it does mean that new competitive actors have entered one of the world’s most dynamic markets and are determined, and increasingly well-equipped, to have their say in this high-tech and geopolitically delicate sector.”

le lien: http://www.isn.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?ID=12795

Britain pushes for Turkey EU talks to go ahead

Ewen MacAskill and Nicholas Watt in Brussels
Friday September 9, 2005
The Guardian
Britain and the US pressed yesterday for talks on the accession of Turkey to the EU to begin as planned on October 3 in spite of increasing opposition from France and Cyprus.
The intervention of the US will help persuade some of the waverers but could be counter-productive in France, which has emerged as one of Turkey’s main opponents.
In a speech in London, Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, warned that failure to allow Turkey entry could create a serious crisis in the future. “We all have an interest in the modernisation of Turkey and of reform there,” he said. “If we make the wrong decision, we could find that we have a crisis on our own doorstep.”
The UK is the main champion of Turkish accession. Mr Straw said it would help in the fight against international terrorism by demonstrating that “western and Islamic cultures can thrive together as partners in the modern world”.
The US, which has been lobbying the EU to speed up Turkish entry since the September 11 attacks, said European leaders should stop erecting obstacles, such as a row over Turkey’s position on Cyprus.
Kurt Volker, principal deputy assistant US secretary of state, said during a visit to Brussels: “It is in the interests of the EU, it is in the interests of Turkey, it is in our interests to see accession talks begin ... I hope that some longer-term perspectives would prevail.”
The EU agreed last year that accession talks would begin on October 3 and re-confirmed this earlier this year. But the atmosphere in parts of Europe has soured, particularly since the proposed constitution was rejected by France. If Germans vote next weekend for Angela Merkel as chancellor, Turkey will have another opponent.
Britain, holding the EU presidency, is trying to ensure that the commitment is honoured. One of the other 24 members could use its veto to block the framework agreement that would initiate talks.
British officials are leading behind-the-scenes negotiations on two documents: one a response to Turkey on Cyprus and the other a framework for accession negotiations.
Cyprus remains divided after its bloody civil war. The EU accepted the entry of the Greek Cypriot republic, leaving the Turkish Cypriot part outside. Turkey angered France and other EU members when it refused to recognise the Greek Cypriot republic.
The British government is trying to find a form of words that would mean that Turkish entry would, in effect, amount to recognition of the Greek Cypriot republic.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,9061,1566103,00.html

The tip of the anti-Turkish iceberg

The angry row over Cyprus is the least of the obstacles in Turkey’s way as it struggles to fulfil its 40-year ambition to join the European mainstream, writes Ian Black

Friday September 9, 2005
It is, for the moment, an obscure diplomatic wrangle being played out largely behind closed doors in the foreign ministries of Europe and in Brussels meeting rooms. But the signs are that a serious crisis is looming over the start of Turkey’s long-awaited talks on joining the EU.
Turkey’s date with destiny, October 3 - the same day, coincidentally, that Germany was reunited in 1990 - was set last year when the then 15-member EU was finalising its historic 10-country enlargement.
Article continues

It has been a very long time coming: Turkey has been a stalwart member of Nato since 1952 and was first recognised as a potential member of the European club as long ago as 1963, only a few years after the creation of the EEC. Britain is a keen advocate of its EU membership, as is the US. Both see the secular Muslim democracy as a key regional ally, a beacon for Islamic and Arab countries and proof that a “clash of civilisations” with the west is not inevitable.
But mounting anti-Turkish feeling in several European countries and last summer’s shock rejections of the new EU constitution in France and the Netherlands - part of a wider political and economic malaise - have created grave doubts. Hence this week’s alarm call by Jack Straw, Britain’s foreign secretary, who is now in the hot seat of the EU’s rotating presidency, that it is vital to stick to the October 3 start date even if, as is widely expected, the actual negotiations drag on for many years.
The immediate problem is the vexed question of Cyprus, one of last May’s new entrants. The hope had been that a long-standing UN drive to reunite the divided island would bear fruit before it joined. But since it did not (though more because of the Greek than the Turkish side) and because Ankara is refusing to recognise the Nicosia government (which for the EU legally represents the entire country), the launch of accession talks is in jeopardy.
Recognition is extremely difficult because without a comprehensive peace settlement it would undermine Turkey’s own 30-year military presence and the breakaway Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. But by flaunting its position at this highly delicate moment, Turkey has given ammunition to its enemies.
Chief amongst these is France, where polls show much of the anti-Turkish prejudice expressed by the former president and author of the constitution, Valery Giscard d’Estaing, whose circumlocutions about “cultural differences” are only slightly less offensive than the cruder view of another clever Frenchman, Voltaire: the 18th-century thinker called the Turks “a reminder to Christians to atone for their sins”.
But there is an even bigger obstacle looming in Germany - assuming Angela Merkel’s centre-right CDU wins this month’s election: Ms Merkel wants Turkey - which supplied so many of the gastarbeiter who created the German economic miracle of the 1960s - to be offered only a “privileged partnership”, not the full membership that has awaited all other candidates, from Estonia to Bulgaria, at the end of their negotiations.
Another key opponent is Austria, where it sometimes seems that Ottoman janissaries are still besieging Vienna as they did back in the 17th century. Its chancellor, Wolfgang Schussel, also favours a halfway house and “open-ended” negotiations for the Turks.
The problem is that offering something different only for Turkey would appear to prove the resentful charge that the EU is a “Christian club” and risk a dangerous anti-European, and perhaps fundamentalist, backlash. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, has warned that he will “walk away for good” if the talks do not go ahead on schedule.
If they do start on time, it will be a very big deal indeed: no country that has begun negotiations on joining the EU has failed eventually to make the grade.
Although actual membership could be 10 or 15 years away, by then there will be more than 80 million Turks, probably outnumbering Germans. And with voting power tied to population size, Ankara will be as important a player as Berlin, Paris and London - a key reason for the mounting opposition. Another is the fear of large numbers of poor Turkish migrant workers flooding western European labour markets, though restrictions could be imposed for a transition period.
Turkey and its supporters are understandably worried, though they have a strong case when they argue that the magnet of EU membership has already generated huge advances under Mr Erdogan’s conservative, moderate Islamist government.
The country’s old Midnight Express image has faded and torture has been banned. There are now Kurdish language broadcasts, and the grip of the powerful military, keepers of the Ataturk flame, has been weakened. The economy is in good shape after years of crisis and inflation under the generals. It is an increasingly attractive market for foreign investment.
Not everything is perfect. Implementation of some new laws has been patchy, and some worry about minority rights. Until recently there was greater openness on the ever-neuralgic question of the Armenian genocide of the first world war. That, however, has faded, and there is now embarrassment about the case of the internationally renowned novelist Orhan Pamuk, facing charges of “belittling Turkishness” over his brave comments about that dark period.
Hectic diplomacy is likely across Europe over the coming days, perhaps going down to the wire on the eve of October 3. There will be brinkmanship and haggling over the precise terms of the negotiations,and attempts to square the circle of Ankara’s non-recognition of Cyprus. Obscure and complex it may all be, but the stakes are very high. As Abdullah Gul, the Turkish foreign minister, put it: “The last 100 metres of the marathon should be run very carefully.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,7369,1566653,00.html

Turkey insists EU dream on course
Turkey has insisted its hopes for full membership of the European Union are on course, despite tension with several existing members.
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul told journalists he was confident that talks would start in October as planned.
Mr Gul had earlier been quoted as saying that Turkey would walk away from the EU for good if there were attempts to water down its membership.
There is continuing opposition in parts of the EU to full Turkish membership.
Suggestions for some kind of partnership status, rather than full membership, have been led by German opposition leader Angela Merkel - expected to win a general election later this month.
I can’t see any problem that will prevent the start of talks on 3 October Abdullah Gul Turkish FM
She has argued that a “privileged partnership” status should be among the options put under discussion when the talks start in Luxembourg on 3 October.
A separate row has developed over Cyprus, with Turkey signing a customs agreement with all member states but refusing to allow Cyprus to use its ports or airport.
Turkey has also renewed its refusal to recognise the Cypriot government, which in effect rules only the Greek Cypriot part of the island, while Turkish Cypriots remain under a separate breakaway administration.
Doubts about Turkish membership were strengthened when many voters in France and the Netherlands cited fears about Turkey as a contributing factor in their decision to reject the EU constitution.
Many people’s concerns focus on its large, low-income population. Others insist that the EU is essentially a club for Christian countries, or argue that much of Turkey is geographically in Asia, despite its Western-looking political leadership.
Confidence
Foreign Minister Mr Gul, speaking after meeting his EU counterparts in Wales on Friday, told Turkish journalists he remained confident.
“I can’t see any problem that will prevent the start of talks on 3 October,” he said.
He had previously warned against imposing any new conditions, or trying to shift the goalposts to a partnership status.
“Should they (the EU) propose anything short of full membership, or any new conditions, we will walk away, and this time it will be for good,” he told the Economist magazine.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said Turkey has done everything it has been asked to, in order to prepare for membership.
“Now Turkey has nothing more to give (the EU),” he said.
“We have done everything related to the Copenhagen political criteria.”
The EU is thought likely to insist that Turkey does grant access to Cypriot planes and ships, and does in time move to recognise Cyprus.
EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said full implementation of the customs pact was “clearly a red line for the EU and is not a matter of negotiation”.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/europe/4211582.stm

Published: 2005/09/03 14:52:17 GMT

© BBC MMV

Europe needs Turkey, says Straw
Turkey should become an EU member state despite refusing to recognise Cyprus, UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said.
Mr Straw believes its entry into the union would be a blow to those who say there is a “clash of civilisations” between the Muslim world and the West.
“It will prove that a secular democracy which shows respect for Islam can live comfortably in Europe,” he said.
Talks on its entry bid are to begin on 3 October but there is opposition to full membership in several EU states.
‘Working hard’
Turkey recently issued a declaration reaffirming its refusal to accept the Cypriot government, which effectively only controls the Greek part of the Mediterranean island.

By welcoming Turkey we will demonstrate that Western and Islamic cultures can thrive together Jack Straw
Mr Straw said: “Acknowledging that Turkey’s declaration raises genuine concerns - which we, as presidency, are working hard to address - does not mean that we should delay the start of Turkey’s historic accession negotiations.”
The foreign secretary went on to tell the Institute of Public Policy Research in London that Turkey’s membership of the EU was of “paramount importance” for the future of the union.
He said: “Turkey is a secular nation with a majority Muslim population.
“By welcoming Turkey we will demonstrate that Western and Islamic cultures can thrive together as partners in the modern world - the alternative is too terrible to contemplate.”
Rejection
Turkey has ongoing disputes with several EU members and senior politicians in France and Germany have voiced doubts over its entry.
These doubts were strengthened when many voters in France and the Netherlands cited fears about Turkey as a contributing factor in their decision to reject the EU constitution.
The country’s human rights record has also been called into question and Mr Straw admitted there was “still some way to go” on the implementation of measures to protect freedom of speech.
The October talks on Turkey’s entry bid will take place in Luxembourg.
The UK took over the EU’s rotating presidency for six months on 1 July.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/europe/4227744.stm

Published: 2005/09/08 19:09:36 GMT

© BBC MMV

EU stands by Turkish entry talks
The European Commission says talks on Turkey’s membership of the EU should start on time on 3 October with accession as a “shared objective”.
The recommendation is made in a proposed framework for the talks, which member states must approve unanimously.

The commission says the talks should be open-ended, and that Turkey will not be able to join until 2014 at the soonest.

Its proposal comes as enthusiasm for enlargement wanes in the wake of French and Dutch votes on the constitution.

It must be ensured that Turkey is fully anchored in the European structures through the strongest possible bond
Enlargement commissioner Olli Rehn

Voters in both countries said they were concerned about the impact of EU enlargement on jobs, and some raised particular concerns about Turkey, a Muslim country whose population is on course to be bigger than Germany’s by 2015.
EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said the 25-member commission took its decision on the mandate after “a lengthy, argumentative and very political debate”.

He said some speakers raised the idea of agreeing a “special relationship” with Turkey rather than full membership.

Political hurdle

The BBC’s Chris Morris in Brussels says like other would-be members in the future, Turkey will also face much stricter conditions than candidates in the past.

The negotiations will be based on Turkey’s own merits and the pace will depend on Turkey’s progress in meeting the requirements for membership
European Commission negotiating mandate

It is not just about human rights and democracy, he says, but also a host of technical issues which will take years to resolve, including agricultural reform and environmental standards.
But the biggest hurdle will be a political one, our correspondent adds.

Although the current French and German leaders are in favour of Turkish membership, their successors may not be, he says.

Turkey’s progress

Before the membership talks can begin, Turkey must sign a protocol extending its customs union to the 10 new EU members, including Cyprus, a country it does not officially recognise.

“The negotiations will be based on Turkey’s own merits and the pace will depend on Turkey’s progress in meeting the requirements for membership,” the negotiating mandate says.

Mr Rehn said that if Turkey must at least be assured of a special relationship with the European Union even if it does not ultimately gain membership.

“If Turkey is not in a position to assume in full all the obligations of membership it must be ensured that Turkey is fully anchored in the European structures through the strongest possible bond,” he said.

Despite the cooling of attitudes towards enlargement since the French and Dutch referendums, a Eurobarometer study published this week suggested that the issue had not been a major factor behind voters’ rejection of the constitution.

The poll said only 6% of Dutch voters and 3% of French voters gave enlargement as the reason for their “No” vote.

Opposition to Turkish membership, in particular, was cited by 3% of Dutch “No” voters and 6% of French “No” voters as the reason for their choice.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/europe/4632353.stm

Published: 2005/06/29 14:37:53 GMT

© BBC MMV

Deal boosts Turkish hopes on start of EU accession talks

>By Daniel Dombey in Brussels
>Published: September 12 2005 03:00 | Last updated: September 12 2005 03:00
>>
Turkey’s hopes of beginning membership talks with the European Union on time on October 3 have been boosted by an Anglo-French deal removing one of the chief obstacles.

London and Paris have provisionally agreed the EU should declare that Turkey cannot join before it recognises all of the EU’s member states and that recognition as soon as possible would be appreciated.

British diplomats hope the outline deal, which concerns Turkey’s relations with Cyprus, will speed preparations for the talks, since France is the most influential of the countries that have voiced reservations about the accession process.

A poll this week revealed that just 11 per cent of French voters approved of Turkish membership of the EU, and Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s presidential hopeful, has strongly challenged President Jacques Chirac’s backing for Turkish membership.

EU enlargement has also become a particularly sensitive issue in France after the country’s rejection of the European constitution in a referendum on May 29.

“If we reach agreement on this it would mean that we have struck a balance between the message we heard on May 29 and the commitments by the president,” said a French official.

France had earlier argued it was “inconceivable” that Turkey, which does not recognise Cyprus, begin negotiations with the 25-nation bloc without upgrading relations with Nicosia.

Diplomats said that the French electorate would not accept the sight of a potential EU member “snubbing” current EU member states.

But Britain maintained that any deadline for Turkish recognition risked undermining United Nations efforts to reunite the divided island, as well as the negotiations between Brussels and Ankara.

The UK, which holds the revolving presidency of the EU, still needs to win round Cyprus itself, which is also calling for firm commitments from Ankara to end a ban on Cypriot ships docking at Turkish ports.

“What we want to do is to link the recognition of the Republic of Cyprus with the accession process for Turkey,” said a Cypriot official.

However, some EU officials are hoping that, without continued support from France, Cyprus will agree to a common EU declaration on Turkey at an ambassadors’ meeting on Wednesday.

“It is regrettable that the self-made stalemate among member states is harming the credibility of Europe both in the EU and in Turkey,” said one official.

Consensus on the declaration would clear the way for Britain to concentrate on agreeing the direction of negotiations.

Austria is insisting that the talks should not exclusively focus on full membership, but also on a “partnership” between Ankara and the EU. Although Vienna was relatively isolated at a foreign ministers’ meeting this month, its position would be strengthened if Germany’s Christian Democrats, who oppose Turkish membership, chalk up a decisive win in next Sunday’s elections.

France could yet insist on tougher language on alternatives to membership, but so far it has not signalled that it will do so.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/cdfad1f6-2329-11da-86cc-00000e2511c8.html

le vocabulaire de la correction politique rend mon intervention plus difficile, car celui-ci justement pénible de parler des différences sans trainer derrière lui de quelconques jugements moraux. Mais allons y quand même ...

Une chose m’aura frappé entre autre dans les images de la Nouvelles Orléans, frappe nourrie de mes séjours en afrique noire : les populations de blacks de cette ville sont ... des vrais noirs. L’imagerie du noir américain, c’est quasi touours un métis (c’est pas tout à fait vrai évidemment, on trouve bien quelques musiciens), que ce métissage ai eu lieu il y a ongtemps ou pas.
Les gens de la Nelles Orléans, leurs visages, leurs expressions, ne sont pas américanisées, et me ramènent plus à mes rencontres africaines qu’occidentales.

Pas facile à faire passer, mais regarder encore. Et si mes yeux ne me trompent pas, alors nous obtenons encore une autre image de cette ségrégation. Elle est impressionnante ...

Editorial The Lancet, 10 September 2005

The terrorist attacks that struck the USA on Sept 11, 4 years ago, obliterated the American people’s trust in their intelligence services. Last week, Hurricane Katrina did the same for any illusions held by the people—or indeed the government—that the country was adequately prepared to cope with a large-scale public-health emergency.

Since 2001, fears for the future safety of the US population have focused on one thing alone: the potential dangers a bioterror attack could unleash. This obsession catapulted the issue of America’s decaying public-health infrastructure from a state concern to a crisis that involved the entire nation. The worry was justified.

A damning report issued in 2002 by the Institute of Medicine claimed that governmental public-health agencies had long suffered “grave underfunding and political neglect”. It criticised the country’s “obsolete and inconsistent laws and regulations” governing public health, and derided the fragmentation of health responsibility, shared among officials at all levels of government. The uneven distribution of resources within the “increasingly fragile” health sector meant, the report claimed, that the health system would be unable to manage a large-scale emergency. Ironically, of only five cities visited by the authors during the report’s preparation, one was New Orleans.

Hurricane Katrina’s shattering intensity has ensured that concerns about the USA’s health-response capacity are circulating once again. But, this time, the critics should have had fewer justifications. Significant boosts to funding for public-health infrastructure followed 9/11, along with plans to better coordinate emergency responses and improve communication between all levels of government. Crowning these efforts was a National Response Plan purporting to provide “the means to swiftly deliver federal support in response to catastrophic incidents”. It was released in January this year, under the auspices of the Department of Homeland Security and its subsidiary the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Last week marked the plan’s first real test. It failed. The sheer scale of the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina and the subsequent floods certainly hindered relief activities. But for the response to have been so sparse and so late that thousands of people had to endure 6 parched and hungry days in the drowning city, the public-health authorities must have got things very badly wrong.

The problem with the National Response Plan is not what it contains, but what has been omitted. While the central themes of the plan strongly emphasise fighting terrorism and national leadership, three key areas of administrative difficulty have been all but ignored. The first is that federal public-health recommendations lack the force of law. Because states have most authority over matters of public health, federal agencies cannot compel state health officials to implement national policies. Thus, while federal agencies aim for national coordination on preparedness, in reality they can do little more than advise.

The second unresolved issue is the necessity for security forces to negotiate with health experts for leadership in the event of a public-health emergency, wasting time and confusing lines of command. The reason behind this bureaucratic tangle is that health responsibilities are dispersed through numerous federal departments. Key emergency health responsibilities come under the jurisdiction of the Department for Homeland Security, rather than their perhaps more natural home at the Department for Health and Human Services.

The third, and perhaps most concerning issue, is the ongoing confusion over what public-health preparedness should be preparing for. Public-health officials are divided over whether to prioritise all-hazards preparedness or specific plans to counter a bioterror attack. Bioterrorism is clearly the government’s priority, but this focus, and the funding bias that goes with it, limits states’ flexibility to choose a broader approach to protecting public health. States also claim that if priorities are set nationally, their specific vulnerabilities will be ignored and responses will be slow and unwieldy. They are probably right.

Would Hurricane Katrina’s aftermath have been less fraught had these issues been addressed? It is impossible to say. For not only did the USA shy away from a national priority list of public-health threats, it also failed to define what should constitute “prepared”. Assessment criteria to test states’ compliance with national obligations have been criticised as meaningless and impossible to measure.

A well functioning public-health system protects human life when disasters occur. Just how much the neglect of the US system hindered an effective response to Hurricane Katrina should weigh heavily on the shoulders of George W Bush, as he views images of stadia crammed with New Orleans’ many homeless and hears the final counts of the dead.

The Lancet
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673605672911/fulltext