Est-ce l’été 1914 ?



Un commentaire est associé à cet article. Vous pouvez le consulter et réagir à votre tour.



William S. Lind, le spécialiste américain de la “guerre de quatrième génération” (4thGW), évoque une prospective pour les événements actuels au Liban. Cette crise constitue, selon lui, le premier exemple d’une “guerre” entre un Etat et une force dépendant de la 4thGW, et l’enjeu est considérable : « If Hezbollah and Hamas win – and winning just means surviving, given that Israel's objective is to destroy both entities – a powerful state will have suffered a new kind of defeat, again, a defeat across at least one international boundary and maybe two, depending on how one defines Gaza's border. The balance between states and 4GW forces will be altered worldwide, and not to a trivial degree. »

Pour Lind, les perspectives sont extrêmement importantes et potentiellement très graves, particulièrement pour les USA. Sa thèse est appuyée sur l’hypothèse d’un affrontement avec l’Iran comme conséquence finale de l’actuelle attaque au Liban.

Extrait de son texte d’aujourd’hui dans :

« The critical question is whether the current fighting spreads region-wide. It is possible that Hezbollah attacked Israel not only to relieve the siege of Hamas in Gaza but also to preempt an Israeli strike on Iran. The current Iranian government is not disposed to sit passively like Saddam and await an Israeli or American attack. It may have given Hezbollah a green light in order to bog Israel down locally to the point where it would not also want war with Iran.

» However, Israel's response may be exactly the opposite. Olmert also said, “Nothing will deter us, whatever far-reaching ramifications regarding our relations on the northern border and in the region there may be.” The phrase “in the region” could refer to Syria, Iran, or both.

» If Israel does attack Iran, the ‘summer of 1914’ analogy may play itself out, catastrophically for the United States. As I have warned many times, war with Iran (Iran has publicly stated it would regard an Israeli attack as an attack by the U.S. also) could easily cost America the army it now has deployed in Iraq. It would almost certainly send shock waves through an already fragile world economy, potentially bringing that house of cards down. A Bush administration that has sneered at ‘stability’ could find out just how high the price of instability can be.

» It is clear what Washington needs to do to try to prevent such an outcome: publicly distance the U.S. from Israel while privately informing Mr. Olmert that it will not tolerate an Israeli strike on Iran. Unfortunately, Israel is to America what Serbia was to Russia in 1914. That may be the most disturbing aspect of the ‘summer of 1914’ analogy. »

Mis en ligne le 19 juillet 2006 à 08H18