European Union. Turkey The
oldest newspaper of Turkey " the Republic " (Cumhuryet), completely independent,
brought back on February 25 2003, the following dialogue, at the White House, between the
president of
the States Unis and that which was then a Minister for the Foreign Affairs: George
W Busch: You do not have anything to make here. Return in your country and make
pass the authorization to the Parliament! Yasar Yakis: We have certain
difficulties, the economic losses which the war will cause us will be considerable, we are
two allied countries and expect your comprehension. G.W.B.: No ally gave
me wire with retordre as much as you! Y.Y.: Turkey also fits in a
European process and there are different voices which rise European Union. G.W.B.:
Is there still a European Union? I broke it into three! Y.Y.: Turkey is a
democratic country which always respected the international law. And, in this precise
case, the decision of the Nations Plain is very important for Turkey. G.W.B.:
I wonder whether UNO is essential to the XXI century. My collaborators are thinking of the
question. (This dialogue was contradicted neither by the Turks nor by the Americans
source: the Diplomatic World. April 2003)
|
| The axis of the evil.
The scenario of a " fast and victorious " war promised by the falcons could
appear disastrous and is likely to consolidate their position in their providing the
occasion to put at execution a matured project of long date. To destroy a " axis of
the Evil " to the vague perimeter. In his book on the war of Mr. Bush, the
journalist Bob Woodward recalls that as of September 15 2001, Mr. Wolfowitz advised with
president Bush to attack Iraq: " a victory against Afganistan is not certain.
On the other hand, the Iraqi mode is fragile and tyrannical. It will break down quickly.
It is feasible. " One includes better the heat to produce evidence of a bond
between Iraq and Al-Qaida.
In November 2002, Ariel Sharon had affirmed that as of the shortly after the victory in
Iraq, the E.U. were to attack Iran. In fact, the list of the countries which are in the
line of sight of the blasters of the Pentagon includes initially: Syria, Lybie and Arabia
Saudi (source: " The war against the terror masters " of Michael Ledeen,
edition St Martin' S Press 2002). For Michael Ledeen, known especially for its
implication in Irangate (sales of secret weapons in Iran to finance Countered them in 1985
- 1987), the objective is not to destabilize these countries: " the
search for stability would be unworthy of America. Our country is that of the creative
destruction. We do not want stability in Iran, in Iraq, in Syria, in Lebanon, nor even in
Arabia Saoudite… the question is to know how to destabilize these countries. We must
destroy them to achieve our historical mission. "
Other scenarios being studied and are frequently evoked by these strategists
néoconservateurs: For example, July 10 2002 Mr. Laurent Murawiec, French analyst, in Rand
Corporation, had come floor in front of Defense Policy Board, consultative body of the
Pentagon. He came to denounce Saudi Arabia like " the core of the evil, present at
all the levels of the terrorist action " and like the main thing enemy of America.
This curious expert suggested with the American government launching an ultimatum to the
kingdom: if you persist in supporting
terrorism and authorizing speeches anti-American and anti-Israelis, " we will confiscate your financial assets, we will occupy your oil
fields and we will take for target your holy places ".
This communication, revealed by Washington Post a few weeks later was also the occasion
of launching another balloon of test. Mr Laurent Murawiec suggested indeed that beyond
Iraq (pivot tactical) and of
Saudi Arabia (strategic pivot), it is Egypt which it was
necessary to think of controlling. (source: the " Diplomatic
World " April 2003.) |
