La situation au Moyen Orient est telle que, à court terme, la disparition d'Israel en tant qu'Etat Juif est programmée. Finalement peu importe qui de l'Iran, de la Syrie ou du Hezbollah fera le boulot...
Pendant ce temps l'Occident et ce qu'il en reste se replie frileusement sur des positions d'une extrême lâcheté.
Avec une petite différence de taille : en 1939 jusqu'en 1943, on pouvait prétendre ne pas savoir ou ignorer l'existence même des camps de la mort... Aujourd'hui ce sera quand même très difficile de rejouer la même litanie.

Donc le problème qui se pose n'est pas de savoir comment faire semblant de s'opposer à l'Iran mais bien comment détourner les yeux de ce qui va arriver.

Cela me rappelle une fort belle phrase de Sir Winston Churchill :
"vous aviez à choisir entre le déshonneur et la guerre, vous avez choisi le déshonneur et vous aurez la guerre".

Dear Jacques: Thank you for sharing with me the report prepared by the Club des Vigilants. I find myself in general agreement with it and I share its deep concerns.

There is clearly rising pressure here, some of it domestic and some from abroad, for pushing the issue with Iran to a critical resolution before the inauguration of the next president. Some of those who advocate it hope that the Iranians will reject the recent proposals, and I note that President Bush could not restrain himself from declaring within three days of its submission to the Iranians that they have already rejected it!

The above notwithstanding, I doubt that the United States can start a military action entirely on its own. But there are efforts already in the Congress to create a situation which perhaps would precipitate a military collision, which in turn might justify politically the initiation of US air-strikes against Iran.

You are probably aware of the legislation that is being pushed through both houses of Congress in favor of imposing a unilateral naval blockade on Iran. Alternatively, an Israeli attack on Iran -- to which the Iranians would respond militarily against American forces in the region rather than against Israel itself (given that Iran cannot hit Israel in a truly painful fashion) -- might serve as the triggering event for US “retaliation”.

Much depends upon how the five negotiating partners will respond to any trend in the above direction. I fear that the British, perhaps also your own president, will be inclined to go along, even if somewhat reluctantly. Germany and China will probably be more explicitly negative in their reactions, given the fact that both fear the economic consequences of a sudden surge in the price of energy. Russia, I suspect, will not fear (for obvious reasons) a surge in the price of energy and it might actually feel that its long range interests will be served well by a United States engaged in a self-damaging military undertaking that spans simultaneously Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

The concluding points of your memorandum are right on: the foregoing would eventually bring to a head an emerging and historically novel global crisis of really unpredictable dimensions.

Un ancien haut responsable de l'Administration américaine