Diplomacy & Crisis News

Allegations of torture follow expansion of U.S. footprint in Africa, as Washington’s fight against terrorists forges new allies.

Is the president looking more like a dictator after six months in the White House?

Another Flynn holdover has been removed.

After months of attacks on civil society, the mood is gloomy.

À 100 °C, l'eau bout, c'est certain. Mais mieux vaut ne pas attendre que la vie des sociétés se plie aux lois de la physique. Certes, 1% de la population s'attribue la majorité des richesses produites sur Terre ; cela ne fait pas pour autant des 99 % qui restent un groupe social solidaire, encore (...) / États-Unis, France, Capitalisme, Économie, Inégalités, Libéralisme, Mouvement de contestation, Société - 2017/08

Here’s one of our biggest military secrets: The greatest untapped resource in the Marine Corps is the E-1 to E-5 community.

The "caliphate" has figured out how to make committing acts of terror easy. It's also made them boring.

  With Adam Rawnsley Trump policy fallout. There was stunned silence in the Pentagon Wednesday after President Trump overturned military policy in three quick Tweets during morning rush hour. Civilian and military officials refused comment on the president’s decision to ban transgender personnel from military service, as they heard about President’s plan just like everyone ...

Indonesian navy crew (right) check one of seven fishing boats destroyed in Batam, Kepulauan Riau province on February 22, 2016 (AFP Photo/Sei Ratifa)

With its announcement at a United Nations conference last month, Indonesia became the first nation to commit to publish the exact location and activity of its commercial fishing fleet.  The decision was announced at a U.N. conference on the ocean, and calls for Indonesia to publish Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data on the mapping platform of Global Fishing Watch,  an independent 501c3 organization founded and supported by Oceana, SkyTruth, and Google.

Solely a tool of transparency, Global Fishing Watch allows citizens, journalists, researchers, commercial interests and governments to track some 60,000 fishing vessels in near real time, using satellite systems and publicly broadcast Automatic Identification System (AIS) signals from ships at sea.   AIS signals cover the majority of all industrial-sized commercial fishing vessels (those exceeding a capacity of 100 Gross Tons which average around 24 meters).  Smaller vessels are not required to carry AIS, though can be tracked using government-owned VMS data.

Indonesia’s announcement follows concerns over increased illegal fishing activity in the South China Sea, and several incidents of ramming between fishing vessels and coast guard vessels of various nations.  Indonesia, the second largest producer of wild-caught seafood in the world, will add some 5,000 vessels to the database of Global Fishing Watch.

Since Beijing claims some 90% of the South China Sea, many Chinese fishing boats operate in the exclusive economic zones of other countries with the support of Beijing.  Chinese officials often argue its fishing fleets are operating in “traditional Chinese fishing grounds,” a position which was recently refuted by an international court in The Hague under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) signed by China.

This position often draws the ire of countries such as Indonesia, which has been particularly tough on illegal fishing, following the appointment of Susi Pudjiastuti as Minister of Fisheries and Marine Affairs.  Susi has drawn widespread support from Indonesians for her crackdowns on illegal fishing, after years of the government downplaying incidents (especially  in 2010 and 2013) over concerns Beijing could cut investment in Indonesia.  

The decision by Indonesian authorities to support better fishing transparency may help prevent confusion over incidents such as last year’s ramming of an Indonesian Ministry of Fishery and Marine Affairs patrol ship by a Chinese coast guard vessel in March 2016.  According to media reports, a 300-ton Chinese fishing vessel had been illegally fishing about 4 kilometres off Indonesia’s Natuna island chain.  The Indonesian patrol ship confronted the Chinese fishing vessel, detained its crew, and proceeded to tow it to Indonesian shores.  Before they reached shore, a Chinese coast guard vessel came to the rescue, ramming the Chinese fishing boat, and eventually prying it free, boarding it, and sailing it away.  The Chinese Foreign Ministry argued the incident occurred within “traditional Chinese fishing grounds” and the Chinese coast guard ship assisted the seized Chinese fishing boat without entering Indonesian territorial waters.

Beijing is not expected to publish the location and activity of its commercial fishing fleet anytime soon, but other nations’ efforts toward greater transparency of their own fleets may help protect their fishermen when operating in their exclusive economic zones.  Indonesia’s intention to map its own fleet is an effort toward much-needed transparency, and by working with an independent organization, Jakarta could effectively set the standard in the South China Sea and shame any further efforts by Beijing to claim “traditional fishing grounds”.

The post Indonesia Leads the Way on Mapping Fishermen appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.

The cancellation of a controversial ballet at Russia’s premiere theater holds dark clues as to where the country could be headed after Putin.

Le lobby des compagnies d'assurances, le Health Insurance Association of America, a consacré 3,5 millions de dollars à une campagne destinée à convaincre le public que la réforme envisagée par le président Clinton bureaucratiserait le système de santé et mettrait en danger la « liberté de choix » des (...) / États-Unis, États-Unis (affaires intérieures), Audiovisuel, Communication, Médias, Presse, Protection sociale, Publicité, Santé - 1996/08

Photo Credit: Hindu Struggle Committee

In an exclusive interview, Shipan Kumer Basu, the head of the Hindu Struggle Committee, described the ascent of ISIS in Bangladesh and how it poses a threat to the Hindu community.

Shipan Kumer Basu, the head of the Hindu Struggle Committee, stated in an exclusive interview that ISIS is on the ascent in Bangladesh and he blames the Bangladeshi government for this reality: “Many of the people who have gone to fight the Coalition Forces have returned. How many of them have been arrested by Sheikh Hasina’s government? Only a handful. These people are nurtured, protected and backed by Sheikh Hasina. They are used to spread terror and fear among the minorities.”

According to Basu, Sheikh Majubur Rehman, the father of Sheikh Hasina, always despised the minorities and Sheikh Hasina has vowed to follow in her father’s footsteps when she came into power: “So, her policy is to make Bangladesh free of the minorities. She has used ISIS in a very veiled and clandestine way. Although the US has time and again pointed out ISIS’s presence in Bangladesh, the government denies it. Within a few days of the denial, a police constable was murdered and ISIS claimed responsibility on their website. Another incident was of a person spreading leaflets of ISIS propaganda in the Bangladeshi capital city of Dhaka. Many ISIS members are from reputable families in the party leadership so there is no suspicion against them.”

Basu related that the attack upon a Dhaka café in July 2016, which left 28 people dead after hostages were held for 12 hours, permitted the truth to come out into the open. During that attack, local Islamists were the culprits: “How many has the government arrested or put behind bars? How many training camps are in Sheikh Hasina’s own Gopalguni district, where Hindus are now in a state of horror? I want to call upon the international community to prepare a report on the plight of Hindus in her district. The state has become a killing field for the minorities. With the government supporting terrorists and jihadists, Muslim fanatics have risen their ugly faces.”

“ISIS has forced Hindus to flee from their ancestral homeland,” he stressed. “There is massive land grabbing, torture, rape, murder, the destruction of Hindu temples and gods, the threatening of Hindu priests and even the killing of Hindu priests. It is all the handiwork of ISIS jihadists. Forced conversion is another ploy to diminish the minorities. Forcefully, they have converted many Hindu women and girls.”

Basu emphasized that the modus operandi of ISIS in Bangladesh has changed: “They have now merged with local operatives because ISIS was declared an international terror organization. So, all of their activities are covert. They camouflage themselves with the ruling parties rank and file and Islamic extremist groups. Due to this, they have kept up their dreadful activities at ease. Even if an arrest is made, it is classified as a local minor incident and small charges are made against the terrorist. No stringent anti-terror law is applied. Dr. Abul Barakat, a Dhaka University Professor, said that if the cleansing of minorities continue in the present way, there will be no more Hindu minorities left in Bangladesh in 30 years.”

The post Hindu rights activist: “Bangladesh is now infested with ISIS” appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.

Cette recension a été publiée dans le numéro d’été de Politique étrangère (n°2/2017). Julien Nocetti, chercheur au Centre Russie/NEI de l’Ifri et spécialiste des questions numériques, propose une analyse de l’ouvrage d’Olivier Iteanu, Quand le digital défie l’État de droit (Eyrolles, 2016, 192 pages).

Olivier Iteanu dresse le constat sévère d’une capitulation de l’Union européenne devant les grands acteurs américains du numérique. Sujet comme constat ne sont d’apparence guère inédits : ces dernières années, nombreux sont les auteurs et les praticiens français du numérique à avoir consacré des ouvrages aux dérives, pour l’Europe et la France, de la maîtrise sans partage du numérique par les États-Unis et de ses abus. Les travaux de Pierre Bellanger sur la « souveraineté numérique », de Tristan Nitot sur la surveillance généralisée, d’Éric Sadin sur l’omnipotence des géants du Net, ainsi que plusieurs rapports parlementaires, ont fait éclore une prise de conscience du caractère stratégique de l’économie numérique.

Le présent ouvrage ne sombre pas dans des débats trop juridiques. Olivier Iteanu démontre comment notre droit est déformé, peu à peu, sans que nous y prenions garde, par la technologie.

En quatre chapitres – explorant chacun la dissolution de nos notions juridiques au profit de concepts importés via la technologie (liberté d’expression face au freedom of speech ; vie privée contre privacy ; droits d’auteur et copyright ; loi contre governance) –, Olivier Iteanu dresse un constat « terrifiant ». Notre dépendance vis-à-vis des services de la Silicon Valley « ne serait pas problématique si elle ne privait pas les Européens d’un recours simple et efficace à leur système juridique », écrit-il. Or, selon lui, la dissolution progressive du droit se traduit par l’affaiblissement de l’état de droit lui-même : « En s’opposant à la loi ou en tentant de manière détournée de la faire évoluer dans le sens de ses intérêts, c’est le processus démocratique qui est bafoué » par les GAFA (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon).

C’est bien l’atteinte au processus démocratique que souligne l’auteur dans cette américanisation du droit appliqué à internet, et cette nouvelle illustration du fait que la technologie n’est jamais neutre. Les encadrements ou les décisions de la Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL), ou des juridictions européennes, peinent à s’appliquer, alors que les conditions générales d’utilisation (CGU) des applications utilisées quotidiennement par des millions d’Européens renvoient dans leurs lignes minuscules aux tribunaux californiens.

Le chapitre sur la gouvernance de l’internet est peut-être le moins convaincant du livre. L’auteur critique logiquement l’ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) – certes cible facile de ce côté-ci de l’Atlantique –, mais il est regrettable que les Nations unies soient citées comme alternative crédible sans un minimum de distance critique.

Le lecteur venant de l’univers du numérique pourra reprocher à l’auteur une tonalité parfois trop « franco-­française », même si Olivier Iteanu prend soin de ne jamais parler de « souveraineté numérique ». Rejetant l’approche défensive des partisans de ce concept, il avance que l’essentiel du problème se situe en Europe et non dans la Silicon Valley. À cet égard, l’auteur rappelle avec justesse que le storytelling de l’économie numérique a souvent un effet d’aveuglement auprès de nos responsables politiques. Et si la puissance publique entend réguler les géants de l’internet, c’est au prix de dilemmes de gouvernants qui souhaitent préserver l’emploi et la création de richesse. Au détriment de nos principes démocratiques.

Julien Nocetti

Pour vous abonner à Politique étrangère, cliquez ici.

U.S. President Donald Trump meets with South Korean President Moon Jae-in (left) at the White House in Washington, DC on June 29. (Yonhap)

U.S. President, Donald Trump and South Korean President, Moon Jae-in, wearing similar-tone-bearing blue ties reaffirmed their ‘ironclad’ commitments to the U.S.–ROK ‘blood alliance’. During a joint press conference, held in the White House Rose Garden on June 30, the leaders affirmed their bond regarding a unified assertion against North Korea’s existential treats. They agreed on the fact that North Korea’s ballistic and nuclear weapons development has reached a tipping point, where ‘maximum pressure’ needs to replace ‘strategic patience’ in a bid to curb North Korea’s evolving errant behavior.

Nonetheless, the two leaders showed a hint of flexibility regarding the extent of strategic choices under consideration, by underlining that their utmost priority is to keep the Korean peninsula peaceful. In this sense, the White House respected Moon’s pursuance of a ‘two-track’ strategy, by acknowledging the importance of initiating a dialogue with North Korea ‘under the right circumstances’. Although the nature of such circumstances remains open to subjective interpretation, the U.S.–ROK alliance has adamantly emphasized that the measures of UN sanctions should be heightened, unless North Korea fulfills its basic obligations to denuclearize itself as a responsible member of international society. In the meantime, the alliance has occasionally softened its tone by making it clear that it does not seek regime change or regime collapse in North Korea. The summit, held for the first time following Moon’s  restoration of presidential powers in South Korea, shared the common goal of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula in a peaceful manner, and re-appreciating South Korea’s leadership role in moving the process toward peaceful unification of the Korean peninsula.

President Moon Jae-in lays a wreath at the memorial to the Battle of Chosin Reservoir at the National Museum of the Marine Corps, in Virginia, June 28. (Blue House photo pool)

Moon began his four-day trip to the White House by attending the dedication ceremony for the Chosin Few Battle Monument on June 28. Surprisingly, Moon’s own parents were among the refugees saved by U.S. Marines from Chinese attack during the Battle of Chosin Reservoir. At the dedication ceremony, Moon sincerely demonstrated his gratitude in his speech toward the U.S. veterans gathered at the event. He confessed his personal indebtedness to them as follows: “If it hadn’t been for those who fought in the Battle of Chosin Reservoir, if the operation to evacuate the port of Hungnam hadn’t been successful, my life would probably have never begun, and I would not be here today”. He also added how the veterans’ sacrifices had not been forgotten by the nation, either: “The Republic of Korea remembers your and your parents’ sacrifice and dedication. Its memory of gratitude and respect will continue forever”.

Such efforts on Moon’s part to revalorize the U.S.–ROK blood alliance were revealed as even more resolute in his trade gift. Leading South Korean conglomerates that accompanied Moon as part of his business delegation announced constructive job-creating investment plans on American soil. Samsung Electronics will invest $1.8 billion in home appliances and semiconductor plant facilities in South Carolina and Texas. Likewise, LG Electronics will spend $550 million on washing machine plants in Tennessee and New Jersey. SK Group and GS Group will begin importing American shale-gas in a few years, while Hanjin Group will purchase 50 additional planes from Boeing over the next seven years. These investments plans were, however, unfortunately not enough to appease Trump’s appetite for the ‘America First’ doctrine. Trump addressed the trade imbalance issue between the two countries in his statement, prognosticating renegotiation of the U.S.–Korea Free Trade Agreement, or KORUS FTA.

In the greater scheme, however, this trade imbalance is not a major point for the U.S–ROK alliance. There are still many issues that the two countries need to seek agreement on, based on close mutual trust. In this regard, the summit successfully regularized a 2 + 2 ministerial meeting, as well as a high level Extended Deterrence Strategy and Consultation Group under the common purpose of strengthening extended deterrence against the Kim Jung-un’s threats.

Bad Omen for the Future of Two-Track Policy?

The U.S.­–ROK summit approved Moon’s two-track policy, offering the Kim Jung-un an opportunity to exit from its current escalation phase. However, Kim Jung-un dynasty refused to do so, at least initially, speaking instead of its intention to directly play the game with U.S . On the eve of Independence Day, the Kim dynasty tested Hwaseong 14 ICBM, the country’s leader calling the event a “package of gifts” for Americans. The Kim dynasty’s such test since the Moon administration took power overshadowed Moon’s July 6 ‘Berlin Declaration’, which was intended to solemnly manifest the revival of the Kim Dae-jung administration’s inter-Korean rapprochement approach.

In a coordinated response, the U.S., South Korea and Japan swiftly released a joint statement in the middle of the annual G-20 meeting hosted by Germany, calling again for newer and tougher UN sanctions against Kim Jung-un’s provocation, as well as China’s greater role in restraining Kim Jung-un. U.S. ambassador to the UN, Nikki Hailey, at a UN Security Council meeting called Kim’s unexpected gift “a clear and sharp military escalation” and further stated that “we will work with China…but we will not repeat the inadequate approaches [of] the past”. South Korean Foreign Affairs Minister, Kang Kyung Hwa, seemed to concur with these remarks when she told the National Assembly on July 9 that she is in the process of discussing secondary boycotts with the U.S.

As Kim Jung-un’s provocations evolve into a new phase, some analysts suggest that a nuclear freeze in exchange for the suspension of annual U.S.­–ROK military exercises is the only viable solution to the problem. Nevertheless, latest developments testify that the time is not yet right. Perhaps Kim Jung-un’s greed to maximize his negotiation leverage has grown too immense for the carrot-oriented Moon-shine policy  to properly work.

The post The ‘Blood Alliance’s Future Knotted with Blue Ties appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.

On s'en aperçoit mieux avec le recul : les guerres de coalition à prétention humanitaire, pour se porter au secours de peuples crucifiés, n'ont pu tout résoudre. Du Kosovo à l'Afghanistan,les bilans humains et matériels ont été lourds, la reconstruction s'est souvent avérée problématique, alors que de (...) / Afghanistan, Irak, Kosovo, Conflit, Géopolitique, Relations internationales, Violence, Guerre du Kosovo 1999, Guerre d'Irak 2002 -, Guerre d'Afghanistan 2001 - - Armées

How Will We Manage When They Know They Can Hit Us?

North Korea’s July 4 launch of an ICBM pushes us to a full reckoning with our motives, values, and national existence. In columnist Charles Krauthammer’s words, for “25 years and five administrations, we have kicked the North Korean can down the road. We are now out of road.” North Korea has put enough “facts on the ground” to present us with a stark choice, between military action or acquiescence to their intercontinental nuclear capacity. UN Ambassador Nikki Haley’s explicit public reference to U.S. military power suggests that U.S. policy makers do not see other options.

Our influence in the world and our security have diminished. We must note that every administration since 1994 paved the road to today; faults and errors are bipartisan and often very human. Regardless, events and arguments will raise questions that portend even greater dangers. We must prepare for a long game, and start by reorienting our foreign policy to America’s basic precepts.

Our reaction to the July 4 test implies that our highest priority is to avoid the threat of nuclear attack. But North Korea will likely gain their nuclear capable ICBMs.  When they do, will we be comforted that  a nuclear attack on the US would be suicide? What if they demand concessions from South Korea or Japan, thinking that we are deterred from striking them? If we only brandish our own military power now that they can hit us, how confident will our allies be in our protection in the future?

North Korea’s operating style will surely confront us with those questions sooner rather than later. The wrong answers will trigger a cascade of losses and doubts. If we show our security commitments to be malleable, allies will disappear. Second, such wavering calls America’s motives into question. Our rhetoric, to protect peace and stability, promote prosperity, and encourage democracy, will look cavalier, or like a cynical cover for raw power. Third, if a nation founded on freedom’s principles will not take risks for others’ freedom, perhaps no one really cares about freedom. Perhaps America’s founding principles are delusional. Fourth, our holding of those principles mark our national identity. If their “self evident” truth is discredited, so will be America’s legitimacy.

The  administration is fashioning responses to the latest launches, and the commentariat is abuzz with attempts to find new angles.  All acknowledge that military action will trigger disastrous counterstrikes, and no one sees Kim Jong Un making compromises.  None can avoid ex-diplomat Evans Revere’s cogently point, that every option for policy toward North Korea leads to outcomes that are beyond bad.  He also notes that any policy will demand skillful diplomacy with many countries, which may not work anyway.  No policy today will avoid the ugly questions, which could discredit America dangerously.

America must turn its focus to reversing any cascade of doubts, into one of affirmation of our nature and goals. Only from affirmation and clear resolve can we build leverage over North Korea or other regimes of its ilk, and it will need time to take effect. Getting to that point requires that we play the long game, with a clear and firm focus.

America’s true bottom line has always been validation of our founding creed, of unalienable rights and government serving to secure them. If we re-voice our policy goals in these terms, we exhibit our true motives, and address the worst possibility of the dystopian cascade.

Our creed need not alienate us from what Freedom House calls “partly free” regimes. Some afford their people more welfare and freedom than others; some are raising those levels and some lowering them. China, though still a one-party state, has a government that knows its public obligations and aims to better the condition of its citizens. We will not be friends as we are with Denmark, but we share some values, as well as common interests. We can see degrees of compatibility,with our ethos as the yardstick.  Using it to calibrate our relationships, we assert our values.  Our global scope for diplomatic collaboration will expand.

A growing understanding of our goals will tip countries like China to focus, more and more over time, on the compatibilities with us.  North Korea will stand out, more and more over time, as an abhorrent outlier, any interest in supporting them less and less worth the cost.

While we should build a new policy base regardless of their threat, we could then point out to North Korea how we adapt to degrees of friendship and enmity — and their weapons, belligerence, and inhumanity put them at the bottom of the ladder. If they feel that Muammar Gaddafi’s overthrow proves their need for a nuclear arsenal, they can be reminded of an arsenal’s failure to save the Soviet Union, and we view their regime as more reprehensible than the Soviets’.

The world ultimately shares our values, which are genuinely the root of our animosity to North Korea. If America aligns our policies by that priority, more will see North Korea as we do – confronting them with a choice between better conduct and the Soviets’ fate.  More importantly, we restore our global influence, in the name of rights and freedom. But it will take time.  We should start as soon as possible.

The post North Korea: Push Comes to Shove appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.

Cette recension a été publiée dans le numéro d’été de Politique étrangère (n°2/2017). Sébastien Boussois propose une analyse de l’ouvrage de Jean-Pierre Perrin, Le djihad contre le rêve d’Alexandre. En Afghanistan, de 330 av. J.-C. à 2016 (Seuil, 2017, 304 pages).

Qu’il soit Proche, Moyen, ou Extrême, l’Orient a toujours fasciné la civilisation occidentale. Si l’on peut encore comprendre pourquoi le « Levant » et la rive orientale de la Méditerranée nous touchent tant – berceau de nos cultures, religions et identités –, on oublie souvent que le rêve d’un homme venu d’Europe fut d’étendre principes et rêves de notre civilisation jusqu’aux confins de l’Asie centrale et extrême-orientale. La terre d’Afghanistan fut le grand rêve d’Alexandre le Grand.

Comme le disait Nicolas Bouvier, ce rêve « si beau, perspicace, intemporel, généreux », n’a eu de cesse de trotter dans notre inconscient depuis la défaite d’Alexandre. C’est en effet là que son rêve s’est fini, avec son Empire. De la Grèce aux steppes d’Asie centrale, ce monde n’était qu’un. Aujourd’hui, il s’est fissuré en plusieurs blocs, en plusieurs micro-mondes.

Les conflits qui bouleversent la région du Moyen-Orient à l’Afghanistan nous semblent lointains jusqu’à ce que des bombes viennent frapper nos villes. Une vie là-bas n’est pas une vie ici. Et pourtant. Cette importation des tensions venues de si loin prouve aussi que nous sommes une part de cette identité et que le rêve d’Alexandre, devenu cauchemar notamment en Afghanistan depuis environ quatre décennies malgré quelques périodes de calme, revient nous hanter. L’arc de feu qui part de Damas jusqu’à Kaboul, en passant par l’Irak, dessine une des régions les plus dangereuses et les plus en guerre du monde aujourd’hui.

Jean-Pierre Perrin, longtemps journaliste à Libération, écrivain-voyageur, romancier, souhaitait revenir sur les lieux géo-poétiques de cette géo­politique du chaos régional. C’est ainsi fait pour un pays qu’il connaît particulièrement bien : en promenant le lecteur dans l’histoire du pays, sa culture, sa politique, il nous fait revivre le Gandhara, cette terre où prospéra l’extraordinaire et tolérante civilisation née de la rencontre entre la Grèce et l’Orient, et il s’interroge sur les raisons qui ont transformé cette terre fertile en terre brûlée, lit du djihadisme contemporain. On trouve dans ce livre complots, invasions, services secrets, armées, concentrés sur un territoire désert, hostile et qui n’a de cesse de nous intriguer. Un pays escarpé qui perd nos armées conventionnelles impuissantes dans des montagnes qui n’ont guère changé depuis Alexandre.

L’auteur interroge dans ce récit passionnant nos propres motivations à vouloir intervenir en terre inconnue, au nom de principes européens qui ont aussi fait les beaux jours d’une terre désormais en proie à l’enfer. Et comme un signe, cette terre résiste et reste insaisissable.

Comme le dit l’auteur, Iskander Kebir, comme on l’appelle là-bas, est encore présent partout. Mais qui sont ceux qui finalement s’en souviennent ? « L’Afghanistan est un pays de conquérants fantômes, de régiments errants, de bataillons disparus, de fugitifs aussi, certains rattrapés, tués, d’autres qui courent encore. » Comme si l’Occident et l’Orient s’affrontaient ici, sur de nombreux différends, pour leurs survies respectives, en ayant encore en tête les théories géopolitiques réalistes du XIXe siècle, qui expliquent que qui contrôle le cœur de la terre, le heartland, contrôle le monde. Alexandre l’avait déjà compris, en bon disciple d’Aristote qui lui avait assuré que, « depuis le toit de l’Hindu Kush, on pouvait découvrir le reste du monde ».

Sébastien Boussois

Pour vous abonner à Politique étrangère, cliquez ici.

(Own report) - Contrary to its announcements, Germany is continuing to furnish arms to Saudi Arabia - and is delivering patrol boats to the Saudi Coast Guard. Last week two patrol boats debarked from the Peene Shipyard in Wolgast headed for Saudi Arabia. They are part of a €1.5 billion deal, which includes the delivery of over 100 vessels to the country's coast guard and navy. The Lürssen Shipyard in Bremen is the main contractor. These ships are being delivered in spite of the worldwide criticism Riyadh is facing for its war against Yemen and its maritime blockade of Yemeni ports - provoking a devastating famine and aggravating a rampant epidemic of cholera. For its maritime blockade Saudi Arabia can rely on German patrol boats. According to a recent report published by the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), al Qaeda is benefiting from the war Saudi Arabia is waging in Yemen - also with German arms. The US ban to carry laptops on board certain passenger flights is allegedly connected to terrorist attacks planned by a reinvigorated al Qaeda in Yemen.

Les effectifs des casques bleus, les soldats mandatés par l'Organisation des Nations unies (ONU), ont doublé en dix ans, de même que le nombre de leurs missions. Depuis la fin du conflit Est-Ouest, les opérations dites de « maintien de la paix », sur une base le plus souvent multilatérale, ont pris (...) / Armement, Conflit, Relations internationales, Droit international humanitaire - Armées