L'OTAN au Liban, mais à une condition…

Les discussions en cours sur l'envoi d'une force internationale au Liban sud portent essentiellement le point de savoir quelle organisation – l'OTAN, l'Union européenne ou l'ONU – ou quels pays vont fournir les troupes. C'est certainement un point important, mais la vraie question concerne le changement de politique dans lequel Israël doit s'engager en échange de la mise en place de cette force et des risques d'une telle mission.

Aucune force internationale ne va se contenter de protéger Israël des missiles du Hezbollah si la stratégie israélienne ne change pas, car la récente escalade militaire dans la région est due au moins partiellement à cette stratégie. Si une force internationale laisse le gouvernement d'Ehud Olmert continuer sur sa voie actuelle, les pays qui fourniront des troupes donneront l'impression de soutenir la politique israélienne et leur mission sera vouée à l'échec.

Critiquer la stratégie israélienne ne revient pas à cautionner les actions du Hamas ou du Hezbollah ou à nier à Israël le droit de se défendre. C'est simplement souligner ce qui devrait être évident : les tentatives d'Israël pour trouver une solution unilatérale à ses problèmes de sécurité – qu'il s'agisse d'occupation, de retrait ou de séparation – ont échoué.

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

Registration is quick and easy and requires only your email address. If you already have an account with us, please log in. Or subscribe now for unlimited access.


Log in

  1. An employee works at a chemical fiber weaving company VCG/Getty Images

    China in the Lead?

    For four decades, China has achieved unprecedented economic growth under a centralized, authoritarian political system, far outpacing growth in the Western liberal democracies. So, is Chinese President Xi Jinping right to double down on authoritarianism, and is the “China model” truly a viable rival to Western-style democratic capitalism?

  2. The assembly line at Ford Bill Pugliano/Getty Images

    Whither the Multilateral Trading System?

    The global economy today is dominated by three major players – China, the EU, and the US – with roughly equal trading volumes and limited incentive to fight for the rules-based global trading system. With cooperation unlikely, the world should prepare itself for the erosion of the World Trade Organization.

  3. Donald Trump Saul Loeb/Getty Images

    The Globalization of Our Discontent

    Globalization, which was supposed to benefit developed and developing countries alike, is now reviled almost everywhere, as the political backlash in Europe and the US has shown. The challenge is to minimize the risk that the backlash will intensify, and that starts by understanding – and avoiding – past mistakes.

  4. A general view of the Corn Market in the City of Manchester Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

    A Better British Story

    Despite all of the doom and gloom over the United Kingdom's impending withdrawal from the European Union, key manufacturing indicators are at their highest levels in four years, and the mood for investment may be improving. While parts of the UK are certainly weakening economically, others may finally be overcoming longstanding challenges.

  5. UK supermarket Waring Abbott/Getty Images

    The UK’s Multilateral Trade Future

    With Brexit looming, the UK has no choice but to redesign its future trading relationships. As a major producer of sophisticated components, its long-term trade strategy should focus on gaining deep and unfettered access to integrated cross-border supply chains – and that means adopting a multilateral approach.

  6. The Year Ahead 2018

    The world’s leading thinkers and policymakers examine what’s come apart in the past year, and anticipate what will define the year ahead.

    Order now