Barack Obama et Israël, avis de dissonances ?

Barack Obama et Israël, avis de dissonances ?

Ce n'est pas encore le début d'une tension, mais il y a bien un décalage dans le ton entre la nouvelle administration américaine et le nouveau gouvernement israélien. Devant le parlement turc, lundi 6 avril, le président des Etats-Unis, Barack Obama, a réitéré son attachement à la solution des deux Etats (la création d'une Palestine aux côtés d'Israël) pour régler la question palestinienne.

Ce rappel de la position classique américaine et de l'Union européenne prend un tour particulier compte tenu des premiers signaux émis par le nouveau gouvernement israélien, qu'il s'agisse du discours d'investiture du premier ministre Benyamin Nétanyahou ou du ministre des affaires étrangères Avigdor Lieberman. M. Obama a d'ailleurs mentionné en Turquie (ce qu'il n'avait pas fait auparavant) le processus d'Annapolis lancé le 27 novembre 2007 par l'équipe précédente (George Bush et Condoleezza Rice), stoppé par la décision de la partie israélienne en octobre 2008 d'organiser des élections anticipées qui ont tourné à l'avantage de la droite.

Ce processus qui avait ouvert des négociations (infructueuses) sur le statut définitif des territoires palestiniens, avait été enterré le 1er avril par M. Lieberman.

Voici l'extrait des propos de M. Obama concernant le conflit israélo-palestinien :

"In the Middle East, we share the goal of a lasting peace between Israel and its neighbors. Let me be clear: The United States strongly supports the goal of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. That is a goal shared by Palestinians, Israelis, and people of goodwill around the world. That is a goal that the parties agreed to in the road map [plan de paix international présenté en 2003 ] and at Annapolis. That is a goal that I will actively pursue as President of the United States. We know the road ahead will be difficult. Both Israelis and Palestinians must take steps that are necessary to build confidence and trust. Both Israelis and Palestinians, both must live up to the commitments they have made. Both must overcome longstanding passions and the politics of the moment to make progress towards a secure and lasting peace. The United States and Turkey can help the Palestinians and Israelis make this journey. Like the United States, Turkey has been a friend and partner in Israel's quest for security. And like the United States, you seek a future of opportunity and statehood for the Palestinians. So now, working together, we must not give into pessimism and mistrust. We must pursue every opportunity for progress, as you've done by supporting negotiations between Syria and Israel. We must extend a hand to those Palestinians who are in need, while helping them strengthen their own institutions. We must reject the use of terror, and recognize that Israel's security concerns are legitimate." Voici à présent l'extrait du discours de M. Nétanyahou prononcé le 31 mars devant la Knesset et dans lequel le nouveau premier ministre avait évoqué la paix sans parler explicitement d'un Etat palestinien: "My Government will act vis-à-vis the Palestinian Authority [PA] to achieve peace on three parallel tracks: economic, security and political. We strive to assist with the accelerated development of the Palestinian economy and in developing its economic ties with Israel. We will support a Palestinian security mechanism that will fight terror, and we will conduct ongoing peace negotiations with the PA, with the aim of reaching a final status arrangement. We have no desire to control another people; we have no wish to rule over the Palestinians. In the final status arrangement, the Palestinians will have all the authority needed to govern themselves, except those which threaten the existence and security of the State of Israel. This track - combining the economic, security and political - is the right way to achieve peace. All previous attempts to make shortcuts have achieved the opposite outcome and resulted in increased terror and greater bloodshed. We choose a realistic path, positive in approach and with a genuine desire to bring an end to the conflict between us and our neighbors." Voici enfin l'extrait du discours prononcé par M. Lieberman lors de la passation de pouvoir avec Tzipi Livni au ministère des affaires étrangères dans lequel il rejette le processus d'Annapolis , "Quand l'image d'Israël était-elle la plus forte dans l'opinion publique mondiale? Après la guerre des Six jours, pas après les concessions d'Oslo I, II, III, IV", avait-il alors assuré : "The Oslo process began in 1993. Sixteen years have passed since then, and I do not see that we are any closer to a permanent settlement. There is one document that binds us and it is not the Annapolis Conference. That has no validity. When we drafted the basic government policy guidelines, we certainly stated that we would honor all the agreements and all the undertakings of previous governments. The continuity of government is respected in Israel. I voted against the Road Map, but that was the only document approved by the Cabinet and by the Security Council - I believe it was Resolution 1505. It is a binding resolution and it binds this government as well. The Israeli government never approved Annapolis, neither the Cabinet nor the Knesset, so anyone who wants to amuse himself can continue to do so. I have seen all the proposals made so generously by Ehud Olmert, but I have not seen any results. So we will therefore act exactly according to the Road Map, including the Tenet document and the Zinni document . I will never agree to our waiving all the clauses - I believe there are 48 of them - and going directly to the last clause, negotiations on a permanent settlement. No. These concessions do not achieve anything. We will adhere to it to the letter, exactly as written. Clauses one, two, three, four - dismantling terrorist organizations, establishing an effective government, making a profound constitutional change in the Palestinian Authority. We will proceed exactly according to the clauses. We are also obligated to implement what is required of us in each clause, but so is the other side. They must implement the document in full, including - as I said - the Zinni document and the Tenet document. I am not so sure that the Palestinian Authority or even we - in those circles that espouse peace so much - are aware of the existence of the Tenet and Zinni documents. When was Israel at its strongest in terms of public opinion around the world? After the victory of the Six Day War, not after all the concessions in Oslo Accords I, II, III and IV. Anyone who wants to maintain his status in public opinion must understand that if he wants respect, he must first respect himself. I think that, at least from our standpoint, will be our policy."

* * * *

Jeudi 16 avril, l’émissaire de la nouvelle équipe américaine arrivera en Israël. George Mitchell, l’homme du “gel des activités de colonisation” rencontrera “Bibi” Nétanyahou, qui avait annoncé au contraire, durant la campagne électorale pour les législatives du 10 février, qu’il n’entendait pas freiner le développement des implantations israéliennes en Cisjordanie.

Alors que les experts s’interrogent sur la potentialité d’une crise entre les deux administrations qui n’ont manifestement pas la même conception du processus de paix avec les Palestinien , le gouvernement israélien part pour l’instant avec un léger handicap : l’absence d’un ambassadeur de poids à Washington.

Le dernier en place, Sallai Meridor a rendu son tablier pour divergences de vue avec la nouvelle équipe. Il est le frère d’un nouveau ministre de M. Nétanyahou, Dan Meridor, et dans le Haaretz, Amir Oren (très cruel sur les capacités linguistiques manifestement réduites de l’équipe actuellement déployée aux Etats-Unis) estime que ce dernier serait un bon candidat pour un poste qui deviendrait ainsi une affaire de famille.