Saudi Arabia

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in World Politics

      Why Don’t Football Fans and Arab Sheikhs Love Each Other?

      by

      The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Washington Post condemns Pompeo for ‘vile’ Khashoggi ‘falsehoods’

      by

      Washington Post condemns Pompeo for ‘vile’ Khashoggi ‘falsehoods’Fred Ryan says former secretary of state ‘outrageously misrepresents’ Post journalist murdered by Saudi Arabian regime The publisher of the Washington Post, Fred Ryan, has blasted the former secretary of state Mike Pompeo for “outrageously misrepresenting” and “spreading vile falsehoods” about Jamal Khashoggi, the Post columnist murdered by the Saudi Arabian regime in 2018.Nikki Haley plotted with Kushner and Ivanka to be Trump vice-president, Pompeo book saysRead more“It is shameful that Pompeo would spread vile falsehoods to dishonor a courageous man’s life and service and his commitment to principles Americans hold dear as a ploy to sell books,” Ryan said.Pompeo’s memoir of his time in Donald Trump’s presidential administration, Never Give an Inch, was published on Tuesday.One of a slew of books from likely contenders for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination – if in this case one who barely registers in polling – the book recounts Pompeo’s time as CIA director and secretary of state under Trump.The Guardian obtained and reported a copy last week. In its own review, published on Tuesday, the Post called Pompeo’s book “vicious … a master class in the performative anger poisoning American politics”.The reviewer, the Pulitzer prize-winning reporter Tim Weiner, added: “Hatred animates this book. It’s got more venom than a quiver of cobras.”The murder of Khashoggi caused outrage around the world and stoked criticism of the Trump White House over its reluctance to criticise the Saudi regime, particularly the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who grew close to Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser.US intelligence believes the prince approved the killing of Khashoggi, whose remains have not been found.On the page, Pompeo deplores Khashoggi’s murder. But he also writes that Khashoggi was not a journalist but “an activist who had supported the losing team” and criticises what he calls “faux outrage” over a killing that “made the media madder than a vegan in a slaughterhouse”.On Monday, Khashoggi’s widow, Hanan Elatr Khashoggi, told NBC News: “Whatever [Pompeo] mentions about my husband, he doesn’t know my husband. He should be silent and shut up the lies about my husband. It is such bad information and the wrong information … This is not acceptable.”Elatr Khashoggi also said she wanted “to silence all of these people who publish books, disparage my husband and collect money from it”.On Tuesday, Ryan said it was “shocking and disappointing to see Mike Pompeo’s book so outrageously misrepresent the life and work of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi.“As the CIA – which Pompeo once directed – concluded, Jamal was brutally murdered on the orders of Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman. His only offense was exposing corruption and oppression among those in power – work that good journalists around the world do every day.”Pompeo responded on Twitter, writing: “Americans are safer because we didn’t label Saudi Arabia a pariah state. I never let the media bully me. Just because someone is a part-time stringer for the Washington Post doesn’t make their life more important than our military serving in dangerous places protecting us all. I never forgot that.”Ryan said Khashoggi, who wrote for the Post while resident in the US, “dedicated himself to the values of free speech and a free press and held himself to the highest professional standards. For this devotion, he paid the ultimate price.”TopicsBooksMike PompeoJamal KhashoggiPolitics booksUS politicsTrump administrationUS foreign policynewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in World Politics

      Saudi Arabia and Russia Have Now Teamed Up in OPEC+

      by

      The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden administration ‘dragged feet’ on Mohammed bin Salman immunity ruling

      by

      Biden administration ‘dragged feet’ on Mohammed bin Salman immunity rulingLegal experts raise questions about run-up to granting immunity in civil case involving murder of journalist When the Biden administration filed a legal brief last week calling for the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, to be granted sovereign immunity in a civil case involving the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, it said it was strictly a legal determination that did not reflect its views on the “heinous” killing.“In every case, we simply follow the law. And that’s what we did,” Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, later said.But a close examination of the Biden administration’s actions, including interviews with legal experts and people who closely followed the matter, suggest the controversial decision was anything but straightforward.Beginning last summer, the administration’s decision to delay action and seek months of legal extensions before submitting its views on the matter before a US judge offered Saudi Arabia an unprecedented opportunity to protect Prince Mohammed through a legal manoeuvre that put him above the law and out of the reach of the US legal system. Once this had happened, the Biden administration in effect said its hands were tied.“If you look at the sequence of events, it is hard not to see this was a battle between Biden and Mohammed bin Salman playing out,” said one close observer, who asked not to be named so they could speak candidly. “I would hate to imagine that there was bartering over our judicial system and that integrity was up for grabs.”The US government was first invited to get involved in the civil case against Prince Mohammed on 1 July by the US district court judge John Bates. At the centre of the request was a lawsuit filed in 2020 against the crown prince and his associates by Hatice Cengiz, Khashoggi’s fiancee, which accused Prince Mohammed and his associates of conspiring with premeditation to kidnap, torture and murder Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018.Bates’s request was straightforward. He gave the administration 30 days – until 1 August – to submit a “statement of interest” and weigh in on whether the heir to the Saudi throne ought to be granted sovereign immunity in the case, or tell the court that it did not wish to make a statement. He also wanted the administration to weigh in on how the court might reconcile protections that are given to foreign leaders and those who are using a US law that allows victims of torture or extrajudicial killings to hold perpetrators accountable.At that time, Prince Mohammed was – clearly – not a sovereign. In Saudi Arabia, that distinction belonged at the time solely to his father, King Salman.Harold Koh, a former legal adviser to the state department during the Obama administration who is now a professor of international law at Yale Law School, said the US had competing interests at the time. On the one hand, the US asserts reciprocal principles of immunity so that its own head of state will be offered protection from legal courts. But that had to be weighed against Biden’s statements about human rights being at the centre of his administration’s foreign policy and “autocrats understanding that the president means what he says”.“All things considered, silence would have been the better way to balance those competing national interests,” Koh said, adding that there would have been “ample precedent” for the state department to stay silent.On 15 July, Joe Biden met Prince Mohammed in Jeddah, a meeting that started with a fist bump and was meant to “reset” his relationship with a leader he once called a pariah. It would later emerge that the meeting was also the start of a campaign by the administration to try to persuade the Saudis not to cut oil production before the US midterm elections.Back in Washington, just a few days later on 18 July, the US asked Judge Bates for an extension, saying it needed time to consult multiple entities within the administration with respect to “complex issues of international and domestic law”. The court agreed, giving the US until 3 October to respond.Weeks later, on 23 September, Brett McGurk, a Middle East policy coordinator for the US National Security Council (NSC), and Amos Hochstein, a US senior adviser for energy security, visited Jeddah again, ostensibly to discuss energy policies.Days later, on 27 September, the Saudi royal court announced that Prince Mohammed had been named prime minister, a role that had been and usually is held by the Saudi king. Observers noted that the apparent promotion did not confer any major new duties or powers to Mohammed bin Salman. Human rights defenders saw it as a ploy to influence the US recommendation on sovereign immunity, which was due about a week later.The US government, citing “changed circumstances”, requested a second extension to prepare its response and was granted one, until 17 November. A few days after it missed its 3 October deadline, Opec+ announced it was cutting oil production by 2m barrels a day, in what was seen by Democrats as an attempt by the kingdom to interfere with the US election and side with Russia over US interests.Biden promised that Saudi Arabia would face “consequences” for the decision, but has not articulated any specific actions he planned to take against the kingdom. On 17 November, just hours before a midnight deadline, the administration filed a notice that it believed Prince Mohammed, as prime minister, deserved to be treated as a sovereign as a standard matter of international law.An NSC spokesperson told the Guardian that the US president was briefed on the immunity decision, which was based on “well-established principles of common law”.When the Guardian asked the spokesperson if any US official ever suggested to Saudi Arabia that Prince Mohammed could be appointed prime minister before the matter was public, the spokesperson said: “This was an independent decision made by Saudi Arabia.”People familiar with the matter say legal questions about Prince Mohammed’s status were hotly debated inside the state department, where views about the best course of action differed.In debates within the administration, senior officials such as McGurk who have sought to promote the rehabilitation of the Saudi-US relationship have edged out policy objectives focused on human rights.“This administration made the decision it did because Mohammed bin Salman is prime minister. But they dragged their feet so much … This was clearly a policy decision in that they waited and stalled,” said one person who has advocated for human rights to have more prominence in decisions around policy.Leaders like Prince Mohammed were “legitimately worried” when Biden first came into office and vowed to make the Saudi heir accountable for human rights violations.“And when they got into office, the execution was not there,” the person said. Even when Biden made the decision to release a declassified intelligence report that found Prince Mohammed had likely ordered the murder, there were no sanctions against him.The person added: “That set the stage and indicated the rhetoric was not matched by substance.”TopicsMohammed bin SalmanSaudi ArabiaBiden administrationUS foreign policyUS politicsMiddle East and north AfricanewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      How Saudi Arabia’s Blowup With Biden Threatens Democrats in 2022

      by

      Democrats and administration officials are furious at the Saudis’ move to cut oil production, seeing it as an attempt to meddle in a U.S. election.Only three months have gone by since President Biden gave Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, the fist bump heard ’round the world.But relations between the United States and the world’s top swing producer have deteriorated markedly since then, precipitated by OPEC’s decision this month to reduce oil production. The Saudis argued that the falling price of crude oil, which had dropped to $80 a barrel, mandated the cut; U.S. officials disagreed.But coming at the height of a U.S. election season characterized by public anger over high gas prices, it looked to many Democrats like a partisan move. The U.S. had asked for a one-month delay, to no avail.The Biden administration was “blindsided by this,” said Steven Cook, an analyst at the Council on Foreign Relations. “And now the Saudis are dug in.”National security officials insist they weren’t blindsided. But other officials, including John Podesta, the climate czar, were furious. Many saw the move as a Saudi attempt to meddle in a U.S. election, and they viewed the Saudis as reneging on a mutual understanding the two countries had reached after the war in Ukraine took Russian oil off the market. The president said there would be “consequences,” and John Kirby, a spokesman for the National Security Council, said the U.S. would be “re-evaluating our relationship with Saudi Arabia in light of these actions.”Jared Kushner’s front-row seat at an investor meeting in Riyadh this week will probably only heighten Democrats’ suspicions, as will the kingdom’s recent agreement to strengthen energy ties with Beijing. Notably, no U.S. officials were invited to the Riyadh meeting.“The White House has taken this very personally, and for understandable reasons,” said Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. He speculated that OPEC might not ultimately cut production by the full two million barrels a day that it said it would; member countries often fail to meet their production quotas anyway.“More important,” Riedel added, “is the symbolism of the president trying to reset U.S.-Saudi relations and the Saudis essentially repudiating him and humiliating him.”Riedel urged the White House to take action before the midterms, possibly by revoking maintenance contracts for Saudi warplanes or by withdrawing the U.S. troops stationed in the kingdom.Many Democrats in Congress, and some Republicans, would support a rebuke to Riyadh. Several leaders of key committees have already announced that they will refuse to approve future arms sales without a change in Saudi attitudes.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.Florida Governor’s Debate: Gov. Ron DeSantis and Charlie Crist, his Democratic challenger,  had a rowdy exchange on Oct. 24. Here are the main takeaways from their debate.Strategy Change: In the final stretch before the elections, some Democrats are pushing for a new message that acknowledges the economic uncertainty troubling the electorate.Last Dance?: As she races to raise money to hand on to her embattled House majority, Speaker Nancy Pelosi is in no mood to contemplate a Democratic defeat, much less her legacy.Secretary of State Races: Facing G.O.P. candidates who spread lies about the 2020 election, Democrats are outspending them 57-to-1 on TV ads for their secretary of state candidates. It still may not be enough.But Representative Tom Malinowski, a Democrat from New Jersey who is on the Armed Services Committee, said he “found it a bit puzzling that the administration was pushing this on Congress at a time when Congress was out of session.”The most likely vehicle for congressional action would be an amendment attached to the annual defense authorization bill, which has passed the House but not the Senate. Saudi Arabia, Malinowski said, had become a “partisan actor” in U.S. politics, and it was time to move to punitive actions.“Any move like this would send a very powerful signal to the kingdom that the U.S. is unhappy with the crown prince,” Riedel said, noting that the young Saudi leader “has many enemies inside the kingdom.”None of that has happened yet, however; U.S. officials viewed some of the ideas kicking around Congress as impractical, and thought it was important to consult with both parties.Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, said he appreciated that the administration had not acted rashly to punish Saudi Arabia, arguing in favor of a deeper reassessment of U.S. involvement in the Middle East. And if the Saudi decision accelerated U.S. moves toward alternate sources of energy, he added, it might turn out to be a “blessing in disguise.”As for fears that Saudi Arabia might turn to other security partners, such as China, Murphy and others noted the kingdom’s utter reliance on U.S. support for its military. The United States, he said, needed to get out of a situation in which “Saudi Arabia benefits from this deep security relationship, but then knifes us in the back.”A crown prince who ‘much preferred’ TrumpFor the Biden administration and the kingdom, the mutual animosity appears to be personal.The Wall Street Journal reported this week that the crown prince “mocks President Biden in private, making fun of the 79-year-old’s gaffes and questioning his mental acuity” and that he “much preferred former President Donald Trump.”For his part, Biden vowed during the 2020 campaign to make the Saudi government a “pariah” — making his fist bump with the crown prince all the more striking.But the clash with Democrats has also been long in the making. As the U.S. diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks showed, Saudi rulers were enraged by the Obama administration’s diplomatic dealings with Iran. And they were further outraged by President Barack Obama’s decision to nudge aside Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian dictator, during the Arab Spring.Trump made it a priority to patch up U.S. ties with the Gulf. He visited Riyadh on his first presidential visit abroad — a trip defined by the famous photo of him touching a glowing orb at a counterterrorism conference.And he endorsed a Saudi-led blockade of Qatar, a tiny, iconoclastic Gulf state that was a cheerleader for the Arab Spring uprisings in 2011. A close Trump friend who became the chairman of his inaugural committee, the investor Thomas J. Barrack Jr., is currently on trial on charges that he acted as an undisclosed agent for the United Arab Emirates.The Saudis have underscored their diplomatic hostility to Biden by throwing money at Trump and his family. Kushner’s investment fund has taken on at least $2 billion in Saudi cash. And this weekend, Trump is hosting a Saudi-backed rival to the P.G.A. Tour at his golf course in Balmedie, Scotland — his second such event in recent months.Now, the Gulf nations’ budding relationship with President Vladimir Putin of Russia has become another flash point.During the Cold War, the United States leaned on Saudi Arabia to ramp up oil production, undermining high-cost Soviet producers in an effort to bankrupt the Kremlin. But in recent years, the Gulf countries have developed cordial ties with Russia.This photograph made available by Russian state media shows President Vladimir Putin meeting with Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the president of the United Arab Emirates, in St. Petersburg.Pavel Bednyakov/SputnikThis month, for instance, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the president of the United Arab Emirates, made a high-profile visit to Moscow to meet with Putin. Foreign policy analysts saw the move as yet another slap in the face to Biden, who has backed the Ukrainian government with weapons, intelligence and heavy diplomatic support in the face of Russia’s invasion.Part of Biden’s problem in the Gulf, Cook said, is “wanting to have it both ways.”Biden began his term by embracing Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, which Trump exited and the Saudis vigorously oppose. He also reversed Trump’s policies on the bloody Saudi-led war in Yemen, blasted the Saudi government for killing the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and talked up the shift away from hydrocarbon-based energy — only to backtrack this summer as gasoline prices squeezed U.S. consumers.“The kingdom and its neighbors view the appeasement of Iran as the foundational error preventing cooperation on many other issues,” said Rob Greenway, a former senior Middle East official on Trump’s National Security Council.In the long run, though, Saudi Arabia might have less leverage than its leaders assume. High oil prices are a momentary annoyance for Americans, but the future of energy is an existential one for Riyadh — and the United States has become a significant producer over the last decade. As Riedel put it, “We don’t need them the way we used to need them.”Malinowski, noting that Saudi Arabia had snapped to attention in 2020 after Trump threatened to pull out U.S. troops, said, “It’s time to act like a superpower, not a supplicant.”What to readOne of this year’s most anticipated debates is tonight in Pennsylvania, where Lt. Gov. John Fetterman will face Mehmet Oz in their pivotal Senate race. Here’s what we’re watching for, and you can follow live updates here.As Republican candidates make crime a central midterm issue, they are running ads against Black candidates that appeal to white fears and resentments — and they are brushing off criticism of such tactics with unabashed defiance, Jonathan Weisman writes.Many political observers trying to forecast the midterms note that as gas prices go up and down, the public’s mood tends to follow. Why, our Upshot team asks, does the cost of fuel have such power over us?The governor’s race in New York, where Gov. Kathy Hochul was expected to coast to victory, is now too close for Democrats’ comfort, Nicholas Fandos reports.Thank you for reading On Politics, and for being a subscriber to The New York Times. — BlakeRead past editions of the newsletter here.If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to others. They can sign up here. Browse all of our subscriber-only newsletters here.Have feedback? Ideas for coverage? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats suggest shifting weapons from Saudi Arabia to Ukraine

      by

      Democrats suggest shifting weapons from Saudi Arabia to UkraineDemocrats call for suspension of transfer of Patriot missiles in wake of ‘turning point’ in relationship with Saudis Democrats on Capitol Hill have suggested transferring US weapons systems in Saudi Arabia to Ukraine and suspending a planned transfer of Patriot missiles to Riyadh in the wake of what they call a “turning point” in Washington’s relationship with the kingdom.Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman from California who is a leading supporter of a weapons freeze, said he believed that “at the very least” Congress would move to halt the transfer of Patriot missiles to the kingdom, and probably pause other defense initiatives.US-Saudi rift grows over decision to cut oil productionRead moreKhanna is a longtime critic of Saudi Arabia and was one of the original sponsors of a 2019 measure that received bipartisan support and would have forced the US to end military involvement in Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen. That resolution was vetoed by then-president Donald Trump.In an interview with the Guardian, Khanna said tensions had reached a boiling point that was comparable to US sentiment following the murder of the Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi.The break in the relationship followed an announcement last week that Opec+, the oil cartel, had agreed to cut oil production by 2m barrels a day over the strong objections of, and lobbying by, the administration of Joe Biden. The move was seen as both a boost to Vladimir Putin and his war effort in Ukraine, and a stunning betrayal of Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the US, just weeks after the president had visited Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Jeddah.“I think President Biden is judicious and pragmatic by temperament but this was a real slap in his face,” Khanna said. While lawmakers like him have long advocated for a tougher response to Saudi on human rights grounds, Khanna said the Opec+ move had galvanized members across Congress.“This is a second moment like Khashoggi’s murder. I believe it is a total miscalculation by the Saudis,” he said, adding that there was still time for the kingdom to change course.Pressed on whether Democrats were likely to move beyond rhetoric, Khanna pointed to recent comments by his colleague Robert Menendez, a Democratic senator who as chairman of the foreign relations committee said he was prepared to halt Saudi weapons sales.“At the very least, the Patriot missiles will be suspended,” he said. “The fact that Menendez has spoken out means that at a minimum it is going to happen.”Meanwhile, Chris Murphy, an influential Democratic senator from Connecticut, said he believed the US ought to suspend the sale of advanced air-to-air missiles to Saudi Arabia and repurpose these missiles to Ukraine.“For several years, the US military had deployed Patriot missile defense batteries to Saudi Arabia to help defend oil infrastructure against missile and drone attacks. These advanced air and missile defense systems should be redeployed to bolster the defenses of eastern flank Nato allies like Poland and Romania – or transferred to our Ukrainian partners,” Murphy said in a statement.While physically transferring existing weapons systems in Saudi Arabia to Ukraine would not be particularly complicated logistically, experts said it could risk accusations that the Biden administration was escalating its support for Ukraine beyond levels that it considered appropriate, because the systems might require on-the-ground US personnel for support.William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute, said at a minimum, any such move to shift weapons would be met by serious debates within the White House and Congress. At the same time, he said, Russia’s continuing assault on Ukraine meant that “political considerations are shifting”.Changes to planned deliveries of Patriot missiles would probably cause “consternation” in Saudi Arabia, but changes to delivery of spare parts and maintenance could ground large parts of the Saudi air force, he said.Hartung said he believed the Saudis might be underestimating the impact of the sudden break in relations with Washington, given the relationship appeared to survive the Khashoggi murder. In that case, however, Trump was in the White House and steadfastly loyal to the Saudis. Hartung said he believed it was unlikely that Biden would veto a congressional resolution aimed at the kingdom, as Trump did in 2019.“It’s not a done deal, but the political tides are stronger against the Saudis than they have been – possibly ever,” he said.The Saudi foreign ministry this week rejected the criticism of its Opec+ decision and insisted the cartel had acted with unanimity and in its own economic interest. It also rejected any assumption that it could be forced into a policy U-turn.“The kingdom stresses that while it strives to preserve the strength of its relations with all friendly countries, it affirms its rejection of any dictates, actions, or efforts to distort its noble objectives to protect the global economy from oil market volatility,” it said.Khanna hit back at that claim.“The reality is that there is no economic case for what they are doing. This was punitive for Americans and it is aiding Putin,” he said.A spokesperson for the national security council said Opec’s decision last week to “align its energy policy with Russia’s war and against Americans” underscored Biden’s earlier call to set a “different sort of relationship” with Saudi Arabia.“We are reviewing where we are, we’ll be watching closely over the coming weeks and months, consulting with allies, with Congress – and decisions will be made in a deliberate way,” the spokesperson said.TopicsUS foreign policySaudi ArabiaUkraineDemocratsUS CongressUS politicsMiddle East and north AfricanewsReuse this content More

    • 250 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Saudi Arabia has screwed over the US – and the world – yet again. Enough is enough | Mohamad Bazzi

      by

      Saudi Arabia has screwed over the US – and the world – yet again. Enough is enoughMohamad BazziBy gouging global oil prices, Saudi Arabia has humiliated Biden and boosted Putin. The US must end this unofficial alliance In July, Joe Biden traveled to Saudi Arabia and shared a fist bump with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman. As a presidential candidate, Biden had promised to make Saudi Arabia a “pariah” for its human rights abuses and its seven-year war against Yemen. But a devastating global pandemic and Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine forced him to set these concerns aside in favor of realpolitik. Biden needed the Saudis to increase oil production in order to lower gasoline prices for American consumers, so he swallowed his pride and treated the crown prince as the world leader he aspires to be.Unfortunately for Biden, that cringe-inducing fist bump photo op has backfired in spectacular fashion.Earlier this month, the Saudi-led Opec+ energy cartel agreed to cut oil production by 2m barrels a day, which will mean higher fuel prices this fall and winter. In the days leading up to the vote, the Biden administration invested significant political capital in its efforts to dissuade Saudi Arabia and its allies from cutting production. In the end, Biden’s wooing of Prince Mohammed yielded nothing but a 2% reduction of the world’s oil supply.In fact, the prince has inflicted political damage on the Biden administration a month before the US midterm elections. After soaring to $5 a gallon in June, US gasoline prices fell for more than three months. Now they are rising once again, increasing by an average of 12 cents a gallon over the past week, to $3.92.Rising prices threaten the Democrats’ hopes of maintaining control over both houses of Congress after the November elections. The prince and his Gulf allies clearly preferred dealing with Donald Trump, whose freewheeling Republican administration gave Prince Mohammed a blank check in exchange for stable oil prices and multibillion-dollar arms sales.The Saudis also sided with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, who needs higher oil prices to help fund his war against Ukraine. As part of their economic sanctions against Moscow, the US and EU are trying to impose a cap on the price paid to Russia for its oil exports. But that effort could now collapse as global oil prices rise and Europe heads into a winter season when heating costs are expected to soar thanks to the Ukraine war.While Prince Mohammed may believe he outmaneuvered Biden and demonstrated his influence over the global oil market, his power play has upset the foreign policy establishment in Washington. Even so-called foreign policy “realists”, who for years ignored progressive criticisms of the US-Saudi partnership, must confront an uncomfortable question: if Washington can’t count on a steady supply of oil, what does it get in return for its decades of unwavering support for the House of Saud?Technically, the US and Saudi Arabia are not allies – they’ve never signed a mutual defense agreement or a formal treaty. For decades, the US-Saudi relationship has been largely transactional: the kingdom used its leverage within Opec (and later the larger Opec+ cartel) to keep oil production and prices at levels that satisfy Washington. The US used to import significant amounts of oil from Saudi Arabia, but now that Washington is the world’s largest oil producer, it no longer relies as heavily on Saudi imports. In return for guaranteeing a steady global supply of oil, successive US administrations supported the House of Saud politically, sold it billions of dollars in advanced US weapons, and provided military assistance whenever aggressive neighbors threatened the kingdom.In 1990, after Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait, Washington sent half a million troops to Saudi Arabia, which feared it would be Hussein’s next target. The US still deploys hundreds of troops and advisers to train the Saudi military and help it operate American weapons, including advanced warplanes, helicopters, and Patriot antimissile systems, which the kingdom has used to intercept drone and missile attacks by Yemen’s Houthi rebels.This oil-for-security arrangement has lasted through Democratic and Republican administrations, including multiple crises like the Arab-led oil embargo and Opec price increases in the 1970s and the aftermath of the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, where 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals recruited by Al-Qaida.Yet Prince Mohammed has now upended the decades-old understanding. Worse, he’s timed that decision so as to maximize Biden’s humiliation: a month before pivotal congressional elections, and as Washington and its allies are trying to maintain a united front against Russian aggression.If Biden doesn’t respond forcefully, he may embolden the crown prince to take more risks. So far, Biden has promised unspecified “consequences” in response to the Saudi maneuvering. But a growing number of Democrats in Congress, including centrists who hesitated to abandon the partnership despite the kingdom’s atrocious human rights record, are now demanding action.On 10 October, Senator Bob Menendez, a Democrat who chairs the powerful Foreign Relations Committee, called for an immediate freeze on “all aspects of our cooperation with Saudi Arabia”, and promised to block future US weapons sales. Senator Dick Durbin, another centrist and the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate, was even harsher, writing on Twitter that the House of Saud “has never been a trustworthy ally of our nation. It’s time for our foreign policy to imagine a world without their alliance”.Even before the ill-fated fist bump, Biden signaled to Prince Mohammed that he would carry out a business-as-usual relationship with the kingdom. In February 2021, weeks after taking office, Biden did follow through on a campaign promise to release a summary report of the US intelligence community’s findings on the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. The report concluded that Prince Mohammed had approved the assassination at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October 2018. But Biden, worried about harming the US-Saudi partnership, decided not to impose sanctions on the crown prince.By abandoning his promise to hold Khashoggi’s killers accountable, Biden convinced Prince Mohammed that he was too powerful to punish. At the time, Biden aides argued that banning the prince from visiting the US or targeting his personal wealth would accomplish little. But the lack of even symbolic US sanctions or response likely emboldened the prince to overturn the basic premise of the US-Saudi relationship.Since Prince Mohammed rose to power with his father’s ascension to the Saudi throne in 2015, he has presided over a series of destructive policies, including the Saudi-led invasion of Yemen and the kingdom’s campaign to blockade its smaller neighbor, Qatar. But the crown prince keeps failing upward, consolidating more control over Saudi Arabia. And he continues to be wooed by foreign leaders and business titans, thanks to the world’s sustained dependence on oil and Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.Prince Mohammed had clearly concluded that he can get away with keeping oil prices high and undermining the US and EU campaign to isolate Russia – and still secure US protection and military assistance because Biden can’t get past the decades-old policy of American support for the House of Saud.This is no longer a case of Biden choosing realpolitik over the stated, but rarely enforced, US ideals of supporting human rights and democracy over autocracy. It’s time for Biden to acknowledge that his supposed realist approach toward Saudi Arabia has failed – and tear up the oil-for-security deal.
      Mohamad Bazzi is director of the Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies and a journalism professor at New York University. He is also a non-resident fellow at Democracy for the Arab World Now
      TopicsForeign policyOpinionSaudi ArabiaMohammed bin SalmanMiddle East and north AfricaJoe BidenBiden administrationUS politicscommentReuse this content More

    • 225 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrat senators call for a freeze on arms sales to Saudi Arabia amid oil production cuts – video

      by

      Two Democrat senators have called for a freeze on arms sales to Saudi Arabia unless it reverses a Riyadh-led Opec+ decision to cut oil production. They said the decision to reduce production would help Russia’s war in Ukraine. 
      ‘The only apparent purpose of this cut in oil supplies is to help the Russians and harm Americans. It was unprovoked and unforced, as an error,’ the Connecticut senator, Richard Blumenthal, said. His statement was echoed by his Democrat colleague from California, Ro Khanna, who said: ‘When Americans are facing a crisis because of Putin, when we’re paying more at the pump, our ally, someone who we have helped for decades, should be trying to help the American people.’
      The Biden administration said it was reviewing its ties with the Gulf kingdom. 
      Speaking to CNN, however, a Saudi minister, Adel al-Jubeir, said: ‘Saudi Arabia does not politicise oil. We don’t see oil as a weapon. We see oil as our commodity. Our objective is to bring stability to the oil market.’ Riyadh is not partnering with Russia, he added

      Democrats issue fresh ultimatum to Saudi Arabia over oil production More