Tag Archives: Saudi Arabia

Fifteen Saudis.

It’s kind of amazing to watch the talking head squad comment on the disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi columnist for the Washington Post who was apparently abducted and quite probably killed and dismembered by his government for the crime of being mildly critical of Prince Muhammad Bin Salman. As I’m sure you know, Khashoggi went to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul to obtain some documents relating to his planned marriage … and never emerged. Now denizens of Morning Joe who were not so very long ago praising Bin Salman to the skies – I’m looking at you, David Ignatius – are now wringing their hands over the disappearance of a colleague. Rightfully so – if there’s any truth to the murder allegations, this is a sickening and despicable act.

MBS red-handedWhat’s ironic is that these pundits should be surprised and appalled by such behavior. After all, the Saudis have been killing people by the thousand in Yemen. It appears that Yemeni children’s biggest mistake may be that they aren’t members of the Washington Post editorial board. And if memory serves, they were well represented in the 9/11/2001 attacks … nearly as many hijackers as there were assassins sent to kill Khashoggi. I’m surprised that the Saudis considered this such heavy lifting. Nevertheless, all of the gray-headed shills who were running around trumpeting the virtues of “MBS” will now have to find some way of reconciling themselves to the ugly truth: their hero is a murderous despot.

The evidence of the Saudi regime’s toxicity is much broader and deeper than this suggests. They have been complicit in supporting some of the most retrograde and destructive movements in the Middle East, South Asia, and North Africa over the last six decades. Most often, they did so with our help. They were deeply hostile to Arab nationalist movements, to the point of becoming de facto allies of Israel after the Israeli military destroyed Nassar’s army in 1967 (while Nassar and the Saudis were engaged in a conflict in – you guessed it – Yemen). They funded and manned the radical opposition to the Soviets in Afghanistan, with our active participation. They fueled radical movements in Iraq, Syria, you name it. And their intelligence services reportedly supported the Saudi 9/11 hijackers as they prepared to pull off their spectacular atrocity.

Will Trump do anything? Not a chance. He’s worried about arms sales and lucrative bookings at his hotels, to say nothing of plans for future ventures for him and Jared Kushner. This is where we’re at, folks. Don’t like it? Vote.

luv u,

jp

Friends and enemies.

Our friends the Saudis are planning to execute a woman for being a dissident. It’s a little hard to imagine how you can be a woman in Saudi Arabia and NOT be considered a dissident, but there you have it. The method will be beheading, which, as I recall, Trump decried furiously during the 2016 campaign as an aberrant ISIS tactic drawn from the middle ages – no one has seen this in centuries! Actually, it’s the preferred method of execution in one of your favorite dictatorships, Mr. Trump. Still, it’s hard to blame the president for this relationship; we’ve been cozy with the Kingdom for decades, regardless of what they do, often bending our own foreign policy to suit their tastes (as long as it remains within the narrow limits of our own imperial policies).

New leaders, same old handshakeWhy? Is it just oil? Well, that’s a complicated issue. Sure, Saudi Arabia wouldn’t have been the center of attention for so long if their chief export had been nutmeg. Their ample supply of easy-to-extract, cheap-to-process crude oil was famously described by our policymakers as a source of enormous strategic power and perhaps the greatest material prize in the history of the world. But it’s that “strategic power” that is the key, as I’ve mentioned previously in these pages. We didn’t need Saudi oil in the 1950s and we don’t need it today, but we do need to have influence and a potential veto over it to maintain our leverage over other nations.

So Saudi is our “friend”, despite the fifteen 9/11 hijackers, and Iran is our “enemy”. Iran is Saudi’s enemy for a range of reasons, not least among them the fact that Saudi has a sizable Shia minority which they fear may be emboldened by a strong Iran. So that puts the Kingdom on the side of the U.S. government and the Israelis (another “friend”). Both Israel and Saudi would love to see us send our troops into Iran … because that’s what friends are for? It sounds chaotic to describe in this brief fashion, but there is a cold imperial logic to this framework – one that opposes secular Arab nationalism, opposes Shia resistance in all of its forms, and supports the enrichment of key U.S. based industries; namely fossil fuels and military technologies, both heavily subsidized by American taxpayers.

So it should come as no surprise that Trump supports an extremist state that beheads its citizens and flies planes into our buildings. In this sense, he’s a real traditionalist.

luv u,

jp

Opposite day.

Trump finally did something constructive – met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un – and the chorus of protest is deafening. I’m not a deep-state conspiracy theorist, but that broad consensus around our imperial foreign policy does not look favorably upon this development. Readers of this blog may recall that I have occasionally wondered aloud (or in html text) whether there are deeper motivations behind this 70-year-old war that never ends. The U.S. relationship with South Korea is one part alliance and perhaps two parts lord/serf. That second component became more evident when Trump announced that there would be no more “war games” – just the use of that term alone exploded heads throughout the talk-show tele-verse.

Right, but still a total dickAs Bruce Cumings and others have pointed out for many years, the South Korean military is essentially under the command of U.S. generals. That is, in the event of a war, South Korean commanders would take orders directly from our military. Add to that the fact that the U.S., South Korea, and North Korea have technically been in a state of war since 1950, and you have a sense of how this works. Think about it – what does it say about South Korea’s sovereignty that they are not in control of their military? Recall, too, that the country was under the rule of generals and assorted dictators into the 1980s, all backed by the U.S. So when a president threatens the sanctity of “military exercises”, essentially admitting that they are, in fact, war games and, as such, “provocative,” as Trump accurately described them, national security reporters and consultants on every network start spinning like crazy.

In all honesty, Trump is a disaster in practically every respect. But his ideology is simply himself. Absent imperial designs, the Korea problem has always been a relatively easy one to solve, given the right conditions – namely, sane leadership in South Korea like Moon Jae-in. The North has always, always wanted direct talks with the United States. Their nuclear weapons program was obviously an attempt to build a credible deterrent to a preeminent military power that literally laid waste to their country in the 1950s. All Trump had to do was say yes. Would Obama have done the same thing, given the same conditions? Hard to say. Trump’s one advantage is that he’s not hide-bound by training and knowledge. In other words, it sometimes takes a dunderhead to see the obvious.

Lest this sound like a praise fest, trust me, I have no illusions about this president. With Bolton and Pompeo at his side, he’s probably doing this to free us up for a war with Iran. We’re already helping Saudi and the UAE pound the living shit out of Yemen. So, eyes open, this is one good thing in a sea of troubles, and we should encourage our compatriots to see both the benefits and the risks. In other words, tell Democrats, liberal talking heads, etc., not to take the other side just because it’s Trump. War in Korea would be an unmitigated disaster – anything that ends that threat is a good thing.

luv u,

jp