In response to Mike Pompeo’s op-ed in the Wall Street Journal:
The kingdom is a powerful force for stability in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is working to secure Iraq’s fragile democracy and keep Baghdad tethered to the West’s interests, not Tehran’s. Riyadh is helping manage the flood of refugees fleeing Syria’s civil war by working with host countries, cooperating closely with Egypt, and establishing stronger ties with Israel. Saudi Arabia has also contributed millions of dollars to the U.S.-led effort to fight Islamic State and other terrorist organizations. Saudi oil production and economic stability are keys to regional prosperity and global energy security.
Saudi Arabia is acting in what it perceives are its own interests and will continue to do so regardless of what we do or do not do. It is working to destabilize countries with Shi’ite majorities or minorities with power. It funds Al Qaeda. It funds Wahhabi mosques all over the world where hatred against us and our way of life is preached on a daily basis. They are not our friends. They aren’t even frenemies.
To whatever extent our relationship with KSA is vital we should take steps to change that. We shouldn’t have had “vital” relationships with Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or China under Mao, either. There are tolerable authoritarian governments and intolerable ones. The Saudi government has become intolerable.
“The kingdom is a powerful force for stability in the Middle East. ”
You think he really believes that? Hard to think of a country that does more to destabilize things in the ME and lots of other places.
Steve
I thought it was unhinged.
I might add that the Saudis are not popular among Muslims for a number of reasons including their tight control over the Hajj and an imperious attitude.
I think our strategy is overwhelmingly to rein in Tehran, I cannot imagine a thaw in U.S. -Iran relations until at least the “Khoumani revolution” generation passes from power. I also can’t judge our sup[port for the Shah. He reportedly did terrible things, but, like Assad, in order to contain determined religious extremists. (True believing Islamists) Our leaders have also resorted to torture and targeting civilians when nothing else worked.
The Saudi rulers have a tense and tenuous relationship with these Wahhabi clerics, and rule the secular state only with their permission. I don’t know who really wanted this journalist dead, but he knew he was marked or he would have done his paperwork in Saudi Arabia instead of Turkey.
Again, IMHO, it’s Iran, if not for Iran we would give the Saudis the boot.
We have established that SA is horrible; not our friends.
We have established that Khashoggi was semi-horrible. 90% Muslim Brotherhood, 10% journalist. His murder was horrible by definition.
We have not established, just opinions expressed, that we have no cause to associate with SA. Realpolitik applies here just as with Russia, China and dozens of others over the years.
And then we have this: “To whatever extent our relationship with KSA is vital we should take steps to change that.â€
Exactly. But that will take time and the question remains with who? I have yet to hear or read a coherent argument. Just preaning about the most recent situation. Russia just offed another, ahem, spy, and there has been no outcry. Who has China or Iran slaughtered lately? It’s only Wednesday. I’m not schooled well enough to offer an opinion, but I don’t think the ME is teeming with cute dance partners.
Until then can we skip with the politically motivated opportunism for criticism? As an old boss said to me 30 years ago, I need solutions, not bitching.
My own thought is that we cannot avoid associating with KSA. There are any number of reasons for that, not the least of which is that they are still the low cost producer of high quality crude oil. My opinion can be summarized by the old proverb he who sups with the devil must use a long spoon. Be cautious in dealing with dangerous people.
However, I distinguish between the necessity of associating with another country, that country being a vital interest of the U. S., and the national interests of that country being vital interests of the U. S.
As I see it one of our gravest foreign policy problems is that there are too many highly-placed people who don’t make those distinctions. So, for example, they think that Israel is a vital interest of the U. S. (it isn’t) and, necessarily, Israel’s national interests are our interests, too. I think that’s lunacy.
“There are any number of reasons for that, not the least of which is that they are still the low cost producer of high quality crude oil.â€
And oil is a global commodity. This is a point I’ve been making to the environmentalist crowd for at least 20 years. Drill, baby, drill not because it’s not an icky business, but because dealing with MEasterners is ickyer. They are crazy and ruthless over there.
“However, I distinguish between the necessity of associating…….â€
Quite frankly, I’m not sure what that means, or is actionable. Again, I’m not a ME scholar, but the notion of abandoning Israel or the ME in general seems strategically suspect. Very bad guys who not only are not our friends, but have very big sticks, would most certainly fill the void. I hold no brief for meddling in the ME. But an awful lot of people have concluded we have no choice. I understand the difference between abandonment and doing their bidding. But I need to hear more meat on the bone about how to accomplish that.
Let me try to explain what I mean better. 70 years ago we were occupying (West) Germany, i.e. associating with it was a necessity. We decided that West Germany was a vital interest for us. That’s why we’re still there. Fair enough.
But West Germany has interests of its own which are not necessarily in our interest. Reunification was one of those. What vital U. S. interest did German reunification constitute? None as far as I can see. In fact I think that two Germanies in competition with one another would have been better for us and better for Europe. And how much history did they have unified? 60-70 years? One person’s lifetime.
Opposing German reunification including by force was within our power but we decided that Germany’s interests were ours. I think that was confused.
We have a similar relationship with Israel. I get that we associate with Israel and for some Israel is a vital interest. I don’t get why Israel’s foreign policy objectives (which include the destruction of Iran) are ours.
“Until then can we skip with the politically motivated opportunism for criticism?”
Those of us at this site who are criticizing KSA now, were doing it before the Kashoggi murder. We need to deal with them with open eyes. They are not our allies and friends, so we shouldn’t treat them as such. We shouldn’t have our people getting killed or kill others to advance KSA interests.
Steve
I appreciate the clarifications. And let’s skip Israel and Iran for now, as Iran’s reach exceeds Israel. So what do we do about SA? They are schmucks. We abandon the sordid interdependency and Russia will be there in a heartbeat. We can feel good about ourselves and run away, as opportunistic (Dem) pols and media types say. But as a practical matter, what?
A basic theme on this blog site is not to interfere if not in our national interests. So why dictate Yemen policy? Why change the SA way? If we can preserve our interests, a slow moon walk seems in order. The question remains, how and who?
As long as the Persian Gulf supplies 20% of the world’s oil consumption, it will be a major strategic asset. And since Europe, in particular, depends on Gulf oil, we will have to be able to control the Gulf.
At one time, we used the Shah as our main ally in the Gulf. That’s off the table so long as the Ayatollah’s reign. But we don’t need the Saudi royal family to run KSA and police the Gulf. We should be looking for a suitable puppet there.
That’s one of the best comments you’ve ever made here, Bob. Agree 100%.
“We should be looking for a suitable puppet there.
Regime change?
“I’m still waiting…..still waiting………facts are lazy and facts are late,
facts all come with points of view…..facts don’t do what I want them to…….facts just twist the truth around…..facts are living turned inside out…. (Let’s see who can identify that reference).
Yes, it’s clear. We need a new ME pal. Who? How fast? And how do we orchestrate it?
@Drew
I had to look it up. I have most of their albums but not that one.
As to the ME, kill ’em all, and let Allah sort it out. Even better, use the area for weapons testing and ammo disposal. Whichever country is the biggest shithead gets a little present.