In recent weeks, Arab countries, as well as Iran and Turkey have all been working out how they can move forward and get along with each other, all due to “sleepy Joe” Biden being asleep at the wheel. Where’s all this heading?

Barely a year in office and what has Joe Biden done in the Middle East? Could it be an after dinner game, like what Europhiles in Brussels play (‘Name five famous Belgians’)? Name five decisions Biden has made in the Middle East?

U.S. presidents can be bold. And they can be wrong. But the worst type are those who are neither bold nor decisive in anything they do. Joe Biden, under the microscope, appears to be a U.S. president asleep at the wheel on so many domestic issues but when we look at the Middle East, it’s almost as though he’s in a coma. And it’s starting to affect how the region operates and how its countries interact with one another.

During Trump’s early days in office, he made a point of doing nothing on the international circuit until the Saudis were ready to accept him as his first official international trip to mark his presidency. The background to this was a strong relationship between Jared Kuchner and Mohamed Bin Salman – the latter installed as Crown Prince by the Trump administration on the condition that a recognition was made of Israel. But the Saudis wanted more. One of the reasons why it took six whole months before Trump made it to Riyadh and ingratiated himself with the cultural histrionics of sword dancing and looking at best ridiculous, was that a second dirty deal was being carved about how the White House would go through with a particularly mendacious ruse against Qatar – which transpired quickly as a blockade on the tiny energy rich state and statements from Trump condemning them for supporting terrorism. In fact, there was even a plan on the table crafted by a middleman working for Blackwater chief Erik Prince, to draw Trump into a plan which would involve a private army overthrowing the Royal Family in Qatar.

The last part of this didn’t transpire as Trump smelled a rat and got nervous at the last moment and the middleman involved, George Nader, soon found himself caught in a CIA trap which landed him in prison and his blueprint for the Qatar invasion scrapped, as part of the Mueller investigation.

For the Saudis, it was nirvana since the day Trump arrived and danced to their tune, even though Kushner was soon to try and capitalize on the situation to harangue the Qataris to invest in his failed New York City real estate endeavours. For MbS in particular nothing could go wrong and the years of fretting over the Obama years seemed well behind them. Finally a U.S. president who is going to show us some respect and give us a much better deal. Indeed, it was rarely pointed out by journalists in the U.S. that the so called amazing arms deal that Trump claimed to have pulled off, was in fact, as Trump likes to put it himself “fake news”. Not only was the figure grossly inflated but it was also not explained to the press that the terms of payment were on the “never never” which gave the Saudis the flexibility to reduce the speed of the purchases and even pull out.

And then everything changed with the Khashoggi murder for Trump and MbS. The Saudi Crown prince was seriously underwhelmed by the Trump response which was barely supportive by any stretch of the imagination.

At this point, relations between Washington and KSA began to sour and in so many ways, what we are witnessing today are rooted here.

Joe Biden came into office huffing and puffing about the Saudis and the Khashoggi murder and how the Saudis would have to pay a price for what was conveniently dubbed a hideous human rights abuse against almost a U.S. citizen.

But the reality is that Biden hasn’t done anything of the sort. In fact, in many ways he has shown that all the ranting and remonstrating about Khashoggi was actually just fake news being created to hit the Trump administration. What we see now is a weak, ineffective and, at times, moronic U.S. president who can barely even remember his own tepid rhetoric on Saudi Arabia and their horrendous, barbarous attacks on Yemenis, even to this day. Just recently, he found himself on the back legs on a deal he signed off to allow more arms sales to the Saudis, despite Congress resisting the deal.

Given the confusion and the dead-dead slow negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, the Saudis are now lost and confused. They can’t take Biden seriously and are almost certainly betting on him not being around for a second term. Bearing in mind that they couldn’t take Trump seriously to help them in their hour of need, amidst talk to possible plots to overthrow MbS, it is hardly surprising that they think of Biden as a fool, who is not worth the time of day.

And so, the recent news that the Kingdom has turned to China to help it develop ballistic missiles really shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone given the backdrop of the regime’s worries both domestically and regionally. There have been plenty of warning signs since Khashoggi that the Saudis were shopping around and warming to both China and the Russians as the deal that they had struck with the Americans was very expensive and brought little advantages politically. With China as a partner now, there is leverage towards Iran which, in itself, actually works as a lightning rod to defuse tensions rather than exacerbate them. In fact, relations in the region are generally improving between old rivalries on a grand scale due to Biden’s dithering, as we have just seen a new page turned with Turkey which now is beefing up relations with its old foes in the region like the UAE and Egypt. The fact that Abu Dhabi orchestrated the attempted coup d’etat against Erdogan in 2016 and earlier in 2013 masterminded the successful overthrow of Muslim Brotherhood icon Morsi in Egypt shows security concerns, COVID, domestic woes, Iran’s growth are enough to smash heads together and work out how enemies can seek a workable peace with one another.

Who knows where this all heading, but a peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran is not as far fetched as it sounds. Who needs the Americans?

The reality is that the West can no longer carry off the moral high ground when dishing out the human rights tutelage. London, Paris and Washington are addicted to Saudi arms deals and have exposed woke U.S. media as entirely fake.

Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohamed bin Salman (or simply MbS to many) is an opaque figure who we can say at least is hugely misunderstood by most, certainly western media. In recent weeks, the news that a Saudi official who was allegedly the mastermind behind the murder of Jamal Khashoggi was arrested and detained briefly by the French, sparked more media chaff about the affair allowing America’s woke media to peddle the worn narrative about MbS being the one who signed the murder off.

Yet the French Connection to the MbS story is interesting as it was Macron who, one could argue, has turned a page for U.S. media and brought MbS in from the cold. It was actually the French president who recently reached out to the Saudis to boost France’s trade with the kingdom as few if any in the West now can keep up the boycott of Saudi Arabia. The French, the British and more importantly the Americans all need the Saudis’ money although three years after the Khashoggi murder the news that Joe Biden is throwing his weight behind 650 million dollar air-to-air missile deal, despite it receiving some resistance in the Senate over concerns for the Saudi role in Yemen, should surprise us – given that Biden was so bellicose about hitting the Saudi regime (and in particular MbS) hard, after only a few days in the Oval office.

Did the French move spur Biden to change his tact and win some points from the U.S. army lobby? Possibly. But if those from the woke camp in America who so vociferously campaigned and whaled at every given media moment about the death of the Saudi commentator are as disingenuous as Biden, then we should be surprised that it took three years for the Saudi crown prince to get the whitewashing which he has finally been awarded by Washington.

We now see, in the bare light, what all that fake hullabaloo was really all about: bashing Trump. If we look, in particular at CNN and the Washington Post (the latter who wheeled out a black editor who claimed to be a dear friend of Khashoggi and turned on the tears when the cameras started to roll), it is clear that the campaign was really only about using the murder as a tool to generate media spin against Trump who had made the Saudis his closest allies in the region (bar the Israelis) and at the time of the murder was helping them with a ruse to destroy Qatar. Trump was blind-sided by the murder. Totally caught off guard and the Washington Post didn’t miss a heartbeat in treating Khashoggi practically like a U.S. citizen who had been murdered for carrying out his American apple pie beliefs of liberty and freedom of expression. The truth about Khashoggi, was in fact a million miles from what the Post’s Opinion section crafted in a baptism of sensational storytelling with perhaps the biggest lie being how the journal managed to not mention its own links – let alone Khashoggi’s – with Qatar, as just one example.

But where is the call centre opprobrium now, just days after Biden has decided, in fact, that it’s fine to sell the Saudi’s air-to-air missiles? Why didn’t the French detain Khaled Aedh al-Otaibi, the Saudi official believed to be at the very centre of the murder and who could shed light on two key questions, namely where the body is and whether it was MbS who issued the order or not. The fact that al-Otaibi was detained was due to his name being on an Interpol blacklist, which, in itself is part of relations between the Saudis and Turkey reaching an all-time low when the murder occurred (it was Turkey who signed off the arrest warrant). But his release is an indication that the West has decided to move on from its hypocritical campaign against MbS and instead go back to selling his regime arms. Even Turkey is trying its best now to patch up its differences with the Saudis and move on. MbS himself has won an important battle both at home and abroad and has edged closer to attaining the foreign investment colossus which he needs to modernize the kingdom and consider a second IPO of the stateowned oil facility. Expect soon photos in the New York Times of him seating with world leaders and talking green energy and a cooling off for the spat with Lebanon (to give a ‘cadeaux’ to Macron and make him feel like a player in the region).

But the lesson to Middle Eastern despots in the region is clear. If you want to kidnap or murder your own dissidents who are residing in the West, don’t risk doing the job yourself with your own third-rate security services, who are almost certain to make a dog’s breakfast of the job. Much better to ask Mossad or Mi6 to do the job for you who will be more professional, leave no forensic or digital footprint and frame your adversaries into the bargain.

By Ziad HAFEZ

In 2016, the Arab National Conference made the assessment that Saudi Arabia would be facing a future of hard choices due to their fast-changing policies and positions. Events have since proved them right. Riyadh today faces tough decisions on the future orientation of its domestic and foreign policies – some of which could affect the very existence of the ruling dynasty and its line of succession established almost a century ago.

Domestically, two crucial changes made recently could weaken the foundations on which Saudi Arabia was built.

One of these changes relates to the line of succession, which has traditionally been bestowed through the sons of the founding monarch, Abdulaziz bin Abdul Rahman Al Saud. The succession allows only for the sons of this first king, all brothers and half-brothers, to accede to the throne in line with seniority, from eldest to youngest. The sons of these brothers are not successors to the throne.

This system has provided stability by avoiding rivalries among factions and the innate propensity for establishing lineage. However, the current King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, who succeeded to the throne via those founding principles, has effectively broken the rules by appointing his son Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) as crown prince, and thus establishing his own successive lineage.

To be fair, the old system has become increasingly difficult to implement as the second generation of princes is vanishing by attrition. As one may expect, this new appointment of King Salman’s son never sat well with the few remaining sons of the founding monarch.

However, MbS has managed to secure the endorsement of younger princes, and has consolidated his grip on power by systematically eliminating all those loyal to the former, now deposed, crown prince Mohammed Bin Nayef.

The second crucial change was implemented by MbS, when he chose to curb the influence of the clerical class who challenged his attempts to modernize the kingdom.

The firm grip of MbS on institutions that implement the observance of the Sharia, as defined by the clerical class, has allowed him to control the degree of social and cultural austerity that plagues Saudi society.

More pointedly, MbS issued a decree banning flogging in public, a significant landmark in interpreting penal rulings traditionally upheld in the kingdom. That ruling is likely to have far-reaching consequences in Islamic jurisprudence, already being addressed by scholars.

Antagonizing the clerical class may have strong support among the youth, especially those under 24 years of age who represent 51 percent of the total Saudi population of 35 million. However, the conservative nature of the population may balk at the speed of forced change.

The government is taking a big risk by undertaking difficult social and cultural reforms in a period of economic austerity. Damaging its alliance with the clerical class without having taken the time to establish a loyal middle class is akin to placing the cart before the horse.

MbS has managed to win several battles, such as granting women the right to drive, legalizing movie theaters, authorizing public, mixed-gender concerts, and creating touristic resorts on the Red Sea.

The crown prince has also cracked down on corruption and cronyism, by forcing princes of all ranks, businessmen, and others who have enriched themselves at the expense of the state, to return ‘illegitimately gained’ funds.

MbS’s most ambitious plan for the kingdom, however, is the construction of the city of Neom, touted as the future hub of technological innovation in the region. He also aims to reduce the kingdom’s dependence on oil. However, the economic infrastructure for such a shift is not in place, and will require a much longer time, and significant resources, to complete.

The question is, can these reforms continue if MbS’s economic policies do not provide the universal welfare state that the population has long enjoyed?

Saudi Arabia, by numbers

The kingdom enjoys the highest Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 1.9 trillion US dollars in the region on a purchasing power parity  basis. Inflation was a moderate five percent in 2019. The per capita income is among the twelfth highest in the world at US$ 56,000. Income inequality is moderate with a Gini coefficient index of 45.9 (the lower the lever, the lower the inequality).

While there are some doubts about the accuracy of the index, it does, for all intents and purposes, show some inequality even though the issue has not yet been at the forefront of local grievances.

There are no statistics on poverty, and the government does not allow attention to this issue. Protests are forbidden and the media is strictly controlled and regulated. Freedom of expression as well as the traditional freedoms enjoyed in developed societies are lacking. But, overall, the Human Development Index (HDI) for the kingdom is very high (0.854), positioning at 40 out of 189 countries and territories.

The Saudization of the work force has not achieved its goals of lowering the unemployment among the kingdom’s citizens and especially the youth.

Expatriates once constituted 90 percent of the workforce in the private sector, while Saudi nationals constituted the bulk of state employment. The private sector can absorb up to 600,000 workers, but the workforce entering the market is over 1.5 million.

The IMF has issued a report saying that the government cannot sustain a policy of absorbing the incoming workforce. In 2017, about 700,000 foreigners left Saudi Arabia because of high fees on expatriate workers, yet unemployment rose to 12.9 percent, though some estimates are much higher.

The Saudi domestic workforce lacks the necessary skills and willingness to learn and adapt to the standards required by private companies. The domestic population has grown sevenfold since 1960, but its resources do not match that growth. Saudis are facing the reality of oil reserves depletion, with no new fossil fuel discoveries in sight. Oil reserves in Yemen may have been one reason for Riyadh’s aggression against its southern neighbor, but the results have been disastrous for the Saudis on every level.

Riyadh’s ability to economically provide for the needs of its population is challenged by an unstable energy market and the erratic policies of the government.

For instance, at the height of the war on Yemen, the crown prince decided to pump more oil into the market, leading to diminished oil prices and therefore government revenues. Stabilizing the market meant dealing with Russia at the great displeasure of the United States.

Furthermore, the war on Yemen has significantly drained the kingdom’s coffers, necessitating the imposition of austerity measures. Resurging oil prices have provided a small cushion of foreign reserves estimated at 500 billion US dollars, which allow Saudi Arabia’s credit ratings to remain high.

Given its erratic financial stability, ambitious domestic economic plans are likely to be further delayed due to the disastrous Saudi decision to launch an unnecessary, treasury-draining war on Yemen. The expectations of achieving a decisive victory within weeks or months, thereby cementing MbS’s legitimacy and competence, proved to be tragically misplaced.

Riyadh is now contemplating a humiliating defeat that has already delivered a blow to the crown prince’s carefully crafted image. The expected fall of the city of Marib in Yemen is likely to seal the fate of the war in the coming few weeks.

War, insecurity, and a region in flux

This unanticipated outcome has led Saudi decision makers to revisit old policies and strategies, and to examine new ones. Most importantly, the ruling dynasty has to ensure its security.

For the last 76 years, that protection was ensured by the United States. In exchange for a steady supply of oil, Washington protected the Saudi dynasty from the turmoil in the region caused by the establishment of Israel, communism and left-wing activism, and later, the ascendence of rival political Islamism.

The Saudi wars on Syria and Yemen, as well the financing of jihadi movements against Iran and its regional allies, were a major departure from the traditional Saudi quiet diplomacy of bribing opponents and bankrolling intellectual mercenaries and media outlets.

In a surprising admission, MbS has acknowledged the exportation of Wahhabism to many parts of the world upon the request of western governments and in order to provoke sedition and dissent within the Muslim and Arab world. Does this mean that the kingdom will forego its policy of arming jihadists as it did in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya?

It may be too early to tell, but if MbS distances himself from the extremism of Wahhabism, then at some point, the past policy of arming jihadists will become a liability significant enough to threaten the dynasty. It may have already started to do so.

Saudis today want to know if US security continues to be reliable. The question remains at the center of the kingdom’s preoccupations.

For Washington, whatever use the kingdom might have once served to US foreign policy is today a subject of ‘introspection’ by the administration of President Joe Biden. Suddenly, ‘morality’ has become a factor in the alliance with the ruling Saudi family. The murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi seems to have made MbS unpalatable to President Biden, although not enough yet to curtail large weapons sales.

To date, no contact between President Biden and MbS has taken place. That trend started with US President Barack Obama but was flipped on its head during the administration of Donald Trump. Furthermore, the mood in the US Congress is getting significantly cooler toward the Saudi ruling dynasty in general, and MbS in particular.

The strategic weakness of the US at the domestic level as well as the erosion of its once military, economic and financial global dominance means it is no longer able to honor its defense commitments to its partners.

Riyadh has sensed this change, especially in the aftermath of the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan, with little or no notice provided to even its NATO allies.

The 2020 electoral defeat of Donald Trump was a further setback to the crown prince and his regional aspirations. Suddenly left without protection guarantees, MbS was forced to reassess both his alliances and enmities.

New friends, old foes, or just leave it to geography?

Engagement with Iran under the sponsorship of Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi was one outcome of his recalibration. While it is too early to say whether the talks will succeed, echoes from Iran seem positive, whereas Riyadh remains circumspect.

Saudi King Salman’s declaration of the need to have good relations with neighboring countries is a notch significantly below the warmer term ‘brotherly,’ but still, a softer stance than in previous declarations. The rivalry for the leadership of the Islamic world is still very much in play.

Discussions with Tehran undoubtedly involve the war on Yemen. So far, Riyadh is still not willing to concede defeat, and developments on the ground show it is still putting up a fight. If Marib falls – an almost certainty – the game will be over. What face-saving deal could be arranged is not clear at this stage.

Will the Iranians show some leeway? Will the Houthis, formerly allied to the House of Saud during the heyday of Arab nationalism, be accommodating? The issue is no longer what kind of control the kingdom may retain in Yemen but what kind of relations will emerge.

Geography will have its say and force an accommodation of some sort as the kingdom cannot ignore the strategic position of Yemen at the entrance of the Red Sea – nor can Yemen ignore the larger neighbor it has on its northern and eastern borders.

In terms of armaments, the kingdom has started discussions with the Chinese and the Russians, a turn of events not appreciated in Washington. The impending defeat in Yemen is also a stain on the performance of US defense weaponry that could not prevent or repel the rocket attacks on oil fields in the kingdom.

The cheaper and more efficient Russian and Chinese arms systems have suddenly become more attractive to Riyadh. This does not necessarily mean a severance of ties with the US, but rather, a diversification of supply sources and an accompanying increase in Russian and Chinese influence. At this stage, the US cannot but stand helpless in this turn of events.

Such moves by the Saudi kingdom are likely to forge increased cooperation with the Eurasian block, and could result in Saudi Arabia joining Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Ultimately, the security of West Asia and the Persian Gulf cannot be maintained by the US or NATO, but by the regional powers in ascendence. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is likely to increasingly take the lead role in all of Asia.

In September, Saudi Arabia’s main regional rival, Iran, fully joined the now nine-member SCO and Afghanistan is an observer nation. The Saudis will want to be part of this influential powerhouse, but should be reminded that Iran has the veto power to nix any new applicant.

The kingdom is also revisiting its position in Syria and Lebanon, although in opposite directions. In Syria, it is edging closer towards a resumption of relations with the government of President Bashar Assad, whereas in Lebanon it is aggressively pursuing an alliance with the right-wing Lebanese Forces (LF) and Arab tribes against the Lebanese resistance Hezbollah, President Michel Aoun, and Prime Minister Najib Mikati.

Hezbollah remains an extremely sore spot for Riyadh, and local Lebanese political parties traditionally allied to Riyadh do not have the clout or numbers to counter the group – which handily won the popular vote in the 2018 elections – despite the huge amounts of Saudi money made available to them.

In just the past few days, the Saudis have recalled their ambassador to Lebanon, sent the Lebanese envoy packing, barred imports from the Levantine state, and urged their Gulf allies – the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain – to follow suit. Facing a humiliating loss in Yemen, MbS has turned his wrath on yet another weak Arab state. Some habits die hard.

The most critical issue for the stability of the region remains the Palestinian struggle with the Israeli occupation. Saudi Arabia has not hidden its hostility toward the Palestinian resistance; instead showing outright disdain by imprisoning leading members of Hamas who have lived in the kingdom for several decades.

However, despite a ‘Deal of the Century’ – that later morphed into the Abraham Accords – which other Gulf neighbors quickly signed onto, the Saudis have not yet taken the step towards normalization with Israel.

Strong resistance within the Saudi kingdom appears to have influenced the decision to avoid a step considered offensive to most Arabs and Muslims around the world. Repercussions could have been significant had the caretakers of Islam’s two holiest cities ‘normalized’ relations with Israel.

Given the inherent instability of the kingdom due to the changes promoted by MbS, the spectacular failure in Yemen, and the increasing strength of the Resistance Axis in the region, it is unlikely for Saudi Arabia to normalize with Israel any time soon. The question is, where do Riyadh and MbS go from here, as Saudi Arabia’s regional, domestic and international prospects diminish?

thecradle.co

Unimaginable reconciliations are taking place across the entire region, since Joe Biden was sworn into office and indicated that he wasn’t going to tolerate regional leaders ‘behaving badly’ and the previous carte blanche from the White House which came with abhorrent human rights scandals.

The Khashoggi murder will not be swept under the carpet and forgotten. But then neither will the Trump-initiated border closure of Qatar with the rest of its GCC neighbours, or for that matter the phony crisis with Iran.

What else would you call the tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, in particular in the previous four years during the Trump administration? Saudi Arabia, along with the UAE and other GCC countries were expecting a second Trump term where what was hoped to be Iran being forced to withdraw its financial aid to Hezbollah or the Houthis in Yemen didn’t happen, when Biden took office. Qatar being alienated even more and MBS getting off scot free, not to mention the war in Yemen raging on, have all also been marked up as ‘non-starters’ by Biden from the off as he has put precedence on MBS himself over the Iran deal.

And it is working.

The cavalier young Saudi Prince’s actions in recent weeks have taken everyone by surprise as he has boldly taken it upon himself to build bridges with Qatar, bring Turkey completely in from the cold and – amazingly – agree to talks brokered by Iraq aimed at sketching out a peace treaty of sorts, based on the same premise of how the EU was formed at the end of the second world war: if you have shared interest with a neighbour, it makes it much harder for either party to go to war.

Saudi Arabia is looking at ways how it could cooperate with its arch foe Iran and is keen to be part of the new ‘Iran Deal’ talks in Vienna where there is an impetus on any new deal extending beyond uranium enrichment but also regional cooperation.

No matter what you might think about MBS, this turnaround shows two things: the young crown prince is capable of doing Mea Culpa. And he also a deft political thinker.

Or, put differently, he is learning fast. For a peace deal of sorts to be hammered out with Iran under the umbrella of Biden-initiated Iran talks, MBS is set to clean up. He could not only win even more political support both at home and abroad, but might catapult himself closer to the ambitious plans he has of economically reforming his country with a grandiose foreign investment scheme including a new ‘Dubai’ type Las Vegas in the desert. 2030 suddenly looks more than just a number.

In moving so quickly to clean up his back yard, it will be hard for Biden to keep playing the Khashoggi card and we could see a more dynamic, bigger relationship between Washington and its EU partners and Saudi Arabia – which goes beyond pumped-up defence procurement and energy dependency. The relationship is set for a reboot and the talks in Iraq now may well be a boost for the Iran deal coming off as there are indicators that the Iranians are ready to build a more sensible relationship with their neighbours in exchange for sanctions being busted and them being allowed to sell their oil on the world market.

Of course, the U.S. pays a very heavy price in the short term in this. Part of the Trump doctrine was always to lead the Saudis and their neighbours away from a model of governance and more bent on being cruel dictatorships which could fool their own people that such behaviour was all about defending oneself from a powerful enemy which has its missiles pointed at you. Forcing the Saudis to talk to the Iranians debunks this old myth that there really was a threat in the first place as enemies red in tooth and claw don’t scramble so quickly to the teak tables of diplomacy and talk about cooperation with such zeal when the air is thick with hatred and revenge. But perhaps more importantly it also dispatches into the long grass the need for such absurd defence spending, which is of course linked to western leaders scare-mongering their hosts about the so-called threat, while providing the solution on the same white marker board.

Does Riyadh really need to spend such obscene amounts of money on U.S. hardware to protect itself when, as we saw in the oil field missile attacks last year, it often doesn’t even work in the first place. And secondly, the spending is counterproductive, both on how much it keeps the rancid atmosphere of impending war but also how it prevents the incumbent from thinking about adopting a governance model.

If the talks in Iraq lead to the arms race being wound down and the same amounts of money can be put into investment, start-ups, research and renewable energy, then just think of the capabilities of what KSA could do in the region and its own young people who look to MBS as a modern-day saviour. The crown prince is looking forward and not looking back at what has passed and for this, western media should cut him some slack and acknowledge his achievements as the early steps of at least opening the doors to governance – as opposed to rule – are shaping up.

The U.S. regime condemns and threatens the Governments of Russia, China, and Iran, and pretends to be not a regime itself, though it is one, and so are most of its ‘allies’. (Whether any of those three targeted nations of the U.S. regime — Russia, China, and Iran — is or is not a regime will not be a topic here, but my personal judgment on that would be no, because each one of those three nations is a target of the world’s only super-power; and, therefore, is tragically and authentically compelled to be obsessed about its national security, in order for it to maintain its own independence and national sovereignty and not become yet another vassal-nation of the U.S. empire. All of the international aggression is actually being led by Washington and practiced by the U.S. and its allies. That is my personal view. But it’s actually irrelevant here, because the topic of this article is America, not any its target-nations. The target-nations are not the topic here, and nothing is assumed about any of them.)

To be a regime is to be a dictatorship, which the U.S. itself has already been scientifically studied and established to be — a dictatorship by its aristocracy. At the very least, if the Government of Russia, or of China, or of Iran, is a regime, then America’s accusing it of being one is simply a pot’s calling the kettle black, in which case, all of the U.S. regime’s holier-than-thou pontifications against its targets are laughable, instead of being informative. But the situation, in the present case, is even worse than that if the aggressor-nation — the U.S. — is alleging idealistic reasons for targeting other nations. That claim would then raise the U.S.’s accusation to an even higher level of aggressive hypocrisy.

For examples of this hyper-hypocrisy: Just as Russia, China, and Israel are three of the U.S. regime’s targets, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Israel, are three of the U.S. regime’s ‘allies’, and those three ‘allies’ are, very clearly, regimes, not democracies. Of course, Americans are lied-to and deceived to think that the racist-supremacist theocratic apartheid nation of Israel is instead ‘the only democracy in the region’ — and how stupid is that to believe? But that’s what the U.S. Government and its media tell them to believe, and only few Americans are outraged against their rulers for perpetrating such blatant lies upon them — manipulating the public in such a way, which assumes them to be mere fools. However, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are widely recognized to be “regimes,” and they will therefore be the focus here, because they blatantly display the U.S. Government’s hypocrisy to ‘justify’ its aggressions against Russia, China, Iran, and other targeted nations.

Recently, after twenty years of the billionaire monarch of Dubai in the UAE threatening, drugging, capturing, and imprisoning, his fleeing daughters, the BBC headlined on February 17th “Princess Latifa: UN to question UAE about Dubai ruler’s daughter” and reported that “The United Nations has said it will raise the detention of Princess Latifa, the daughter of Dubai’s ruler, with the United Arab Emirates (UAE).” The day before that, the BBC bannered “Princess Latifa: ‘Hostage’ ordeal of Dubai ruler’s daughter revealed” and reported: “The daughter of Dubai’s ruler who tried to flee the country in 2018 later sent secret video messages to friends accusing her father of holding her ‘hostage’ as she feared for her life. In footage shared with BBC Panorama, Princess Latifa Al Maktoum says commandos drugged her as she fled by boat and flew her back to detention.” Also on February 16th, the BBC headlined “Princess Latifa timeline: The failed escapes of Sheikh Mohammed’s daughters”, and started with the year 2000, when one of Latifa’s sisters, “Shamsa escapes while on holiday with other members of the Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum’s family at their Surrey estate. The sheikh launches a search for her, but doesn’t inform the police – his men track her down in Cambridge over a month later. In an email to her solicitor, Shamsa says she was bundled into a car by four Arab men and driven to her father’s house in Newmarket, where she was injected and given tablets. The next morning, she is flown back to Dubai on a private plane.”

For all that the world yet knows, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum had her murdered, and her body disappear. On 6 March 2020, the Guardian headlined about Shamsa “Police to review inquiry into 2000 disappearance of Dubai ruler’s daughter” and there has been silence from the press after that. Latifa had made her first escape-attempt only two years after Shamsa, in 2002.

Probably they’ve both been murdered and disposed of. This is the reason why the UN will now be making noises about Latifa’s disappearance, but everything’s for show, because Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum is a U.S.-and-UK vassal, a prominent member of the U.S. aristocracy’s gang. “He’s on our side,” in the U.S. empire’s conquests — no target of them (such as the leaders of Russia, China, and Iran, are).

Another of ‘democratic’ America’s vassal leaders, the one who controls Saudi Arabia, had perpetrated the 2 October 2018 luring into Istanbul’s Saudi Consulate of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi (who feared for his life even as he entered there) where he was immediately dismembered and chopped-up by the team of Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman al-Saud, and thus was placed on public display how above-the-law Saudi Arabia’s Government really is. The five execution-team-members, whom the Crown Prince had reason to believe might testify against him if released, were sentenced to death. So, anyone who, from now on, would be hired for such an operation, would be a fool to trust that employer. The only real insiders in such a regime are at the very top. ‘Honor among thieves’ doesn’t exist at that high a level. Finally, on 9 September 2019, Turkey’s Daily Sabah newspaper bannered “Saudi hit squad’s gruesome conversations during Khashoggi’s murder revealed”, and reported that Turkey’s Government had just released recordings of the phone conversations between the head of the team that executed Khashoggi and a top aide to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman al-Saud, reporting on the success of their mission.

These are America’s ‘allies’. What they actually are is aristocracies that are allied with America’s aristocracy. It’s an international gang of billionaires, and they’re all psychopaths.

When someone such as Ukraine’s Yanukovych, or Iraq’s Saddam, or Libya’s Gaddafi — someone ‘we’ want to take down — is accused by anybody, any mere suspicion that’s been raised against such a person is instead a ‘proven’ ‘fact’ in the view of the regime’s media and in the eyes of its public; and the U.S. and allied regimes claim that there’s no need for any international investigation by the UN or any other organization, because ‘our’ ‘free’ press has already indicted and convicted the target (such as was done regarding Saddam Hussein and Bashar al-Assad). But not when the accused is instead ‘an ally’ — such as Benjamin Netanyahu, or Mohammad bin Salman, or Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, or any other major buyer of the products of U.S. firms such as Lockheed Martin. If America’s weapons are to be sold to such a nation, then it’s an ‘ally’ and there is no investigation into any of that leader’s crimes. But if the weapons are instead to be used against a nation, then whatever the person does is condemned-in-advance. This is ‘international justice’, in the view of the U.S. gang. Whether a foreign ruler is good or bad is irrelevant, because the U.S. regime is, itself, a gangster operation, and it adheres only to gangland rules. And anyone who has open eyes and an open mind can recognize this fact, because it has been amply documented (though not in the empire’s press).

In Brazil, President Jair Bolsonaro has been effectively removed from power, at least for the foreseeable future. His airy insouciance in face of the spreading virus exposed him to it. He has for the moment and the foreseeable future been quietly replaced by Army Chief of Staff General Walter Braga Netto.

Commented Miguel Andrade on World Socialist Web Site, “The Brazilian political establishment, from business circles to bourgeois editorial boards and the whole spectrum of political parties, is treating as an accomplished fact that President Jair Bolsonaro’s Chief of Staff Gen. Walter Braga Netto has been designated by the military brass to rein in the government’s criminally negligent response to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Andrade further noted, “The pandemic is rapidly gripping the entire country, with authorities projecting as an “optimistic” scenario of 100,000 deaths in the state of São Paulo alone and admitting to having lost control of even how many tests have been carried out throughout Brazil.”

He rightly concluded, “The gross negligence and incompetence of the Bolsonaro administration has called into question the legitimacy of the entire bourgeois setup in Brazil.”

The history of the Brazilian military in power hardly suggests a chorus of sweet heavenly angels singing “kumbaya” but they have never to their credit been remotely as manic or merciless as the Argentinian armed forces, for example when given their head.

In the United States, President Donald Trump remains un-incapacitated by the virus but he has enthusiastically approved a wild range of big spending bills that rival those of his two predecessors George W. Bush and Barack Obama in their profligacy. As I have noted before, America’s Libertarians and Cato Institute haters of any kind of national government and big spending continue to mutter and moan at Trump’s policies but no one even in the old Reagan and Bush loyalist ranks of the Republican party dares to challenge him.

Right now the most dangerous parts of American for the virus are New York City and other self-righteous, ultra-liberal Sanctuary City core areas. This has not gone unnoted across America’s vast continental Heartland which went for Trump by large margins in the 2016 election.

There are many months for the situation to change, but right now, Trump looks on course to win reelection by a larger margin than he did in the 2016 contest with Hillary Clinton. His margin will rise to landslide proportions if the Democrats are benighted enough to replace former vice president Joe Biden, their only credible candidate, with the self-righteous ,but frighteningly incompetent governor of New York State, Andrew Cuomo, a long-time Hillary Clinton loyalist who lost a thousand ventilators that the federal government had to help him find in a warehouse in New Jersey.

As I have previously noted, Mohamed Bin Salman was driving Saudi Arabia into self-inflicted ruin long before the coronavirus hit but it hasn’t helped. The governor of Riyadh, the Crown Prince’s uncle and key ally has been laid low by the COVID-19 and MBS and his father, old 84-year-old King Salman have retreated to an island refuge in the Red Sea. That makes them more vulnerable to a coup and there are any number of powerful players from Iran to the United States who could be motivated to try and cut them out.

In Britain, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been critically ill. Notably, on being discharged from an intensive care unit (ICU) he graciously thanked the country’s National Health Service for saving his life. This is not as much of a volte face as it might appear as Johnson pledged after his general election victory last year to invest much more money in the NHS. But it will stick in the craws of the Thatcherite slash-government purists in his Conservative Party.

Under the remorseless Audit of Pandemic, Johnson is therefore moving in the same direction as Trump in the United States and General Braga Netto in Brazil: Away from the idealized minimum or zero government role in the economy and health care and instead towards a nationalist, hands-on central government that at least acknowledges its responsibility for the wellbeing of the general population.

Eighteenth century, sheltered, romantic libertarians will continue to shake their heads wearing their quaint tricolor hats and muttering darkly about the anger of their ridiculous false gods Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Ayn Rand. But in Brasilia, as in Washington and London we see welcome signs of reality belatedly breaking in to shatter the old fantasies.

In Israel, the virus has enabled that master political magician Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to pull off yet another spectacular escape as improbable as any in a James Bond or Star Wars movie to remain in power indefinitely.

After matching him in three successive national elections, Blue and White opposition leader, former Army Chief of Staff retired Lieutenant General Benny Gantz finally blinked: Because of the coronavirus pandemic crisis, he agreed to enter into a coalition with Netanyahu leading it for the first 18 months.

This is more than enough time for Netanyahu, a master political infighter and intriguer to splinter Blue and White into fragments. Indeed, Gantz has already done the biggest part of the job for him.

His own top allies in the new party, former Finance Minister Yair Lapid and former Defense Minister and Army Chief of Staff Moshe Ya’alon both firmly opposed any agreement to compromise with Netanyahu refused to go along with it. Currently, even Gantz and Netanyahu have not yet finalized their agreement, but Netanyahu has seized the initiative from him. His record in power over the past decade suggests he will not release it easily.

Netanyahu can at least boast that his lockdown has kept Israel relatively isolated from the pandemic. That is not the case in Iran, which boasts close trade and energy ties with China and where the virus has been raging ferociously.

That of course, is also the case in the United States. Extremist US hawks have been gloating – hopefully – that the crisis in Iran might discredit and topple the government there. That seems very unlikely at the moment.

What remains possible is that if the virus does significantly “decapitate” the current leadership in Tehran, more extreme and unpredictable rather than more moderate figures may take over more ready to act on provocations from Washington rather than play them down.

In Saudi Arabia, the virus may also have unpredictable “cushion shot” – surprise ricochet – effects.

Saudi Arabia’s elite King Feisal Specialist Hospital, which treats members of the kingdom’s royal family, is said to be on “high alert” as senior members of the Al Saud clan become infected with COVID-19. As many as 150 royals in the kingdom are now believed to have contracted the virus, according to a report in the New York Times.

The highest royal to be infected so far is Prince Faisal bin Bandar bin Abdulaziz al Saud the governor of the capital Riyadh who is in his 70s and therefore at increased risk. Worse yet, at the time of writing, he is said to be in intensive care.

King Salman bin Abdulaziz, aged 84 is believed to have taken refuge on an island palace near the city of Jeddah on the Red Sea along with Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Salman on the same coast with his ministers. But these moves , if extended, may isolate them dangerously from the national centers of power.

Bin Salman was already in an uncharacteristic subdued mood before the pandemic hit as his oil price war on Russia and the United States backfired disastrously. Since then, he has been busy mending bridges with Moscow and appears close to completing a deal on reducing oil production with the Kremlin.

However, the prolonged slump in global oil prices will certainly continue and may intensify. Russia is in a sound position to ride out such a longer-term wave: Saudi Arabia is not.

If on top of all this, Bin Salman himself should contract the coronavirus, he has made so many enemies across society from royal to business circles with his reckless, warmongering and spendthrift policies that any sign of personal vulnerability could launch an attempt to drive him from power. He has almost certainly survived at least one assassination attempt already.

Only last month, Bin Salman ordered the arrest of two senior members of the royal family – Prince Ahmed bin Abdulaziz, the younger brother of King Salman, and Mohammed bin Nayef, his first cousin and the king’s nephew.

Like Netanyahu, Bin Salman has good reason for caution rather than dangerous adventures as both men struggle to maintain their increasingly precarious bases of power. That should point to a quieter, more peaceful region, at least in the short term.

But as I learned a long time ago in my native North Belfast, no time is more dangerous than when things get too quiet in a dangerous neighborhood.

The fear caused by the coronavirus outbreak is greater than that provoked by a serious war because everybody is in the front line and everybody knows that they are a potential casualty. The best parallel is the terror felt by people facing occupation by a hostile foreign army; even if, in the present case, the invader comes in the form of a minuscule virus.

The political consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic are already vast because its advance, and the desperate measures taken to combat it, entirely dominate the news agenda and will go on doing so for the foreseeable future, although it is in the nature of this unprecedented event that nothing can be foreseen.

History has not come to a full stop because of the virus, however: crucial events go on happening, even if they are being ignored by people wholly absorbed by the struggle for survival in the face of a new disease. Many of these unrecognised but very real crises are taking place in the Middle East, the arena where great powers traditionally stage confrontations fought out by their local proxies.

Top of the list of critical new conflicts that have been overshadowed by the pandemic is the battle for the throne of Saudi Arabia: Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS), whose dwindling band of admirers describe him as “mercurial”, this month launched a sort of palace coup by arresting his uncle, Prince Ahmed bin Abdulaziz, and his cousin, Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, whom he displaced as crown prince in 2017.

The new purge of close relatives by MbS may be motivated by his wish to eliminate any potential rivals for the crown who might step forward upon the death of King Salman, his 84-year-old father. This need to settle the royal succession has become more urgent in the past few weeks because the US presidential election in November might see the crown prince lose an essential ally: Donald Trump, a man who has become increasingly discredited by his shambolic response to Covid-19, and who faces Joe Biden’s emergence as the likely Democratic candidate for the presidency.

Trump has been a vital prop for MbS, standing by him despite his role in starting an unwinnable war in Yemen in 2015 and his alleged responsibility for the gruesome murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul in 2018. MbS has denied personal involvement in the killing, but told PBS last year: “It happened under my watch. I get all the responsibility, because it happened under my watch.”

The record of misjudgements by MbS after he established himself as the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia five years ago makes Inspector Clouseau seem like a strategist of Napoleonic stature by comparison. Every one of his initiatives at home and abroad has stalled or failed, from the endless and calamitous war in Yemen to the escalating confrontation with Iran that culminated in Tehran’s drone and missile attack on Saudi oil facilities last September.

The latest gamble by MbS is to break with Russia and flood the market with Saudi crude oil just as world demand is collapsing because of the pandemic’s economic impact. In living memory in the Middle East, only Saddam Hussein displayed a similar combination of hubris and erratic performance that inspired disastrous ventures such as the Iraqi invasion of Iran in 1980 and of Kuwait in 1990.

I once asked a Russian diplomat knowledgeable about the workings of the Iraqi ruler’s inner circle why none of his senior lieutenants, some of whom were intelligent and well informed, had warned him against taking such idiotic decisions. “Because the only safe thing to do in those circles was to be 10 per cent tougher than the boss,” explained the diplomat. MbS reportedly shows similar impatience towards anybody critical of the latest cunning plan.

When it comes to the oil price war, the likelihood is that the Kremlin will have thought this through and Riyadh will not. Russian financial reserves are high and its reliance on imports less than during the last price conflict five years ago between the two biggest oil exporters. Inevitably, all the oil states in the Middle East are going to be destabilised, Iraq being a prime example because of its complete reliance on oil revenues. Iran, suffering from the worst outbreak of Covid-19 in the region, was already staggering under the impact of US sanctions.

In time, the Russians may overplay their hand in the region – as all foreign players appear to do when over-encouraged by temporary successes. For the moment, however, they are doing nicely: in Syria, the Russian-backed offensive of President Assad’s forces has squeezed the rebel enclave in Idlib without Turkey, despite all the belligerent threats of President Erdogan, being able to do much about it.

These developments might have provoked a stronger international reaction two months ago, but they are now treated as irrelevant sideshows by countries bracing themselves for the onset of the pandemic. It is easy to forget that only 10 weeks ago, the US and Iran were teetering on the edge of all-out war after the Iranian general Qassem Soleimani was assassinated at Baghdad airport in a US drone strike. After ritualistic Iranian retaliation against two US bases, both sides de-escalated their rhetoric and their actions. Rather than drastically changing course, however, the Iranians were probably re-evaluating their strategy of pinprick guerrilla attacks by proxies on the US and its allies: this week, the US accused an Iranian-backed paramilitary group of firing rockets at an American base north of Baghdad, killing two Americans and one Briton. Iran has evidently decided that it can once again take the risk of harassing US forces.

Covid-19 is already changing political calculations in the Middle East and the rest of the world: a second term for President Trump looks much less likely than it did in February. The election of Biden, an archetypal member of the Washington establishment, might not change things much for the better, but it would restore a degree of normality.

Trump’s foreign policy in the Middle East and elsewhere has always been less innovative in practice than his supporters and critics have claimed. Often, in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was surprisingly similar to that of Barack Obama. The biggest difference was Trump’s abandonment of the nuclear deal with Iran, but even there Trump relied on the “maximum pressure” of economic sanctions to compel the Iranians to negotiate. For all Trump’s bombast and jingoism, he has never actually started a war.

However, this is now changing in a way that nobody could have predicted, because in its political impact the pandemic is very like a war. The political landscape is being transformed everywhere by this modern version of the Great Plague. By failing to respond coherently to the threat and blaming foreigners for its spread, Trump is visibly self-isolating the US and undermining the hegemonic role it has played since the Second World War. Even if Biden is elected as the next president, the US will have lost its undisputed primacy in a post-pandemic world.

counterpunch.org

Prince Andrew and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia have both had a bad week.

On the very same day that Prince Andrew was giving his disastrous interview explaining his relationship with the sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the crown prince – often referred to as MbS – was hearing from international bankers about the failure of his bid to sell part of Aramco, the state oil company, for a high price on the international markets. The sale had been heralded as the moment when Saudi Arabia would use its oil wealth to exalt its status as a world power.

The two princes have many characteristics in common: both have a reputation for arrogance, ignoring expert advice and showing startlingly poor judgement in taking decisions. The result has been a dismally unsuccessful record for both men.

In the case of Prince Andrew, these failures have been on a limited scale thanks to his relative powerlessness beyond his immediate circle. But ever since his elderly father became king of Saudi Arabia in January 2015, MbS has been the effective ruler of his country.

And it is his performance in this role, his power enhanced by his appointment as crown prince in 2017, that explains in part why international investors baulked at buying even a small piece – only 1.5 per cent was on offer – of Aramco, the largest oil company in the world, at the high overall valuation of $2 trillion placed on it by the Saudis.

These new departures introduced by MbS start in 2015 when, as defence minister, he launched a war in Yemen that was supposed to swiftly defeat the Houthi movement that held the capital Sanaa and much of the country.

Almost five years later, the Houthis are still there, but 100,000 Yemenis have been killed and 24 million of them – 80 per cent of the population – need humanitarian assistance. Lack of clean water sources, and the collapse of the medical system, both allegedly targeted by Saudi bombers, has led to 700,000 suspected cholera cases. The UN describes the food and health crisis in Yemen as the worst humanitarian crisis on the planet.

At home, MbS had claimed that he would reform Saudi Arabia’s medieval and oppressive social norms, producing a more tolerant and freer society. But such modernisation as there has been, such as allowing women to drive, has turned out to be cosmetic, while repression has been all too real.

A planned expansion in the rights of women was well publicised abroad, but a Human Rights Watch report issued earlier this month, entitled The High Cost of Change: Repression Under Saudi Crown Prince Tarnishes Reforms, tells a different and much grimmer story, saying that “authorities had tortured four prominent Saudi women activists while in an unofficial detention centre, including by administering electric shocks, whipping the women on their thighs, forcible hugging and kissing and groping.”

As the price of their release, the activists were asked to sign a document and appear on television saying they had not been tortured.

Other reforms have followed the same pattern. In April 2016, MbS launched Vision 2030, an ambitious scheme to modernise the Saudi economy that attracted international plaudits. But the reality of the economic changes to be introduced became clear in November 2017 when leading businessmen and royal family members were confined, some being reportedly abused, as part of an alleged corruption inquiry in the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Riyadh.

A few are still detained, while others were only released after handing over part or all of their business interests.

For a long period, MbS was treated gently by foreign governments greedy for Saudi contracts and by the foreign media, which bought into a PR picture of MbS as breaking the bonds of an archaic society. President Trump made a triumphal visit to Riyadh soon after his election and frequently tweeted his approval of all that MbS was doing – including his incarceration of the businessmen.

In terms of publicity, all went well enough until 2 October 2018 when a Saudi death squad murdered the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. The crime is now admitted by the Saudi authorities, though they deny that MbS knew about the killing in advance – something asserted to the contrary by US senators briefed by US intelligence.

The Khashoggi killing and the grisly dismemberment of his body released a flood of criticism from which MbS has yet to recover. The dead journalist had said the year before his assassination that the crown prince had “promised an embrace of social and economic reform… but all I see now is the recent wave of arrests”.

The tainting of Saudi Arabia’s reputation by the Khashoggi affair, and the torrent of criticism that followed, played a role in deterring foreign investors from buying into Aramco at the price the Saudis wanted.

But what really undermined Saudi Arabia’s reputation for stability was the surprise Iranian/Houthi drone and missile attack on the Abqaiq and Khurais oil facilities in September. As significant as the attack itself was Mr Trump’s refusal to retaliate against Iran. What had for so long seemed like a gold-plated US guarantee of Saudi security turned out to be nothing of the sort.

MbS is not going to be displaced because of these mistakes and miscalculations: when he was appointed heir to his father in 2017, the royal court purged and took over the entire Saudi security apparatus. On the other hand, the long list of self-destructive actions by the Saudi authorities in the last five years has left the country much less stable than it once appeared.

Prince Andrew’s take on the career of his fellow royal in Saudi Arabia would make interesting reading. Perhaps he looks on MbS’s absolute power and gigantic wealth with envy; he may even approve of the rigour with which his counterpart asserts his authority. This is not pure guesswork.

Andrew used to be a regular visitor to Saudi Arabia’s near neighbour and de facto protectorate, Bahrain, praising it as “as source of hope for many people in the world”. These kind words contrast with the report of an independent inquiry into the crushing of the Arab Spring protests there in 2011 which details 18 different torture techniques inflicted on detained protesters.

A British diplomat stationed in Bahrain at the time of a Prince Andrew visit later wrote that the thank-you letters he sent to his hosts after one visit to Bahrain – comparing the size of his plane to theirs – made for cringe-making reading.

In one significant respect, however, Prince Andrew is setting a good example for MbS by standing down from his public duties. Doubtless, the Saudi crown prince will be wondering, after the failures and fiascos of the last five years, if he should consider following the same path.

counterpunch.org