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 Alan MACLEOD

“The war in Yemen must end,” declared President Joe Biden in his first major foreign policy speech; “and to underscore our commitment, we are ending all American support for offensive [Saudi] operations in the war in Yemen, including relevant arms sales.”

Yet studying sales records from the Department of Defense (DoD), MintPress can reveal that less than one year into his presidency, the Biden administration has already approved 20 separate weapons contracts, worth just shy of $1.2 billion, to Saudi Arabia alone. This includes a $100 million shipment of Black Hawk helicopters, support for Apache gunships, and a $78 million deal to buy 36 cruise missiles. A new and controversial $650 million deal announced earlier this month has yet to be finalized but will likely soon follow, boosting sales up to levels equal with the earlier years of the Trump presidency.

The Saudi-led Coalition is once again pummelling Yemen’s capital, Sana’a. Images appear to show U.S.-made aircraft attacking ground targets. This is hardly surprising: American arms sales to Saudi Arabia have long been a point of contention. But this MintPress investigation will reveal the extent to which private American companies are profiting off the infliction of suffering on the Yemeni people.

Sorting through thousands of approved contracts, the Department of Defense has approved in excess of $28.4 billion worth of sales from American companies to the armed forces of Saudi Arabia since they began their military intervention in the Yemeni Civil War in March 2015. This includes billions of dollars worth of arms, supplies, logistical support and training services.

While this is a gargantuan number (already larger than Yemen’s gross domestic product), it is certainly a serious underestimate of just how much the military industrial complex is benefiting from what the United Nations has called the “world’s worst humanitarian crisis.” In addition to the $28 billion figure, Saudi Arabia is also a named customer (often along with other nations) in weapons deals worth more than $34 billion over the same period. However, the amounts the Saudis actually paid in these were not disclosed, though in some of these orders Saudi Arabia was clearly the primary buyer. For example, a $3.4 billion DoD-approved radar deal with Raytheon lists only two buyers: Saudi Arabia and the tiny nation of Kuwait (population 4.2 million).

Added together, this means that the DoD has greenlighted the sale of somewhere between $28 billion and $63 billion worth of arms from American companies to Saudi Arabia since the latter began its attack on the largely civilian population of Yemen.

How Saudi State Media Feeds Fake News to Israeli, Western Audiences

Of course, the U.S. was supplying the Saudis well before the war started and also continues to sell billions of dollars worth of weapons to other partners in the Saudi war on Yemen, such as Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Therefore, this number only begins to tell the story of corporate American war profiteering.

While selling weapons of war to such a repressive government was already ethically questionable, by March 2015 there was no way one could credibly argue that arms sales to Saudi Arabia would be used in a purely defensive manner. Nevertheless, they continued to grow, fueling the violence. From March to December 2015, sales to Saudi Arabia totalled $1.56 billion. But under Trump, that number ballooned to $5.47 billion in 2019 and $14.36 billion in 2020. Facing increased opposition even inside Washington, Trump even used his presidential veto to unblock an $8.1 billion deal.

Although the Biden administration has not overseen the bonanza fire sale its predecessor oversaw, the flow of arms has not stopped.

“President Biden said we were going to see an end to U.S. complicity in the Saudi war and blockade on Yemen. Unfortunately, this new $650 million weapons sale perpetuates both war and the blockade that’s pushing millions of Yemenis into famine,” said Hassan El-Tayyab — Legislative Director for Middle East Policy at the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a pro-peace lobbying group associated with the Quaker movement — adding:

These air-to-air munitions, combined with other forms of military aid, send a message of impunity to the Saudis as they continue their destructive behavior in Yemen with no consequences from key allies like the United States… Now is not the time to be greenlighting new arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Now is the time to use existing U.S. leverage to end the Saudi blockade before more Yemenis are plunged into famine.

Data compiled by MintPress shows a sharp decline in sales under the Biden administration

Calling the roll

The biggest profiteer from Yemen’s destruction has been aviation giant Boeing, which brought in $13.9 billion in sales over the period. Next comes Lockheed Martin, which has signed 62 separate contracts with the Kingdom since March 2015, worth in excess of $7.4 billion. Third on the list is missile expert Raytheon, which has cashed in on the violence to the tune of $3.3 billion.

Boeing’s spot at the top of the pile comes in large part thanks to a massive, $9.8 billion contract signed last year to maintain and modernize Saudi Arabia’s fleet of 269 McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle fighter jets, including changing out hardware components, updating software and improving weapons systems (McDonnell Douglas is a subsidiary of Boeing). 2020 was a great year for the company, as it also secured a $1.97 billion fee to provide 650 SLAM ER cruise missiles to the Saudi government.

Lockheed Martin has scored big with the Saudi Navy, making billions of dollars, including a nearly $2 billion contract to build four warships. In addition, it secured enormous sales of Patriot missiles and laser and infrared technology. Black Hawk helicopters made by its subsidiary Sikorsky (treated by the DoD as a separate entity) were also in high demand.

Meanwhile, many of Raytheon’s largest deals include air-to-ground missiles, guided bombs, and widespread logistical, planning and technical support.

Slices of the American pie

The top 10 war profiteers supplying the Saudis with arms are as follows (with the total value of contracts in parentheses):

• Boeing ($13,879,225,733)
• Lockheed Martin ($7,423,287,331)
• Raytheon ($3,306,032,077)
• Sikorsky ($650,701,270)
• PKL Services ($557,629,505)
• S&K Aerospace ($566,435,631)
• DynCorp International ($232,878,635)
• AITC-Five Domains JV ($183,584,909)
• L-3 Communications Corp. ($178,569,672)
• Kratos Technology and Training Solutions ($115,408,312)

For full information, including links to all grants, see the attached viewable spreadsheet.

Reading the approved sales, what becomes clear is the depth of U.S. involvement in virtually every aspect of the Saudi military. Of course, there are direct arms shipments. But there are also contracts for helmets and a wide range of equipment, intelligence services, maintenance arrangements, and even for English lessons for Saudi pilots to help them better use their aircrafts’ features.

While the offensive is widely known as the Saudi-led attack on Yemen, in reality, U.S.-made aircraft — armed with American missiles and bullets, maintained by American crews and flown by pilots trained by American operatives — hit targets selected by U.S. intelligence. All of this is done under political and diplomatic protection by Washington, which blocks attempts by regional organizations to mitigate the destruction and shields Saudi Arabia from international consequences. This, in other words, is an American attack on Yemen.

“It is inconceivable that the Saudi-led Coalition could be carrying out its attacks without the support of these companies,” Kirsten Bayes of the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) told MintPress via email; “Western-made weapons have been central to a bombardment that has destroyed schools, hospitals and homes and created the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. It is long past time for arms shipments to the Saudi-led Coalition to be brought to an end.”

In total, 86 U.S. companies have profited from sales to Saudi Arabia since its intervention in Yemen, including household names like General Electric, Booz Allen Hamilton and Honeywell. The full list is also available in the accompanying spreadsheet.

Death for sale – $50,000 apiece!

Counting the value of the contracts is relatively straightforward. Counting the dead is not. One recent estimate, however, put the cumulative death toll from the conflict at over 560,000. If that is the case, American companies have made about $50,000 in sales per death. The Saudis have deliberately targeted Yemeni infrastructure, including hospitals, farms and sewage plants. Oxfam calculated that attacks on health and water facilities have taken place on average every 10 days since the conflict began.

It is beyond doubt that American arms are in part to blame for the carnage. In the first two years of fighting alone, pieces of Raytheon weapons were found at 12 different sites where civilians had been targeted. Meanwhile, fragments of Boeing Joint Direct Attack Munition bombs were identified in the wreckage of a marketplace that had been targeted, killing 107 civilians, including 25 children. Not to be left out, 500-pound MK-82 bombs built and supplied by Lockheed Martin were used in an infamous 2018 attack on a school bus, killing 40 children, and a 2016 strike on a funeral hall that left 240 dead. The company’s unexploded cluster munitions also litter the country, likely causing casualties for years or decades to come. The U.S. is the only major Western nation not to have signed the 2008 convention banning the production and use of cluster bombs.

For almost seven years, Saudi forces have maintained a naval and aerial blockade of Yemen, cutting it off from the outside world. “The closure of Sana’a Airport has been devastating for Yemen, driving up the prices of life-saving medicines and humanitarian aid, and preventing mercy flights for tens of thousands of critically ill Yemenis who need emergency treatment abroad,” El-Tayyeb told MintPress.

Fragments of one of the MK-82 bombs used in an attack on a vegetable market in Hodeida, Yemen, October 25, 2018. Ibrahim Tanomah | MPN

Keeping the D.C. spigot stuck on open

Weapons manufacturers are well aware that their profits live and die on the decisions made by legislators. Lockheed Martin’s latest annual report makes that explicit. In a section entitled “other risks to our operations,” the Bethesda, Maryland-based outfit noted:

International sales also may be adversely affected by actions taken by the U.S. Government in the exercise of foreign policy, Congressional oversight or the financing of particular programs, including the prevention or imposition of conditions upon the sale and delivery of our products, the imposition of sanctions, or Congressional action to block sales of our products.”

“For example,” they state, “the U.S. Government has imposed certain sanctions on Turkish entities and persons as described in the risk factor below, and could act in the future to prevent or restrict sales to other customers, including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.”

Unsurprisingly, then, the military industrial complex has lobbied the government hard to continue supporting the violence. Ronald L. Perrilloux Jr., an executive with Lockheed Martin, denounced the wave of “patently false” “hostile media reports” about Saudi atrocities, described human rights laws as a “significant irritant,” and argued that the best thing to do is help the Saudis “finish the job” in Yemen by “provid[ing] them with the benefit of our experiences, with training of their forces, and probably replenishment of their forces.”

His counterpart at Boeing, retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kohler, agreed, arguing that weapons transfers were actually a force for stability. “When you sell somebody a big platform like an F-15, you build a 30-plus-year relationship with that air force,” he said.

BAEing for blood

If the public had their way, U.S. involvement would cease. A 2018 poll found that 82% of respondents wanted Congress to act to halt or decrease arms shipments to Saudi Arabia. American law already bans the sale of weapons to human rights abusing countries, but this legislation is constantly ignored (conservative estimates suggest Washington is supplying military aid to almost three-quarters of the world’s dictatorships).

According to data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, around three-quarters of all Saudi military purchases come from American companies. Much of the rest comes from Great Britain. Riyadh’s top ten suppliers since 2015 are as follows (with percentage of total sales in parentheses):

• United States (74%)
• United Kingdom (12%)
• France (4%)
• Canada (2%)
• Spain (2%)
• Germany (1%)
• Italy (1%)
• China (1%)
• Switzerland (1%)
• Turkey (<1%)

The British figure is dominated by BAE Systems, which has closed deals worth over $24 billion with Saudi Arabia since it began bombing Yemen, documents obtained by the CAAT show. CAAT’s Bayes told MintPress:

BAE Systems’ U.K.-made Typhoon and Tornado aircraft have been central to Saudi Arabia’s devastating attacks on Yemen. BAE Systems also has 6,300 employees in Saudi Arabia supporting the Saudi Air Force as part of the British-Saudi Defence Cooperation Programme, and we know [it] sends weekly shipments by air to the Saudi armed forces from its own private airport.

How Britain Aids Saudi Massacres in Yemen, with Phil Miller

Thus, while a figure between $28.3 billion and $63.0 billion is already monstrous, it tells only part of the story. The likes of Boeing, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin were already supplying the Saudi government with weapons long before the conflict began — Boeing since 1945, Lockheed Martin since 1965, and Raytheon since 1966. American arms companies continue to supply other members of the Saudi-led Coalition with similar arms. That number will continue to rise, as deals negotiated with the Trump administration come to fruition.

Therefore, the true extent to which the military industrial complex is profiting off some of the most extreme suffering in the world is still not completely clear. All that is known is that the Saudis pay in petrodollars and the Yemenis pay in blood.

mintpressnews.com

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

Two decades after 9/11, the role of Saudi Arabia in the attack remains in dispute despite unrelenting efforts by the US and Saudi governments to neutralise it as a live political issue.

The Saudi Arabia embassy in Washington this week issued a statement detailing its anti-terrorist activities and ongoing hostility to Al-Qaeda. This was briskly rejected by the lawyers for the families of the 9/11 victims who said that, “what Saudi Arabia desperately does not want to discuss is the substantial and credible evidence of the complicity [in the attack] of their employees, agents and sponsored agents”.

Saudi Arabia claims that the 9/11 Commission Report, the official American inquiry published in 2003, cleared it of responsibility for the attacks. In fact, it found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials as individuals had funded Al-Qaeda. But this is not an exoneration since the Saudi government traditionally retains deniability by permitting Saudi sheikhs and wealthy individuals to finance radical Sunni Muslim movements abroad. A former Taliban finance minister, Agha Jan Motasim, revealed in an interview with the New York Times in 2016 that he went to Saudi Arabia several times a year to raise funds from private donors for his movement.

The evidence has always been strong that at various points the hijackers, who flew the planes into the twin towers and the Pentagon, had interacted with Saudi state employees, though how much the latter knew about the plot has never been clarified. What is impressive is the determination with which the US security services have tried to conceal or play down intelligence linking Saudi officials to 9/11, something which may be motivated by their own culpability in giving Saudis a free pass when suspicions about the hijackers were aroused prior to 9/11.

By Firas AL-SHOUFI

It has been ten long years since the US and its regional allies launched their proxy war on Syria, a war that caused immeasurable human tragedy and, with Syria’s diminished political role, a dangerous regional imbalance. And yet, the Gulf States and Jordan are only just waking up to the perils of leaving Syria out in the cold.

Historically, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Damascus has maintained a high level of diplomatic proficiency and influence, even compelling the US to communicate through Damascus as a means of contact between regional powers.

Modern Syria has effectively been a bridge between the Arab states of the Persian Gulf and Tehran, a bulwark against Turkish expansionist efforts in the Arab world, and a key political factor in securing a minimum level of stability in the region.

But in 2003, the Gulf States threw their collective weight behind the US in its war on Iraq, and then since 2005, its machinations against Syria. In 2011, trembling in the wake of Arab uprisings, key Gulf States fully supported the international and terrorist proxy war on Syria, without understanding the repercussion of Damascus’ regional decline on their own fates.

Of the US’ staunchest Arab allies, only Egypt, with its deep political heritage, maintained a minimum of political-security relations with Syria, even during the days of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi.

Today, the Gulf States and Jordan are stuck hard between their own geopolitical and economic interests and the aggressive US decision to subjugate Syria at any cost. Their gamble on Syria’s collapse through either war or economic blockade has failed, and attempts to alter Damascus’ position on Israel, Palestine and the Resistance Axis have been counterproductive. If anything, the Syria-Iran-Hezbollah relationship has solidified and been empowered through years of fighting from the same command center.

The bloody war waged by Saudi Arabia and its allies on Yemen soon morphed into a strategic threat to the security of Saudi Arabia and to the commercial sea routes of the Gulf States. Saudi influence in Lebanon receded from its usual playground of political-economic affairs, and left Riyadh with only minor tools to sabotage and shake stability. More importantly, Syria has now become an advanced base for Russian forces, giving Moscow a strategic view of the Mediterranean and a corridor in the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

When Syrian forces liberated Deir Ezzor from its mercenary ISIS armies; when conflict hotspots resolved in favor of the Syrian state; when the Muslim Brotherhood’s influence crossed deep into Riyadh’s comfort zones; when Turkish pressures amassed; and when the military resistance by Yemen proved far too mighty to break; only then did the Saudis slowly start to back off.

Meanwhile, countries such as Oman, Algeria, Tunisia and Iraq, who had maintained diplomatic relations with Damascus throughout the mayhem, started demanding Syria’s return to the Arab League.

The first step in Riyadh’s ‘change of heart’ was an undeclared security–political openness to Damascus. The Saudis have slowly initiated secret lines of communications, the most prominent of which are alleged meetings between the head of the Syrian National Security Office, Major General Ali Mamlouk, and Prince Muhammad Bin Salman, and the visit of the Director of Saudi Intelligence Khaled Humaidan to Damascus in May this year.

On the agenda of the Saudi-Syrian contacts are two main items: reining in Turkey and easing tension with Tehran. An Arab diplomatic source confirms that “the Saudis would have almost opened their embassy in Damascus, had it not been for the American pressure that put brakes on the Saudi initiatives.”

The UAE, which maintained back lines of communication with Syria during the 10-year war, is today at the forefront of efforts pushing Arab states toward normalizing relations with Damascus. This Emirati role, as described by more than one observer, is driven by Abu Dhabi’s desire to curb Turkey’s regional ambitions and by a need to balance out its excessive coziness with the Israeli enemy. Sources also confirm that the UAE would have taken more impulsive steps toward Damascus, had it not been for American pressures.

As for Qatar, which still maintains hostility toward Damascus stemming from its strong Muslim Brotherhood affiliation and its functional relationship as a Turkish claw in the Persian Gulf, Doha has rolled back the inflammatory, often sectarian, language it used during the war on Syria. As reflected in Al-Jazeera’s more recent coverage, Qatar has considerably changed its tone, now utilizing the official terminology of the Syrian Arab Army SAA) and President Bashar al-Assad in its reporting. Despite this, a Syrian source say that it is “Damascus [which] has reservations about the return of relations with Doha, and not the other way around.”

In Jordan, King Abdallah’s throne is increasingly vulnerable, not to his enemies, but to his allies in the Gulf and Israel, and he has moved to strengthen his ties with Egypt and Iraq and to reestablish a relationship with Syria. Sources say Abdallah discussed normalization during his last visit to Washington, where he attempted to soften Washington’s position on Damascus. Jordan re-opened the Naseeb-Jaber border crossing to Syria in April – a vital lifeline to Jordan’s pandemic-hit and flailing economy – only to shutter it again in July when violent clashes broke out between Daraa militants and the SAA. A ministerial meeting in Amman, due to be held on 8 September between the energy ministers of Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, looks to be yet another step toward breaking the diplomatic and political siege on Syria.

In August, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi expressed enthusiasm about inviting President Assad to participate in his heavily-publicized Baghdad Summit. It wasn’t to be. Iraqi sources told The Cradle “The French and the Turks obstructed Syria’s participation in the Baghdad summit.” French President Emmanuel Macron, appears hellbent on establishing some international credit – and the desirable optics – for France’s presidential elections in seven months. The French hadn’t spent years working to unseat Assad, only to have him show up in Baghdad standing next to their president in photo ops. Macron’s obstruction is not limited to Iraq, however, but extends to Lebanon, where the French are engaged in some serious arm-twisting to prevent an official Lebanese rush toward Damascus. As mentioned, Turkey also weighed in to nix Assad’s Baghdad visit in accordance with Erdogan’s continued hostility towards Syria, and perhaps also to outmaneuver his Emirati foes.

Of all places, the American veto on Arab normalization with Syria may ultimately meet its demise in Lebanon. Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah’s announcement that he will import Iranian fuel for the besieged Levantine state takes an axe to the meticulously-constructed US bans on Arab trade with and through Syria. Nasrallah’s decision embarrassed Washington and its clueless ambassador to Beirut, who immediately rushed to unilaterally lift the ban on fuel imports via Syria – as long as they travelled through Jordan from Egypt. The Lebanese, ultimately, won’t care where their much-needed energy supplies comes from, but this American move showed them who is actually responsible for their shortages.

General Security chief, Major-General Abbas Ibrahim, has tried several times to open up these transport channels, but failed because of Lebanese fears of American sanctions. Likewise, Lebanon’s President Michel Aoun, whose every effort and intention was foiled by a US veto. Whatever the outcome of the negotiations to import gas and electricity from Egypt and Jordan to Lebanon via Syria, the biggest beneficiary of this American opening is Damascus, which knows how to take advantage of opportunities when they fall in its lap. Syria will undoubtedly use this crack in the door to re-engage participants on various vital issues:  demarcating maritime borders with Beirut to extract oil from The Syrian-Lebanese coast, and arranging transit affairs from the Syrian Sea to the Persian Gulf through Jordan – effectively breaking the US-imposed ‘Caesar Act’ that prohibited regional financial, economic and political dealings with Damascus.

The biggest loser in all matters – from its thoroughly incompetent Afghanistan withdrawal to the collapse of its Syrian siege – is the United States of America, which will seek, in parallel with continuing – but now in the open – pressure on Lebanon, to try to reengage with Syria. US relations with Syria will never be in earnest, always with malicious intent to serve its own geopolitical ambitions at the expense of Damascus’ allies and the Palestinian issue, and so will amount to nothing other than providing further legitimacy for the Syrian state.

With Syria’s military and political stabilization now a near certainty, most Arab countries that had severed relations with Damascus have, to varying degrees, reinstated their diplomatic representatives in Syria, either by sending an ambassador or a chargé d’affaires back to the Syrian capital.

Many European countries, among them the Czech Republic, Austria, Greece, Italy, Spain and Romania, have either started or have expressed a plan to re-open their embassies in Damascus.

Syria’s return to the Arab League remains the last hurdle in the full spectrum of eventual Arab rapprochement, something that all Arab nations – and not just Syria – urgently need. The US, however, is still trying to hold the reins of that horse tightly, refusing to allow Saudi Arabia to make its decision independently. But for the rest of the Arab world and beyond, a break from that suffocating noose could well be on the horizon.

thecradle.co

How many of us can remember the names of the Presidents of Italy or Germany? This is because in these republics, it is the prime minister who wields the real power, with the President largely playing a symbolic role as a grey-haired sage who views the proceedings at a great distance.

This is how many Lebanese would like to think of their own aging President Michel Aoun, who in his mid-eighties (it’s unclear exactly how old he is) is holding Lebanon to ransom over a new cabinet of ministers. Aoun, a Hezbollah servant who once fled Lebanon at the end of the civil war when Syrian troops approached Beirut, has taken the terms of his office too literally in believing that the President has the overall say who makes up the cabinet.

It is for this reason why we will see Lebanon fall into an abyss of rampant crime and poverty not seen since the civil war, following the recent resignation of Saad Hariri, who stepped in as Prime Minister nine months ago, following the Beirut bomb and the appointment of a stooge Sunni PM whose name has been changed to sound like “diabolical” by most Lebanese, such was the magnitude of his uselessness.

But even in Lebanon, being useless can be quite useful.

Hariri, hardly a dynamic player himselft, was Saudi Arabia’s last hope in playing a role in somehow compromising some of Iran’s power it wields through keeping Aoun and his son-in-law, Bassil, a hapless buffoon who never had a real job until he was given the post of foreign minister on a plate without even holding a parliamentary seat, in office. Their plan is probably to present Bassil as a presidential candidate in next year’s elections which will be a major juncture for Lebanon and the country’s future. Some even go as far as to argue that the present set up of a Christian Maronite President, a Sunni PM and a Shia parliamentary speaker could even be scrapped.

For Aoun to refuse to accept that it is for Hariri as PM to choose the lion’s share of cabinet ministers was a move, which might prove to have cataclysmic consequences. For Hariri to not accept the stand-off and resign was predictable, given that he will no doubt be having his own ideas about how to derail even the process of being replaced. It is the oldest after dinner joke in Beirut shared by almost everyone that Hariri believes he is indispensable. A lot of that collateral stemmed from the special relationship his father had with the older generation of Saudi royals who treated the Lebanese firebrand leader as one of their own.

But with now King Salman’s health a question in Saudi Arabia, with many speculating that he may well step down to give the throne to Mohamed bin Salman (MbS), how long can this old record keep getting played?

Lebanon needs fresh flows of outside money to pull itself out of the cesspit which the country has become through decades of being looted by the same cronies who are in office today. The only way that money can come in is with cast iron guarantees signed by a credible new government which is not being hijacked by Iran, so as to let Hezbollah keep hundreds of thousands of sophisticated rockets buried in secret bunkers all over the country, facing Israel, naturally. This old set up of “corruption sharing” which now even the most naive Lebanese citizen knows was all about a farce of scaring people into supporting their militia leaders to apparently keep the peace has also had its day.

Hariri’s resignation should neither shock us or worry us. It is simply another move in the same game which has been played out since the early 90s. Sabotage. The difference today is that Lebanon is reported to be literally a matter of days away from hospital generators being shut down as the government neither has the will, nor the ability, to pay for fuel via the central bank – whose chief is so mired in corruption and embezzlement scandals that no one on the country can tell you if the central bank has anything left of the 40bn dollars it was once believed to have before the entire crisis imploded in 2019. Today, Lebanon’s currency in practical terms is worth not even ten percent of its original value as the country is gripped by new fuel shortages and the relentless hyperinflation on essentials, foods and drugs.

Soon, when the old and weak are dying in hospitals which don’t even have electric light and crime levels sore, those who are linked to Hariri will note that in fact, in the shorter term, it was Aoun and his son-in-law who came out of this recent spat as victors – given that Hariri’s ace card (he can talk to Hezbollah) was played but came to nothing. Even the Lebanese Shiite militia, which acts often as a state within a state inside Lebanon, didn’t want to face a stand-off with a President who is so old and showing signs of senility, over his role. Here we see for the first time real power of this duo which explains why they behave sometimes like they are untouchable. Is Hezbollah looking to Aoun to ‘hand down’ the presidency to Bassil, who is hardly on good terms with the Lebanese group? If this is the case, then the Saudis have got their work cut out if they are relying on the often repeated Hariri ruse of resigning just to create a political vacuum. Surely the capricious young Saudi Prince, who once had Hariri beaten up during a kidnapping ordeal which made international headlines in 2017, must have reached the end of his patience?

GCC countries have so much to learn from Assad on how to survive an uprising and how to stay in power. But what he can really teach them is how to handle Moscow

In early June, the world was rocked by news from the Middle East that Gulf Arab leaders are now moving even further to becoming a full-on ally of Syrian leader Bashir al-Assad. Now, all countries have their embassies re-opened in Damascus with Saudi Arabia being the last to jump on the bandwagon and the new position of these GCC states is to go beyond merely bringing him in from the cold but to embrace him. Soon, we will see Syria reinstated in the Arab League, an institution largely known around the world as an Arab elite talk shop which only makes the headlines when its members have a very good lunch and often nod off in the afternoon during the speeches.

On the face of it, the move is pragmatic, even erudite. Assad is the ultimate survivor who has fought and won a counterrevolution against the very people – the Muslim Brotherhood – which most (not all) GCC states hate vehemently.

Yet there is some irony now with those same Gulf Arab countries using their influence in Washington to try and convince Joe Biden’s administration that it is time to lift sanctions against Syria. Indeed, it is the Biden touch which has pushed Saudi Arabia, UAE and others towards this extreme measure of “if you can’t beat them, join them.” America may “be back” for most of the world, but for the Middle East the only thing it is “back” to, is Obama’s “soft power” touch in the region.

And what this translates to for the elite of these wobbly states, is forget about the U.S. ever helping us with another Arab Spring revolution.

With Trump, they may have believed that he would do his best to keep them in power. With Biden, they know this is impossible and that they are truly alone.

And this is where Assad comes in.

While it is absolutely true that the GCC states will want to exchange info and intel with Assad about his own experiences fighting an uprising, which will also extend to the darker side of autocratic governance like new torture techniques, Assad would be very useful as a conduit to deal with a new, stronger threat from Iran, which, again, the GCC states don’t believe the U.S. will help them with.

A stronger Iran, run by a hardliner president, calls for extreme measures and these Gulf Arab countries are hedging their bets that if they can use Assad as a communicator and backchannel negotiator, then this could be useful in calming tensions while appealing to his pan-Arabism. In fact, the idea is nothing new. In 2007, the EU and the U.S. wanted to use Assad to communicate with Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iranians in exactly the same way.

Yet there is more to it than meets the eye.

The jewel in the crown for GCC countries to restore their relations with Assad is Russia. In September 2015, when Moscow intervened in the Syria war, Assad clung on to power by the Russian air force arriving in Syria. This game changer is the main reason why Assad is still in power today as without Putin’s help, Syria today would be run by Islamic extremists and would almost certainly not be one country.

And so to be close to Assad means being even closer to Russia. In fact, some Gulf Arab leaders had already started talking to Russia about arms deals in what is becoming an increasingly difficult relation to sustain with the U.S. under Joe Biden. It is unclear how far those talks went although they did stir the wrath of Washington which complained the moment the news went out. Biden wants to crack the whip in the Middle East on human rights, reigning in authoritarian leaders like MbS, Sisi and perhaps even MbZ, but also wants those same countries to keep their loyalty to U.S. arms makers.

Perhaps in those talks Putin’s top advisors mentioned that striking huge deals on jets and tanks, for example, would have to come with some guarantees about those weapons not being used on Moscow’s allies. Of course, no GCC state would ever use a jet, wherever it is made, to bomb Iran. That is unthinkable. But they might consider bombing Iran’s allies and proxies in the region.

Most likely the move to get closer to Assad is to appease Russia before a new deal is signed off. If these same GCC countries can agree not to use Russian weapons to arm proxies which fight Assad, Hezbollah, Iranian militias in Iraq or the Houthis, then the new relationship with Assad is a win-win for them. Throw into the bargain that it would also alienate Qatar, who would certainly not sign up to a Russia arms deal and is still very much a supporter of the opposition in Syria, and the Saudis and Emiratis are laughing all the way to the bank. Yet Qatar may prove to be a pivotal player in the endgame. If GCC countries go ahead with arms purchasing – with the tacit agreement from Moscow that its forces will keep them in power come any uprising – it may well be Qatar, which has one of the largest U.S. military bases in the world, will be more warmly welcomed in Washington.

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.

By Ahmed ABDULKAREEM

March 26 marks the sixth anniversary of the U.S.-backed Saudi bombing campaign in the war-torn country of Yemen and massive demonstrations took place across the country on Friday in commemoration.

Hundreds of thousands of people took the streets in the Yemeni capital of Sana’a near the besieged Sana’a International Airport, and in Hodeida, home of the country’s largest and most important seaport. In fact, thousands of Yemenis gathered in more than twenty city squares across the northern provinces, carrying Yemeni flags and holding banners emblazoned with messages of steadfastness and promises to liberate the entire country from Saudi control. Images of the demonstrations show a sea of Yemeni flags, posters bearing pictures of Houthi leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi, and the slogan “Six years of aggression — We are ready for the seventh year — We will win.”

“We are here to send a message to both the United States and Saudi Arabia that we are ready to make more sacrifices against the Saudi-led Coalition,” Nayef Haydan, a leader of the Yemeni Socialist Party and member of the Yemeni Shura Council, said. “Any peace initiative must contain a permanent end to the war, lift the blockade completely, include a detailed reconstruction program, and compensate Yemenis,” he added.

Having bombed for six years, Saudis now talk peace

For six years, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, two of the richest countries on the planet, have relentlessly bombed the poorest nation in the Middle East, with crucial assistance from three consecutive U.S. administrations. For 2,160 days — six years straight — the Royal Saudi Air Force and the UAE Air Force have, with American assistance, launched nearly 600,000 airstrikes in Yemen. The bombing has targeted civilian homes, schools, hospitals, roads, funerals, food facilities, factories, mosques, water, pumps and sewage, markets, refugee camps, historical cities, fishing boats, fuel stations, a school bus full of children, and Bedouin camps, making any potential reconstruction very long and costly.

The bombing continues even as talks of new peace initiatives begin to surface. Just last Sunday, March 21, consecutive Saudi airstrikes destroyed a poultry farm in Amran province. The attack was especially egregious as Yemen is suffering from one of the most severe famines in recent history. In fact, the country faces a humanitarian, economic, and political crisis of a magnitude not seen in decades. According to the United Nations, almost 16 million Yemenis live under famine, with 2.5 million children suffering from malnutrition. And thousands of Yemeni state workers now face hunger as their salaries have gone unpaid for years after the Saudi Coalition seized control of the country’s central bank.

Relentless destruction

As the war enters its seventh year, the country’s war-weary masses face grim new milestones. The fastest growing outbreak of cholera ever recorded and outbreaks of swine flu, rabies, diphtheria and measles are among the man-made biological threats facing Yemen. Meanwhile, hundreds of Yemenis are dying of Covid-19 every day amid a collapsed and destroyed health system. Many of these diseases and crises are not natural but have been created, artificially and intentionally, by Saudi Arabia. The U.S.-backed Saudi Coalition has completely or partially destroyed at least 523 healthcare facilities and bombed at least 100 ambulances, according to a report from the Sana’a-based Ministry of Health issued last Tuesday.

Years after Saudi Arabia imposed a blockade on Yemeni ports, halting life-saving supplies, Yemenis are still suffering from a lack of food, fuel and medicine. Hodeida Port, which is the primary entry point for most of Yemen’s food imports, is still under a strict Saudi blockade; even humanitarian aid is prevented from reaching the port. Sana’a International Airport, which has been bombed heavily by the Saudi Air Force in the past two weeks, has been blocked almost since the war began, leaving thousands of medical patients to die prematurely because they were unable to travel abroad for treatment.

Yemenis for their part, have resorted to targeting the Saudi Coalition in its own backyard. Hoping that taking the battle to the Kingdom will exact enough of a toll on the Saudi monarchy to cause it to rethink its quagmire in Yemen, Houthi missiles and drones have had increasing success in striking Saudi oil infrastructure, airports and military bases, leaving Saudi soil exposed to daily bombardment for the first time since the Al Saud family established their state.

In a recent statement, the spokesman for the Ansar Allah-backed Yemen Army claimed that its Air Force had carried out more than 12,623 drone strikes and reconnaissance operations during the past six years and that, in the past two months alone, 54 high-precision ballistic missiles have been fired at vital Saudi targets, some of them deep inside Saudi Arabia.

Last Wednesday, Saudi Arabia’s Abha Airport was attacked by a number of drones, and on Friday, a facility belonging to Saudi state-owned oil giant Aramco in the Saudi capital of Riyadh was hit with six drones, causing damage to the facility, according to Yemen military sources.

Saudi futility

Despite its enormous onslaught, lethal Western weapons, and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted on this war, Saudi Arabia has been unable to crush the will of the Yemeni people, who continue to fight for independence and sovereignty. At the end of March 2015, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman promised confidently that it would all be over within a few weeks and that Ansar Allah would quickly surrender. Now, after six years of war, Bin Salman has not only been unable to defeat The Houthis. Instead, it is The Houthis remain steadfast in their resistance and have grown even more powerful, leading to much consternation in Saudi Arabia and a half-hearted attempt by Bin Salman to ask The Houthis to accept his country’s version of peace and free the Kingdom from the quagmire it has created for itself in Yemen.

As Yemenis make their final push to recapture the strategic city of Marib, amid failed U.S. efforts to protect their Saudi ally from Houthi ballistic missiles and drones, both Washington and Riyadh have presented peace initiatives in an effort to stem the tide of Saudi Coalition military defeats. Those initiatives, however, fail to address or alleviate the humanitarian plight of Yemenis, end the war, or even lift the blockade.

Sour wine in new bottles

On March 12, U.S. Special Envoy for Yemen Tim Lenderking announced an initiative to end the war during a webinar with the Atlantic Council. The plan is essentially a recycled version of a previous proposal presented by Mohammed Bin Salman and the Trump administration one year ago in Oman, dubbed “The Joint Declaration.” It contains a matrix of Saudi principles and conditions aimed at the surrender of the Yemen Army, the Houthis, and their allies, in exchange for an end to the war. Lenderking’s initiative gives no guarantee that the Coalition will take any measures to lift its blockade and end the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

On March 22, Saudi Arabia announced its own “ceasefire initiative” to end the war it announced from Washington D.C. six years ago. Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan revealed the initiative, which would include a nationwide ceasefire under the supervision of the UN and a partial re-opening of the Sana’a International Airport to certain destinations. It also included a revenue-sharing plan that would guarantee the Saudi government access to a portion of the wealth generated by Yemen’s oil and gas deposits in Marib.

Come back when you’re serious

Both initiatives were rejected by Sana’a. “We reject the American and Saudi peace initiatives because they do not meet the demands of the Yemeni people,” Khaled Al-Sharif, chairman of the Supreme Elections Committee, said of the proposals during a meeting held in Sana’a on Monday. According to many Yemenis, including decision-makers in Sana’a, the U.S. and Saudi plans are not intended to achieve peace, but to advance their political goals in the face of an imminent military failure following six costly years of war. The measures, according to officials in Sana’a, are also about saving face and presenting an untenable plan, so that when it is inevitably rejected the tide of public opinion will turn in favor of the Saudi-led Coalition.

In a live televised speech commemorating the sixth anniversary of the war on Thursday afternoon, ِAbdulMalik al Houthi, the leader of the Houthis, refused Washington and Riyadh’s initiatives, explaining:

The Americans, the Saudis, and some countries have tried to persuade us to barter the humanitarian file for military and political agreements. We refuse that.

Access to oil products, food, medical and basic materials is a human and legal right that cannot be bartered in return for military and political extortion.

We are, [however], ready for an honorable peace in which there is no trade-off for our people’s right to freedom and independence or to Yemen’s legitimate entitlements.”

The Houthi leadership views the policies of the Biden administration as not far removed from those of his predecessor, Donald Trump. “Biden’s administration is following the same policies as those of former President Donald Trump. [They] have not offered a new plan for peace in Yemen. Washington has rather presented an old plan for the resolution of the conflict,” Ansar Allah spokesman Mohammed Abdul-Salam said, adding that the U.S. plan does not offer anything new. ”The plan has placed conditions for the opening of the Hodeida port and Sana’a International Airport, which are unacceptable,” he concluded.

No retreat, no surrender

The Houthis — empowered by six years of perseverance amid one of the most violent wars against some of the world’s most powerful military forces, not to mention the ability to reject the proposals set forth by those same powers — have little incentive to accept Riyadh’s offer. They see the end to the conflict coming from Washington in the form of an announcement of an immediate ceasefire, a departure of all foreign forces from the country, and lifting of the air and sea blockade as a pre-condition for any deal. “They should have demonstrated their seriousness for the establishment of peace by allowing food and fuel to dock at the port of Hodeida rather than put forth proposals,” Mohammed Ali al-Houthi said.

Over two thousand consecutive days of war have proven that Saudi Arabia is not ready to bring peace to war-torn Yemen. With the exception of a fragile ceasefire in Hodeida and a small number of prisoner releases, negotiations between the two sides generally reach a dead end, as Bin Salman looks for total surrender and nothing else. Numerous negotiations between Saudi Arabia and Yemen have failed, including UN-brokered peace talks in Switzerland in 2018. The Yemenis, who are now on the offensive, are unlikely to retreat or surrender. The offensive to recapture oil-rich Marib and sweep the shrinking areas that remain in Saudi control shows no signs of slowing down and, according to high-ranking military officials, the Saudi-controlled gas-rich province of Shabwa will be the next to be liberated. Moreover, retaliatory ballistic missiles and drone attacks against Saudi targets will continue.

Despite recent peace initiatives, the Saudi-led Coalition has only intensified military maneuvers in Yemen this week. Saudi warplanes are seen regularly above highly populated urban areas in the north of the country, dropping hundreds of tons of ordnance, most supplied by the United States. There is a near-consensus among the leadership of the Yemeni army and Ansar Allah that the current U.S. administration is participating in the battles taking place in the oil-rich Marib province. However, the Houthis have not directly accused the Biden administration of being involved in the fighting and are waiting for more evidence to do so. They may not have to wait long. On Tuesday, a sophisticated, U.S.-made MQ-9 Reaper drone was downed with a surface-to-air missile as it was flying over the Sirwah district in Marib.

mintpressnews.com