Fear and loathing in the House of Saud
By Pepe Escobar
To follow Pepe's articles on the Great Arab Revolt, please click here.
Early last week, US President Barack Obama sent a letter to Saudi King Abdullah, delivered in person in Riyadh by US National Security Advisor Thomas Donilon. This happened less than a week after Pentagon head Robert Gates spent a full 90 minutes face to face with the king.
These two moves represented the final seal of approval of a deal struck between Washington and Riyadh even before the voting of UN Security Council resolution 1973 (see Exposed: the Saudi-US Libya deal, Apr 1, Asia Times Online). Essentially, the Obama administration will not say a word about how the House of Saud
conducts its ruthless repression of pro-democracy protests in Bahrain and across the Persian Gulf. No ''humanitarian'' operations. No R2P (''responsibility to protect''). No no-fly or no-drive zones.
Progressives of the world take note: the US-Saudi counter-revolution against the Great 2011 Arab Revolt is now official.
Those 'pretty influential guys'
The wealthy, truculent clan posing as a perpetual absolute monarchy that goes by the name House of Saud wins on all fronts.
Last month's ''Day of Rage'' inside the kingdom was ruthlessly preempted - with the (literal) threat that protesters would have their fingers cut off.
With the price of crude reaching stratospheric levels, and with Saudi refusal to increase production, it's a no brainer for Riyadh to dispense with a few billion dollars in pocket change to appease its subjects with some extra 60,000 ''security'' jobs and 500,000 low-rent apartments.
King Abdullah also recently ''received a verbal message'' from the emir of Bahrain, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa, on the thriving ''bilateral issues'' - as in Saudi Arabia ruthlessly repressing the pro-democracy protests in Bahrain by invading their neighbor and deploying their ''security'' advisers.
The House of Saud's violent reaction to the peaceful protests in Bahrain may have been a message to Washington - as in ''we are in charge of the Persian Gulf''. But most of all it was dictated by an absolute fear of Bahrain becoming a constitutional monarchy that would reduce the king to a figurehead; a nefarious example to the Saudi neighbors.
Yet as much as real tensions between Iranian Shi'ites and Arab Shi'ites may persist, the Saudi reaction will end up uniting all Shi'ites, and turning Iran into Bahrain's only savior.
As for Washington's reaction, it was despicable to start with. When Sunnis in Iraq oppressed the Shi'ite majority, the result was Iraq shocked and awed to destruction by the neo-cons. When the same happens in Bahrain, liberal hawks have the Sunnis get away with it. (As much as there's been plenty of spinning to the contrary, the Pentagon's Gates knew Saudi Arabia would invade Bahrain on the spot, on a Saturday (the invasion started on Sunday night).
Not that Washington cares that much any way or another. Last week, in a Chicago restaurant, President Obama qualified the emir of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa, as a ''pretty influential guy''. He praised him as ''a big booster, big promoter of democracy all throughout the Middle East'.' But Obama didn't notice there was an open mike, and CBS News was listening; so he added, ''he himself is not reforming significantly. There's no big move towards democracy in Qatar. But you know part of the reason is that the per capita income of Qatar is $145,000 a year. That will dampen a lot of conflict.''
Translation; who cares whether these ''pretty influential guys'' in the Gulf reform or not as long as they remain our allies?
The House of Saud (as well as the US and Israel) backed Mubarak in Egypt until the 11th hour. They all knew if that ''pillar of stability'' fell, the other (Saudi) would also be in danger. For all its bluster, the House of Saud's actions are essentially moved by fear. In recent years it has lost power in Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine and now Egypt. Its ''foreign policy'' consists in supporting ultra-reactionary regimes. The people? Let them eat kebab - if that. Their last bastion of power is the Gulf - crammed with political midgets such as Bahrain or Kuwait. With a little thrust, The House of Saud could reduce all these to the status of mere provinces.
Not yet. As the House of Saud developed its counter-revolutionary strategy,
the Saudi-Israeli alliance morphed into a Saudi-Qatari alliance. Qatar could be destabilized via the tribal factor - the Saudis had attempted it before - but now they needed a close ally. And that, unfortunately, explains Qatar-based al-Jazeera's meek coverage of the repression in Bahrain.
It took only a few days for the House of Saud to force the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to toe the new hard line: we are the top dog; there's no room for democracy in the Gulf; sectarianism is the way to go; our relationship with Israel is now strategic; and Iran is to blame for everything. The ''Persian conspiracy'' is the key theme being deployed by the hefty Saudi propaganda machine especially in Bahrain and Kuwait.
Israeli hawks, not surprisingly, love it. There's plenty of flower power - or downright lunatic - rhetoric in the Israeli press about a ''
strategic alliance'' between Tel Aviv and Riyadh, ''similar to the one between the Soviet Union and the US against the Nazis''.
And guess what - Obama is to blame for it. Without this strategic alliance, according to the Israeli narrative, the whole Gulf will fall ''victim of a nuclear Iran'', and the Obama administration won't lift a finger to save anybody. Obama is vilified as someone who ''only confronts and abandons allies'', while emboldening ''evil'' Syria and Iran. It's a narrative straight out of the Loony Tunes.
Asia Times Online :: Middle East News, Iraq, Iran current affairs
---------- Post added at 06:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:55 PM ----------
Saudi Arabia has always been cautious not to have any direct communication with Israel, but in 2002,
King Abdullah launched an initiative that would normalize Riyadh's ties with Tel Aviv.
Freshly- released WikiLeaks documents have uncovered a deep alliance between Israel and Saudi Arabia, reportedly affecting Riyadh's ties with regional states.
One of the cables dispatched from Tel Aviv on March 2009, refers to a meeting between US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman and Israeli Foreign Ministry's Deputy Director General for Middle East Yacov Hadas-Handelsman, Egyptian daily al-Masry al-Youm reported Tuesday.
The meeting, which involved other high-ranking Israeli officials, evolved around Tel Aviv's relations with Persian Gulf nations and the situation in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Iran.
At one point Hadas admitted to having secret communications with Saudi Arabia through various channels.
The Israeli official then added that relations between Qatar and Israel were even affected Doha's belief that Tel Aviv maintains secret and powerful ties with Riyadh.
Of course, indirect forms of communication through third parties happen all the time in diplomacy
so it can happen through Egypt, Jordan or the US, the head of the London-based Gulf Strategic Studies Center, Omar Hassan, said.
Saudi Arabia has always been cautious not to have any direct and open communication or ties with Israel due to its position in the Muslim world.
However, in 2002, Saudi Arabia extended an initiative that it would normalize relations with Israel in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders and an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The initiative was reaffirmed in 2007, but no headway has been made in that regard.
WikeLeaks cables also underline that despite the recent regional developments, Israel continues to enjoy steady ties with Arab nations.
Meanwhile, the secret documents have unraveled Israel's deep fear of Iran's growing influence in the region, by pointing at Tel Aviv's direct support for anti-Tehran positions held by the United Arabs Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Egypt (before the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak).