Connect with us

Foreign Affairs

Saudi Arabia has three choices

Published

on

Saudi Arabia has three choices on how to handle the Jamal Khashoggi situation

Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi was very likely kidnapped, tortured, and murdered by a Saudi Arabian kill squad at the Saudi consulate in Turkey. All the evidence points to them and despite their denials, they haven’t put up a shred of evidence in their defense.

Now, the Kingdom is faced with three ways to handle the situation.

Admit some of the truth but pin it on a scapegoat

Mohammed bin Salman, crown prince and unofficial ruler of the Kingdom, was almost certainly the person who gave the order to take out Khashoggi. Decisions like these are not made by lesser officials or specific agencies without at least getting MBS’ blessing. Considering much of Khashoggi’s negative commentary about the Kingdom was directed at MBS, it would make sense for the man in charge to be the one who made the call.

While it’s hard for many of us who are paying attention to believe MBS wasn’t involved, the spin machine, political clout, and mainstream media pressure owned by Saudis is tremendous. This is the same nation that positioned itself as one of our prime partners in the war on terror despite having direct connections to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It’s also the same nation that spreads Wahhabism, one of the most extreme ideologies in Islam, around the globe while somehow having a public sentiment towards them that does not match. Ask your average American where they are on the extremism scale and they’ll be ranked as mostly moderate. After all, they let some women drive now!

With all this in mind, they could say, “Yes, there was an order to kill Khashoggi but it came from [insert low ranking scapegoat official]. The regime in general and MBS in particular just found out about it today after an internal investigation revealed [scapegoat] has a personal vendetta against Khashoggi because he [insert fabricated accusation]. The Kingdom apologizes to Khashoggi’s family and fiancee. We only wish we could have discovered the plot soon enough to prevent it from happening.”

In that scenario, as unbelievable as it is, the U.S. government would almost certainly forgive it following a token sanction or public scolding. We’d be back to normal relations within a month.

While this might seem like the easiest road to take, it’s also the least likely. Western thought accepts this as a logical way to cover it up and sweep it under the rug, but Saudi Arabia is conspicuous in their unwillingness to acknowledge any wrongdoing in any manner, ever.

Keep denying and hope their spin machine works

As mentioned above, the amount of control Saudi Arabia has in the United States is immense. It isn’t just the oil. They directly pay media, think tanks, lobbyists, and consultants who aid them in funneling money to all the right people.

If anyone can make a story disappear, it’s Saudi Arabia.

But this particular story may have legs that are too strong to trip up. Journalists are not accustomed to burying stories about journalists getting murdered and the Washington Post has clout of its own. As crazy as it sounds today, it’s still possible that they can make it fall in an active news cycle.

The midterm elections may not come soon enough for them, though.

This is the most likely scenario.

Keep denying but change the story to Russia and China

An interesting and potentially dangerous tactic may be for Saudi Arabia to become indignant towards the accumulated accusations towards them. They could start making threats and working with non-allies to change the tone of the story altogether.

By going to Russia and/or China, the mere threat of fundamentally changing the relationship with the United States over accusations it denies could be enough to force Washington DC to ease the pressure on them. Of all the scenarios, this is the one the White House fears the most. It won’t reduce coverage. It would force coverage to expand as leftist mainstream media ties the Saudis’ offenses to their nemesis in the Oval Office.

President Trump and Jared Kushner have worked hard to make the Saudi-US relationship stronger than it’s been in decades. They need that relationship if there’s any hope of brokering a peace deal in the Middle East. Even if we dismiss the economic blowback from a contentious relationship between Riyadh and Washington DC, the foreign affairs effects alone would be devastating.

The President has to play hardball, at least to an American public that wants repercussions against a murderous regime. If the Saudis start playing hardball as well, it could cause major issues that affect elections, hurt the economy, and end hope for reaching a peace deal any time soon.

Whatever path the Saudis choose, one thing is certain. The United States should not be in bed with a regime that will murder someone who works in the United States and has permanent legal residence here. That’s not what allies do to each other.

Advertisement

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Foreign Affairs

Is Israel on the brink of war?

Published

on

Is Israel on the brink of war

Israel and Iran continue to trade threats and missile attacks over Syria as the latest round targeted Iranian Quds forces near Damascus. The IDF, which has confirmed attacks recently, went so far as to announce the attacks on Twitter.

This attack was in response to a missile launched from Syria by Iranian Quds Forces into the Golan Heights. The missile was intercepted by the Iron Dome, which was captured on camera by skiers on Mt. Hermon.

The overnight attacks on Syria resulted in many missiles and guided bombs being shot down, but enough made it through to damage Quds training grounds, weapons depots, and kill at least 11 people. There are no reports of how many of Iran’s elite forces were killed, though British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said only two of the dead were Syrians.

Israel, in rare move, announces attacks on Iranian targets in Syria, delivers warning

https://www.foxnews.com/world/israel-attacks-iran-forces-in-syria-military-confirmsIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently confirmed that Israel had struck hundreds of targets in Syria linked to Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah militant group, including a weapons facility two weeks ago.

Iran and Hezbollah are allied with the Syrian government in the civil war.

Iran has begun its loudest saber-rattling in some time as they send clear threats of war and the destruction of Israel through state television.

“The young people in the air force are fully ready and impatient to confront the Zionist regime and eliminate it from the Earth,” IRIAF Brigadier General Aziz Nasirzadeh said following the strike.

Iran says ready for war with Israel that will ‘lead to its destruction’

https://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Iran-We-are-ready-for-a-war-that-will-lead-to-the-destruction-of-Israel-578108The commander of the Iranian Air Force warned on Monday that Iran was prepared for a decisive war with Israel, “which will bring an end to the IDF’s attacks on Syria.” “Our armed forces are prepared for a war that will bring the crushing destruction of Israel,” he said, according to media reports.

“We are ready for the day when we will see the end of Israel.”

My Take

Americans are often unaware of the importance of Syria to Iran. For years, it’s been assumed the only reason Iran hasn’t attacked Israel, especially when they were at the height of their power during the latter years of President Obama’s administration, is they have no clear path to reach Israel. Iraq, Syria, and Jordan are between Iran and the tiny Jewish state, making it nearly impossible for them to have any real reach into the heart of Israel.

This is why they are so intent on having an embedded military presence in Syria. It’s why Israel is doing everything in its power to prevent them from getting a serious foothold there.

Iran’s military is strong and somewhat sophisticated, but it’s still no match for Israel. However, Iran could take advantage of Israel’s small size if they can get enough missiles and launchers into Syria. Doing so would allow them to use Syrians as cover, a strategy currently in use by anti-Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon.

As long as Iran continues to pursue entrenchment in Syria, war is on the near horizon. Israeli strikes may be a catalyst for war, but they’re necessary if they have any hopes of preventing Iran from taking over their Syrian neighbors wholesale.


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

NY Times invokes Martin Luther King Jr. to attack Israel

Published

on

NY Times invokes Martin Luther King Jr to attack Israel

When a nation the size of New Jersey is surrounded by enemies and is the subject of incessant condemnation from the United Nations, it’s natural to assume thoughtful people will take a complete look at its circumstances before deciding which side of a contentious debate to support. This is why many Americans still choose to support the nation of Israel despite mainstream media’s efforts to frame it as evil.

Unfortunately, the debate is so complex, most Americans form their perspectives based on very limited data. Passions are so strong on both sides that it often comes down to which side’s message is loudest in the ears of those deciding who to support. The Israel-Palestine debate has been ongoing since the tiny nation was first formed and ramped up greatly following the attacks on Israel in 1967 that resulted in necessary expansion.

Today, the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights are all considered “occupied” territories by a majority around the world, at least among those who are paying attention. Despite clear evidence that the very existence of Israel would be threatened if these lands were “returned” to the Palestinians, most of the world calls for the two-state solution as the path to peace.

On top of the disputed lands, the way that Israel maintains peace within its own lands is labeled as oppression against Palestinians living there. The core of the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement’s message is that the Palestinian people are being persecuted. To support this premise, an activist at the NY Times is invoking Martin Luther King Jr and his opposition to the Vietnam War as the roadmap by which BDS activists should muster their own courage and build more support to fight the nation of Israel.

Time to Break the Silence on Palestine

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/opinion/sunday/martin-luther-king-palestine-israel.htmlReading King’s speech at Riverside more than 50 years later, I am left with little doubt that his teachings and message require us to speak out passionately against the human rights crisis in Israel-Palestine, despite the risks and despite the complexity of the issues. King argued, when speaking of Vietnam, that even “when the issues at hand seem as perplexing as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict,” we must not be mesmerized by uncertainty. “We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak.”

To be clear, King was opposed to a war that resulted in the deaths of 1,350,000 people, which is nearly the same amount of Arabs living in Israel currently. King was opposed to a war in which no Americans were attacked prior to us getting involved. Israel is attacked regularly from multiple groups in and out of the nation who support the Palestinian movement. King was opposed to a war that took focus and resources away from his cause.

As he said, “We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem.”

To be fair, the author of the NY Times article, Michelle Alexander, was using his anti-war speech to demonstrate the courage King displayed as inspiration for the courage she feels BDS supporters need today. Had she left it there, then there wouldn’t be much of a need to respond. However, she continued in the article to speculate King may not have been happy with Israel back then. Worse, she implied that he could have been a supporter of the BDS movement today.

This opinion is beyond questionable. King’s motivations for not wanting to outwardly support Israel’s actions following the Six Day War were for the sake of his movement, not based on personal feelings on the matter. It made sense to not take a side in a debate in which many of his supporters of African or Middle Eastern descent may have objected.

It is becoming increasing common in the BDS movement to point solely towards the actions of the Israeli government while ignoring the reasons for these actions. They often talk about homes being bulldozed, but they ignore the fact that punitive demolitions are a result of terrorist attacks. I am not in favor of these demolitions, but I would never hide the facts to support my claims. The BDS movement realizes calling out Israel for bulldozing Palestinian homes is most effective if the reasons are never mentioned.

As pro-BDS articles go, this one was strikingly coherent. This is a bigger problem than the unhinged hate articles we often see from BDS supporters. It’s easy to see how this one-sided portrayal in a publication as strong as the NY Times that invokes an icon like Martin Luther King Jr can garner support for the movement from those who would otherwise never consider it. The article is very careful to cut off cries of antisemitism and is written for rational thinkers rather than emotional feelers.

But therein lies the problem. It invokes King and his famous speech knowing full well few will actually read it. If they take the time to read or hear it, they’ll wonder what any of that has to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The NY Times is betting on the easy odds that nobody’s going to take the time.

None of the seven reasons King gives for opposing the Vietnam War could be applied to Israel. Invoking the speech and insinuating he would have been a BDS supporter is a disingenuous attempt to equate his righteous activism to the BDS movement itself.


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Rep. Ilhan Omar’s excuses attacking Israel by saying she attacks Saudi Arabia, too

Published

on

Rep Ilhan Omars excuses attacking Israel by saying she attacks Saudi Arabia too

New Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has been outspoken against the Israeli government for years. Some of her public condemnations including calling Israel evil and claiming they’ve “hypnotized the world.” But Israel is an ally to the United States and her role in the House of Representatives will put her position to affect change on our relationship.

Her excuse for attacking Israel is that she also attacks Saudi Arabia.

“I say the same things if not worse when it comes to the Saudi government,” she said. “I’ve called for boycotts of hajj, and boycotts of Saudi Arabia, because to me it is important when you see oppression taking place – when you see regression – when you see our values being attacked as humans, you must stand up, and it doesn’t matter who the inhabiters of that particular region might be.”

My Take

It wasn’t just Omar that is concerning. The narrative being formed by CNN’s Christiane Amanpour was equally discouraging. How she framed the relationship between AIPAC and the U.S. government was thinly veiled spite towards the Jewish group.

“There’s generally sort of a rite of passage for politicians in the United States, and that is to sort of profess sort of fealty or at least pay homage to AIPAC, the pro-Israel PAC that is very, very prominent,” she said.

I won’t even try to deconstruct that silly statement.

As our EIC pointed out, Omar’s perspectives are a real concern on the foreign relations front:

There is no room for bigotry of any kind in the House of Representatives. We need to watch closely as she toes the line between calling out the nation of Israel for what she perceives as offenses and actual antisemitism, which often follows.


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report