SAUDI PURGES AND DUTY TO ACT

What the recent political shakeup in Saudi Arabia means for global terrorism funding.

For 70 years, Saudi Arabia served as the largest and most significant incubator of Sunni jihad. Its Wahhabist Islamic establishment funded radical mosques throughout the world. Saudi princes have supported radical Islamic clerics who have indoctrinated their followers to pursue jihad against the non-Islamic world. Saudi money stands behind most of the radical Islamic groups in the non-Islamic world that have in turn financed terrorist groups like Hamas and al-Qaida and have insulated radical Islam from scrutiny by Western governments and academics. Indeed, Saudi money stands behind the silence of critics of jihadist Islam in universities throughout the Western world.

As Mitchell Bard documented in his 2011 book, The Arab Lobby, any power pro-Israel forces in Washington, DC, have developed pales in comparison to the power of Arab forces, led by the Saudi government. Saudi government spending on lobbyists in Washington far outstrips that of any other nation. According to Justice Department disclosures from earlier this year, since 2015, Saudi Arabia vastly increased its spending on influence peddling. According to a report by The Intercept, “Since 2015, the Kingdom has expanded the number of foreign agents on retainer to 145, up from 25 registered agents during the previous two-year period.”

Saudi lobbyists shielded the kingdom from serious criticism after 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers were shown to be Saudi nationals. They blocked a reconsideration of the US’s strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia after the attacks and in subsequent years, even as it was revealed that Princess Haifa, wife of Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to Washington at the time the September 11 attacks occurred, had financially supported two of the hijackers in the months that preceded the attacks.
The US position on Saudi Arabia cooled demonstrably during the Obama administration. This cooling was not due to a newfound concern over Saudi financial support for radical Islam in the US. To the contrary, the Obama administration was friendlier to Islamists than any previous administration. Consider the Obama administration’s placement of Muslim Brotherhood supporters in key positions in the federal government. For instance, in 2010, then secretary for Homeland Security Janet Napolitano appointed Mohamed Elibiary to the department’s Homeland Security Advisory Board. Elibiary had a long, open record of support both for the Muslim Brotherhood and for the Iranian regime. In his position he was instrumental in purging discussion of Islam and Jihad from instruction materials used by the US military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The Obama administration’s cold relations with the Saudi regime owed to its pronounced desire to ditch the US’s traditional alliance with the Saudis, the Egyptians and the US’s other traditional Sunni allies in favor of an alliance with the Iranian regime.

During the same period, the Muslim Brotherhood’s close ties to the Iranian regime became increasingly obvious. Among other indicators, Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated president Mohamed Morsi hosted Iranian leaders in Cairo and was poised to renew Egypt’s diplomatic ties with Iran before he was overthrown by the military in July 2013. Morsi permitted Iranian warships to traverse the Suez Canal for the first time in decades.

Saudi Arabia joined Egypt and the United Arab Emirates in designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group in 2014.

It was also during this period that the Saudis began warming their attitude toward Israel. Through Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, and due to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s leading role in opposing Iran’s nuclear program and its rising power in the Middle East, the Saudis began changing their positions on Israel.

Netanyahu’s long-time foreign policy adviser, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs president Dr. Dore Gold, who authored the 2003 bestseller Hatred’s Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism which exposed Saudi Arabia’s role in promoting jihadist Islam, spearheaded a process of developing Israel’s security and diplomatic ties with Riyadh. Those ties, which are based on shared opposition to Iran’s regional empowerment, led to the surprising emergence of a working alliance between Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE with Israel during Israel’s 2014 war with Hamas – the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.

It is in the context of Saudi Arabia’s reassessment of its interests and realignment of strategic posture in recent years that the dramatic events of the past few days in the kingdom must be seen.

Saturday’s sudden announcement that a new anti-corruption panel headed by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and the near simultaneous announcement of the arrest of more than two dozen royal family members, cabinet ministers and prominent businessmen is predominantly being presented as a power seizure by the crown prince. Amid widespread rumors that King Salman will soon abdicate the throne to his son, it is reasonable for the 32-year-old crown prince to work to neutralize all power centers that could threaten his ascension to the throne.

But there is clearly also something strategically more significant going on. While many of the officials arrested over the weekend threaten Mohammed’s power, they aren’t the only ones that he has purged. In September Mohammed arrested some 30 senior Wahhabist clerics and intellectuals. And Saturday’s arrest of the princes, cabinet ministers and business leaders was followed up by further arrests of senior Wahhabist clerics.

At the same time, Mohammed has been promoting clerics who espouse tolerance for other religions, including Judaism and Christianity. He has removed the Saudi religious police’s power to conduct arrests and he has taken seemingly credible steps to finally lift the kingdom-wide prohibition on women driving.

At the same time, Mohammed has escalated the kingdom’s operations against Iran’s proxies in Yemen.

And of course, on Saturday, he staged the resignation of Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri amid Hariri’s allegations that Hezbollah and Iran were plotting his murder, much as they stood behind the 2005 assassination of his father, prime minister Rafiq Hariri.

There can be little doubt that there was coordination between the Saudi regime and the Trump administration regarding Saturday’s actions. The timing of the administration’s release last week of most of the files US special forces seized during their 2011 raid of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan was likely not a coincidence.

The files, which the Obama administration refused to release, make clear that Obama’s two chief pretensions – that al-Qaida was a spent force by the time US forces killed bin Laden, and that Iran was interested in moderating its behavior were both untrue. The documents showed that al-Qaida’s operations remained a significant worldwide threat to US interests.

And perhaps more significantly, they showed that Iran was al-Qaida’s chief state sponsor. Much of al-Qaida’s leadership, including bin Laden’s sons, operated from Iran. The notion – touted by Obama and his administration – that Shi’ite Iranians and Sunni terrorists from al-Qaida and other groups were incapable of cooperating was demonstrated to be an utter fiction by the documents.

Their publication now, as Saudi Arabia takes more determined steps to slash its support for radical Islamists, and separate itself from Wahhabist Islam, draws a clear distinction between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Given Saudi Arabia’s record, and the kingdom’s 70-year alliance with Wahhabist clerics, it is hard to know whether Mohammed’s move signals an irrevocable breach between the House of Saud and the Wahhabists.

But the direction is clear. With Hariri’s removal from Lebanon, the lines between the forces of jihad and terrorism led by Iran, and the forces that oppose them are clearer than ever before. And the necessity of acting against the former and helping the latter has similarly never been more obvious.

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post

For Saudi Arabia, the Yemen War is Ground Zero for its Fight Against Iran

With the war in Yemen, led by Saudi Arabia and coalition of Sunni states against the Houthis, Iranian proxy heating up, the Houthi led military fired a balistic missile over Riyadh on Saturday night. This marked a serious turn in the war.

The missile, producd in Iran, would have no doubt only been fired only with Iran’s permission, which seems to be more comfortable displaying its hegemonic aspirations since its victorious battle in Kirkuk. For Saudi Arabia, the missile is a sort of wake up call on just how serious the Iranian threat is. It also proves that the Iranians, true to their word are not about to stop and rest a bit.

Turki al-Maliki, spokesperson for the coalition forces, said: “The missiles Houthis targeted the Saudi Arabia was produced by Iran, they are not involved in the ammunition of Yemen army.”

Maliki continued: “Houthis couldn’t increase the tension without the support by the Iran regime.”

Controlling Yemen is key to the Iranian strategy and equal in value than building a land bridge from Tehran to the Mediterranean Sea; although the latter is usually mentioned far more by pundits. Taking full control of Yemen means that the Bab-el-Mandeb Straight which connects the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden will fall into Iran’s hand. 3.8 million barrels of oil a day pass through the Bab el-Mandab chokepoint on Yemen’s southwestern coast.

More than that, taking Yemen completely would supplant on Saudi Arabia’s doorstep, giving it the capability to destroy the Kingdom.

This is why the missile over Riyadh that was taken down by an American Patriot Missile is a serious escalation. Given the fact that Iran is on the move under Russian protection across the Middle East, Saudi Arabia views Yemen as the last chance to stop them before the Kingdom has to take them on the Iranian forces directly.

With the rise of Prince Salman and his purging of his competition in the Saudi Kingdom, the Saudi royals may be forced to rally around the Crown Prince despite his controversial moves.  Embroiling the Kingdom in the Yemen war had always been viewed as a misstep by the young prince, but with Iran using it as a spring board to corner the Saudi Kingdom, Salman’s intereference may have been far more cunning than those who doubted it believed.

Is Israel Trying to Wrest Control of the Druze from Syria?

With Russia and Iran solidly working together to etablish a new Middle Eastern paradigm, Israel appears to be creating one of its own.  Late Friday, the IDF responded to the Duze village of Hader’s request for help against ISIS by stating that Israel will absolutely lend aid to the embattled village.  There is only one problem, Hader is not within the current boundaries of Israel, but rather just East in Syria.

The village residents felt so threatened by ISIS that many attempted to break into Israel for safety where many of their relatives live.  The Druze are a stateless people who are spread between Syria, Southern Lebanon, and Israel.  In Israel, they are considered loyal, with many serving in the top units.

With Syria and Iran threatening Israeli security, the plight of Hader could well be the key for Israel’s entry into creating a formidable buffer against its enemies.  The Druze are loyal to the country they live in, which means the Syrian regime has benefited from outsized Druze support even during its lowest point during the civil war. Yet, Hader lies far West from the Syrian Druze main area called Jabal Al-Druze or Druze mountain.

Due to Hader’s location, Syria has been unable to apply its control there, which gives Israel the possibility for establishing a forward base in Syria, which can be used to push back Iranian control in the area. It is not clear how serious Hader is about its desires for Israeli help or even the ability for the IDF to enter, but given the fact that the region is under remendous mount of chaos, there is a logic in rethinking the borders and relationships in the area.  With the Druze finding success in Israel in a way they don’t in other areas, a unique opportunity may now exist to reach out to Druze communities in Southern Lebanon and Western Syria by offering a chance to ensure these communities security and prosperity under an expanded Israeli security umbrella.

This would send a message to Iran and even Russia that they are not the only ones that can shape and change assumed regional foundations.  The Syckes-Picot agreement has been buried.  It appears to be time for Israel to take charge and push back against Iranian and Russian machinations. Hader is the first test.

Russia and Iran Strike a Deal, Leaving Israel Cornerned

The tension in the region seemed to spike when Israel’s airforce was said to have fired 7 missiles at a weapons depot near Homs, Syria.  This occurred the same day Putin was wrapping up meetings with Iranian leader the Ayatollah Khameini.

The meeting appears to be fruitful in the sense that Iran is willing to follow Putin’s line on the Middle East.

The Tehran Times said the following about Putin’s statements at the meeting:

Putin also said Russia considers Iran as a “strategic partner” and “great neighbor” and that Moscow will use every opportunity to strengthen inclusive ties with Tehran.

Putin also praised cooperation between Russia and Iran in Syria, saying it has produced good results. He also said the two countries should go ahead with their struggle against terrorism in Syria and simultaneously help facilitate a political process for the resolution of the conflict between the Syrian government and armed opposition groups.

Also at the meeting the Khameini said:

“America is the number one enemy of our nation,” Reuters quoted Khamenei as saying. “We will never accept their bullying over the nuclear deal. They are using all the wickedness they can muster to destroy the fruit of the nuclear talks.”

Putin appears to be taking up the leadership mantle and Iran has decided to follow suit. Although Putin puts trust in one, Iran is willing to play to Russia’s tune as long as they get to take on Israel.

With Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran all pining to take on Israel, Russia’s tightening grip on the Middle East paints an ominous future for Israel and others not willing to live under the thumb of Russia.

For its part, the US is drifting away from being a reliable partner seemingly content to nurse its wounds rather than defend its interests. This leaves Israel to fend for itself or make a bad deal with Putin.

Putin Shakes Up Syria, by Inviting the Country’s Kurds to Sochi

According to Asharq Al-Awsat Russia has invited Syrian Kurdish authorities to the Congress of the Peoples of Syria.  The congress is a meeting of Syria’s various ethnic groups that is scheduled to be held in Sochi.

The move appears to be part of Putin’s broader strategy of playing the “great balancer” in the Middle East. The Kurdish move achieves three objectives for Russia.

The first is a message to Iran, that Putin is serious about not letting them have free reign in the region. The second objective is the prying of the Kurdish movement away from America.  By offering the Kurds of Syria a seat at the table, Putin wants the KRG in Iraq to know that they to]o can turn to him and achieve better results than relying on the USA who has essentially allowed Iran to cut the Iraqi Kurds off from the outside.

Putin believes that only by playing all sides against one another, can true stability be achieved in the Middle East. With America losing its grip on the region, will Israel now be willing to play ball with  Russia or will Putin find that Israel is the only hold out to his grand plan?