The Honeymoon is Over: Saudi Arabia files for Divorce

Actually, if we believe a former Jordanian information minister:

“The relationship between the United States and the Arab regimes is like a Catholic marriage where you can have no divorce.”

Sounds like an odd way to characterize foreign relations between the US and Saudi Arabia, home of the holiest site in Islam.

But, clearly it's not altogether accurate . . .

[T]here can be separation. And several associates of Prince Bandar acknowledge that he feels caught between the opposing pressure of the king and that of his close friends in the Bush administration.

And apparently, separation is what's in the works.

“The problem is that [Prince] Bandar has been pursuing a policy that was music to the ears of the Bush administration, but was not what King Abdullah had in mind at all,” said Martin S. Indyk, a former United States ambassador to Israel who is now head of the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy.

This quote of course, is as significant for what it says as it is for who says it. Indyk is a rabid Zionist.

It seems israel is getting a little testy after Gates' recent visit to Saudi Arabia and his pledge to sell them advanced weapons.

So, they're laying down the groundwork - preparing the backdrop for the coming confrontation between the US and Saudi Arabia, which they of course will orchestrate with a little "cooked" intelligence.

The cause of the latest friction in the American-Saudi relationship began in 2003, before the invasion of Iraq. The Saudis agreed with the Bush view of Saddam Hussein as a threat, but voiced concern about post-invasion contingencies and the fate of the Sunni minority. When it became clear that the administration was committed to invading Iraq, Prince Bandar took a lead role in negotiations between the Bush administration and Saudi officials over securing bases and staging grounds.

But Saudi frustration has mounted over the past four years, as the situation in Iraq has deteriorated. King Abdullah was angry that the Bush administration ignored his advice against de-Baathification and the disbanding of the Iraqi military. He became more frustrated as America’s image in the Muslim world deteriorated, because Saudi Arabia is viewed as a close American ally.

Tensions between King Abdullah and top Bush officials escalated further when Mr. Bush announced a new energy initiative to reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil during his 2006 State of the Union address, and announced new initiatives in that direction this year.

Both American and Saudi officials say that King Abdullah clearly values — and uses — Prince Bandar’s close relationship with the White House. And that, associates said, will dictate what Prince Bandar can do.

“Don’t expect the man, because he happens to have an American background, not to play the game for his home team,” said William Simpson, Prince Bandar’s biographer, and a former classmate at the Royal Air Force College in England. “The home team is Saudi Arabia.”

Of course, the same can be said of israelis with American backgrounds.

And, as demonstrated by the recent fiasco in the run up to the Iraq war, it can even be said of Americans with israeli backgrounds.

However, to point that out would be "anti-semitic" and we can have none of that.

____________________
Thanks, Susan

Posted in
diplomacy

foreign policy

iraq

prelude

Saudi Arabia

US

war

zionist agenda

Submitted by qrswave on Sun, 2007-04-29 18:07.

qrswave's blog

Login or register to post comments

Saudi king declines visit from Iraq's prime minister

As usual, israel is looking for cover for the coming attack against Iran - always hiding behind someone else's interests.

They're trying to create the impression that Iran poses the greatest threat primarily to Sunni Arabs in the region and only secondarily a threat to israel.

So, they characterize this incident as a snub, when it may very well be just a matter of timing - since the Sharm El Sheikh summit is just around the corner anyway.

If israelis can convince the world that there is a great divide between Sunnis and Shiites, then they can hide in the background and claim it wasn't their fault when the shit hits the fan.

Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has turned down a request to meet with Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, Baghdad's foreign minister said Sunday, denying, however, that the refusal was an outright snub.

* * *

"This time the Saudi king, his schedule was not suitable for this timing," Zebari told CNN.

"So they did not decline it, but they said the king has an internal tour which he does every now and again. So we couldn't agree on the timing," he said, speaking in Baghdad.

The apparent snub comes as Saudi Arabia, long a US ally in the Middle East, has been increasing critical of the US-backed Iraqi government.

Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice put a good face on the criticism, saying the upcoming regional conference would offer Maliki the chance to make the case for his government.

"There's no doubt that the Saudi government has concerns about the process of reconciliation in Iraq," she told CNN.

"They have concerns about Sunni inclusion. They have concerns about the Iraqi government's willingness to use their security forces in an even-handed fashion."

She said Maliki could show neighboring countries at the conference, in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, "what also needs to be demonstrated to the Iraqi people, that this government is behaving in an even-handed fashion."

Also Sunday, Martin Indyk, a former assistant secretary of state for Near East affairs, declared the warm US-Saudi relationship over, sidelined in part by the Iraqi policy of US
President George W. Bush's administration.

In an essay published in The Washington Post, Indyk said Abdullah is working to "wean (Arab Shiite governments) off their dependence on Tehran."

"That dictates engagement, however distasteful, with Hamas in Gaza and Assad in Damascus," he wrote. "It also requires distancing Saudi Arabia from Bush's ill-fated Iraq adventure, which in Abdullah's view is only strengthening a pro-Iranian Shiite government at Sunni Arab expense."

In March, Abdullah sharply criticized the US troop presence in Iraq, calling it an "illegitimate foreign occupation."

But Sunday, Rice downplayed the criticism, saying US troop presence in Iraq was in line with international law.

"We have a good relationship with the Saudis, I think we have the same strategic goals for Iraq," Rice told CNN. "Our forces are there, and we've been assured that his majesty understands this, because of UN Security Council resolutions."

---------------------------------------
"Money" has no value - people do.

qrswave | Mon, 2007-04-30 03:39

The Honeymoon...

It's quite an interesting honeymoon in Iraq with the Saudis being the main financiers of the Sunni resistance... I guess that it's a love-hate relationship:) A sign of the "end" of the honeymoon might be the Saudis allowing one of their "hijackers" to appear in front of media... but I guess we're not there yet.

Cherifa Sirry | Mon, 2007-04-30 08:58