The Leveretts comment on Nawaf Obaid's article. Setting the background on April 16, "...Bahrain is not the only place in the region where the Saudi counter-revolution is being felt. Saudi initiative was critical to bringing about the Arab League’s quasi-endorsement of international military intervention in Libya. That amounts to Saudi endorsement of coercive regime change in another Arab state. Regime change is unacceptable in Bahrain, but OK in Libya—the main thing is, the Saudis have reaffirmed their ability to suck the United States onto their side in regional disputes (at those in which Israel is not taking a position at odds with the Saudis). Washington’s deference to Saudi anxieties could prove almost as corrosive to the possibility of America making critically necessary adjustments in its own Middle East policies as Washington’s deference to Israel..... ..... " and today they add, "... We will leave it to others to comment on the wisdom of Saudi Arabia’s strategy, as Nawaf has outlined it. As Americans, we want to underscore how the deterioration of the U.S.-Saudi relationship over the last few years is one of the most dangerous consequences of the strategic malpractice committed by the George W. Bush administration and then—against many people’s expectations and hopes—perpetuated and made even worse by the Obama Administration. President Obama personally returned several individuals who contributed enormously to the egregious mishandling of Middle East policy, including the U.S.-Saudi relationship, during the Clinton Administration to positions of even greater influence on these issues in his Administration. The results have been devastating for strategic stability in the Middle East and for U.S. interests in the region."
Obaid's most important excerpt in the WaPo article:
"... Saudi Arabia has the will and the means to meet its expanded global responsibilities. In some issues, such as counterterrorism and efforts to fight money laundering, the Saudis will continue to be a strong U.S. partner. In areas in which Saudi national security or strategic interests are at stake, the kingdom will pursue its own agenda. With Iran working tirelessly to dominate the region, the Muslim Brotherhood rising in Egypt and unrest on nearly every border, there is simply too much at stake for the kingdom to rely on a security policy written in Washington, which has backfired more often than not and spread instability. The special relationship may never be the same, but from this transformation a more stable and secure Middle East can be born.”...
2 comments:
I have to confess that i sometimes get bored to read the whole thing but i believe you'll be able to add some value. Bravo !
Let's get real now. Foreign intervention in Libya was being discussed long before the AL's blessings, and they literally said they would like to have AL's blessings before continuing. The foreign invasion of Libya is Washington policy supported by the puppets in Saudi Arabia, not the other way around.
Post a Comment