Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Saudi Royals Snub Bush, Fund Opposition to U.S. Troops

By Jeffrey Klein and Paolo Pontoniere, New America Media. Posted December 21, 2006.


Saudi Arabia, fearful of a nuclear Iran and a Shiite Iraq, is taking steps to influence U.S. policy in Iraq. The kingdom may also be building its own nuclear program.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Early in November, National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, in a memo leaked to the press recommended that Saudi Arabia play a leadership role in talks about Iraq's future. But even before the memo landed on Bush's White House desk, the Saudis were positioning themselves to directly influence strategy in Iraq:

  • While the debate about negotiating with the Iranians and the Syrians raged in America's leading circles, Vice President Dick Cheney flew to Riyadh for talks. Topic of conversation? The safety of Iraq's Sunni minority should American forces disengage. Simply put: the king read the riot act to the vice president.
  • A few weeks later the Iraq Study Group asserted that Saudi private citizens, and probably a few members of the Saudi royal family, have been financing the Sunni opposition in Iraq all along. This is the same opposition that is targeting U.S. troops. Last week, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah confirmed that his loyalty must lie with Iraq's Sunni tribal chiefs, even if his support also helps insurgents who have been fighting Americans and the Brits.
  • Early in November, the Saudis announced their intention to build a $10 billion wall (give or take a few billion) on the border with Iraq, with Raytheon as the top bidder. Raytheon, one of America's premier weapons manufacturers, has close ties to the neocons, including Richard Armitage, former undersecretary of state and Sean O'Keefe, secretary of the Navy during the Reagan administration. Raytheon's stock price is hovering near a seven-year high.

The Saudis are clear about their bottom line: If the United States isn't careful about withdrawing from Iraq, the Sunni kingdom will have no other choice but to arm Iraqi's Sunnis, especially if the Saudi's arch-rival, Iran, which has already destabilized the regional power equilibrium by launching a nuclear program, rushes into a military vacuum left by the Americans.

Last week in Riyadh, at the end of a two-day summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council (a six-country organism including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates), the Saudis announced their interest in developing a joint nuclear energy program. Publicly, Arab officials said the program would be directed at meeting the burgeoning demand for electricity in the region. According to Gulf officials, despite their enormous oil reserves, which power everything from electricity generation to water desalination, the Gulf States need a new source of energy.

"Nuclear technology is an important technology to have for generating power," said Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, at the conclusion of the summit meeting, "and the Gulf states will need it equally."

Few observers doubt that promoting the idea of a joint atomic energy program between the predominantly Sunni Arab states is a way for Saudi Arabia to send a message to the United States that the Arab state will match Tehran's nuclear power if it needs to.

For years now the international press has been awash with reports about a Saudi collaboration with Pakistan to develop a Saudi nuclear program. Early in 2006, the German periodical Cicero reported that satellite imagery obtained by Germany's secret service indicated that Saudi Arabia has set up in Al-Sulaiyil, south of Riyadh, a secret underground city and dozens of underground silos for missiles. According to Cicero, those silos may be already armed with long-range Ghauri-type missiles of Pakistani origin. This information was corroborated by John Pike, one of the United States' foremost military analysts. According to Pike, a great part of the financing for the so-called Islamic Bomb, Pakistan's nuclear program, has been provided by Saudi financiers.

How hard can the White House push back on the Saudis? It's the Saudis who are now doing the pushing. Last week Saudi financiers showed their political power by forcing Tony Blair to peremptorily cancel his own government's investigation of a slush fund reportedly kicking back 32 percent to Saudi royals on their military purchases from Great Britain. The Saudis reportedly told Blair they'd never buy British weaponry again if their Swiss bank accounts were investigated by the Brits.

"The Saudis think a nasty civil war in Iraq could quickly sour into an even nastier regional war," Pike says, "so they're not in a real patient mood."

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: war in iraq, saudi arabia

Jeffrey Klein, a founding editor of Mother Jones, this summer received a Loeb, journalism's top award for business reporting. Paolo Pontoniere is a New America Media European commentator.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
whacked
Posted by: rsaxto on Dec 21, 2006 2:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bushies better get US soldiers and others out of Iraq before they get whacked even harder than they are getting whacked now. The stupid Bushies lost the Iraq war before they even started it because they didn't understand all the dynamics of the Arab/Muslim/Iranian Middle East. They also didn't understand that most of the people of the world hate American imperialistic bullshit. Bring the troops home and stop the mass murder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: whacked....and Posted by: Captainmagic
» Bushies Posted by: bookie
» Exactly! Posted by: werewolf
Yay, lets put the fire out by pouring on oil!
Posted by: cordas on Dec 21, 2006 4:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It just beggars belief, how stupid are these people?

Surely the answer is to get all the people in "power" put them in a large building and give them each an assortment of heavy weaponry and let them fight it out, letting only the last survivour out alive to tell us what he thinks, and then he (or she, I wouldn't bet against Condie) should be shot and other people implement his ideas.

I wonder what measures the US and UK will take against Saudi (and its allies) to stop them from developing Nuclear power and the bomb.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why are they afraid of Iran?
Posted by: rnagisetty on Dec 21, 2006 6:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fear of Saudis regarding Iran is intriguing to me. Could someone explain what are the actual fears of Sunnis in this area? Shiites are a minority in the region and Arabs have more oil than Iran and Iran did not invade any country for at least 200 years if not more. Hizballah though supported by Iran and Syria is based on local populations of sizable poor Shiats. Nuclear power is just a cover for attacking Iran and reducing its influence among poor and oppressed Muslims, it seems to me. if it stopped its nuclear projects tomorrow, they will find another reason to attack Iran. In the middle east, Iran seems to be the only country which has a semblance of elections, peaceful transfer of power, and independence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why are they afraid of Iran? Posted by: Iconoclast421
financing the Sunni opposition -- big surprise
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Dec 21, 2006 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It was Saudis who supposedly hijacked jets on 9/11. That got us over there. And now it is Saudis who are financing the Sunni opposition. Unfortunately they, as a leading oil exporter, can do pretty much whatever they want. They got the drug, and we've got the addiction! I guess we should be shocked when they start acting like drug lords? How far down the rabbit hole does this have to go before people realize:

a) The Saudi elites are not our friends.
b) The Bushes are in bed with the Saudis on all of this.

The motive is there, and it's a strong one. OIL. To keep Iraqi oil in the ground. That just happens to be what our oil companies want too. So you have a match made in heaven.

Too bad for the Saudis it's gonna blow up in their face because the fighting will spread to Saudi Arabia! But that is also too bad for us because oil will double in price if Saudi Arabia erupts. There will probably be a draft if that happens...

5 years ago
10 years ago
15 years ago
20 years ago
people have been shouting, "get off oil before it's too late". And no one listened...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It Just Keeps Getting Better And Better . . .
Posted by: JCR on Dec 21, 2006 8:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fucking Fantastic! Thank you mssrs. Cheney, Bush and Rumsfeld for managing to destabilize an entire region while jeopardizing the lives of countless other civilians who are now firmly in the crosshairs of erstwhile everyday citizens cum terrorists. Not only that, but you have sped Iran on its way to producing nuclear arms and unwittingly convinced the Saudis that they too need to get on board the Nukular Express.

A grand ol' time will be had by all when the Saudis and Iranians square off in their own sectarian proxy war in Anbar province. Saudi oil money meets Iranian gas proceeds in a battle royale between two petro-titans with the now "highly skilled in the art of insurgent warfare" Iraqis caught in the middle. There will be some real nail biting as it is revealed which companies among the who's who of Big Defense will be awarded those highly coveted contracts to arm the Sunnis with everything from Stingers to Predator Drones. Will it be Northrop, Lockheed or General Dynamics? Oh the drama! The Iranians will have a few tricks up their sleeves as they look to their pals in Russia and China for more STA missiles and perhaps a Sukhoi or two. I'll be in the back room taking bets on which nation gets sucked in first - Syria, Pakistan or maybe even Turkey? Who knows, maybe the remanants of the Taliban in Afghanistan can even stage a comeback there. No matter which way you slice it, it's a megalomaniac's wet dream.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New Saudi Ambassador not a Royal - news item
Posted by: cognitorex on Dec 21, 2006 9:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Saudi Ambassador Best Not a Kissing Cousin
( cognitorex blogspot )

The Bush family and the Royal Family of Saudi Arabia are hand holding, corporate cousin kissing tight.

During the oncoming decade in which Shiites may continue to ascend en masse over the Mid East, Saudi Arabia and the incompetent architects of this political maelstrom may well see beaucoups of bad blood and bitter words of recrimination.

It would be best if Saudi's man in the US of A were not of the Royal Family.
Craig Johnson

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our response to Fear:
Posted by: Gregor on Dec 21, 2006 10:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
POLICE STATE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Israeli - Saudi - Iranian triangle of nuclear ambition
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Dec 21, 2006 11:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The three regional power centers in the Middle East appear to be the Israelis, the Saudis and the Iranians. Israel has nuclear weapons, as Gates and Olmert publicly admitted. No doubt history will show that the US played a critical role in establishing Israel as the Middle East's first nuclear power.

The Saudis have extensive relationships with Pakistan and also provided the funding for the Pakistani nuclear program run by AQ Khan. The Pakistani ISI also coordinated both Saudi and American CIA aid to the Afghani mujahedeen during the 1980's; the Saudi financing of the Taliban and OBL continued right up to 9/11 through such channels. Fifteen of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia (can you name anyone besides the Egyptian, Atta?). Incidentally, the royal families of the Sunni Gulf region have ridiculous amounts of money invested in the US-British financial system, including significant media ownership (in FOX News in particular). That's why the media tends to ignore the Saudi role in 9/11, Chechnya, Pakistani nukes, etc.

What's curious is the extent to which the US has been the major promoter of nuclear power in the Middle East. The Iranian nuclear program was also promoted by the US when the sadistic Shah was in power. Currently, Bush just signed a nuclear deal with India that will provide billions in profits for US nuclear engineering concerns like General Electric, and which will also allow India to divert its own nuclear fuel into weapon production, thereby escalating the situation with Pakistan, who will now likely try and build more nukes as well; it's no surprise that the Saudi royals want to secure their position with a few nukes.

There was a story on this last year:
"Hersh reported that the US campaign against Iran is being assisted by Pakistan under a deal that sees Islamabad provide information in return for reducing the pressure on Abdul Qadeer Khan, the disgraced metallurgist who is the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb and who was revealed last year to be the head of the biggest international nuclear smuggling racket uncovered." Sy Hersh report 2005

This will all probably result in three nuclear powers in the Middle East, all staring at each other on hair-trigger alert, just like India and Pakistan. Nukes served as the 'restraint' in the Cold War - and we're still just 15 minutes or less away from nuclear oblivion - and now they are viewed as security against invasion by the developing world. Look at North Korea, they'll say - Bush will only invade defenseless countries.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Doublelibra
Posted by: Doublelibra on Dec 21, 2006 12:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look to those who are profiting from this evil mess. It's "The Man Who Sold The World", isn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good thing we have a Rhodes Scholar at the helm...
Posted by: MonkeyBoy on Dec 21, 2006 2:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...oh yeah, that was Clinton ...

Oh well, I'm sure everything will work out just fine with Forrest Gump running things...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Warmongering?
Posted by: rwa on Dec 21, 2006 8:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
>A few weeks later the Iraq Study Group asserted that Saudi private citizens, and probably a few members of the Saudi royal family, have been financing the Sunni opposition in Iraq all along.

Is there no suspicion that this assertion, presented with no evidence, may be intended to inflame Americans? Let's remember the ISG is composed of some of the same characters that lied us into invading Iraq. It reflects poorly on Mother Jones that they repeat these assertions without attempting to verify them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Instead of begging Saudi Arabia for oil,
Posted by: Jason Jordan on Dec 22, 2006 1:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the US government could subsidize alternative renewables such as solar, wind, water, biofuels, etc ...

But nah, I guess America has to drown in its wars for oil ! :(

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fine Mess
Posted by: Glennk1949 on Dec 24, 2006 9:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does any of this make any sense? Only for those profiting hugely from it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]