Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Arab Spring Stalls as U.S. Defers to Saudi ‘Counter-revolution’

Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies, seemingly encouraged by Washington acquiescence, push back against Arab Spring movements as part of a regional proxy war with Iran.

Print Friendly

Inter Press Service

As the so-called Arab Spring enters its sixth month, it appears to have run into seriously wintry headwinds.

While some observers here have blamed Saudi Arabia and its neighbouring Sunni-led sheikhdoms as a major source of the icy winds that are blasting through the Gulf, the growing contradictions between the U.S. and Western "values" and their interests are adding to the unseasonable weather.

Thus, while Washington has privately expressed strong doubts about the wisdom of the increasingly brutal and indiscriminate crackdown against the majority Shia population in Bahrain, home to the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, its failure to clearly and publicly denounce the Saudi-backed repression is only the most blatant example of this trend.

Far less noticed – let alone condemned – are actions such as Thursday's dissolution by the government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) of the board of directors of the Jurist Association, one of the country's most prominent civil society organisations, which earlier this month had the temerity to sign a petition seeking political reform.

Human Rights Watch said the move was part of a "broader crackdown on peaceful dissent" by the government, whose de facto defence minister, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, will meet with President Barack Obama here next week, the White House announced Friday.

Indeed, despite his growing – if reluctant – military investment in "regime change" in Libya, Obama's avowed efforts to put Washington "on the right side of history" in the Arab world appear increasingly lame and hypocritical.

Not only is the U.S. – not to say the rest of the West – effectively deferring to Saudi policy, particularly in the Gulf, but it also appears to be hedging its bets against truly democratic change elsewhere in the region by, for example, bolstering its support for Egypt's military – while withholding substantial economic aid – in the apparent hope that the army will retain control over the country's defence and foreign policies, especially toward Israel.

Meanwhile, the more idealistic youth-led movements that initiated the early "pro-democracy" demonstrations that succeeded in ousting Zine Al Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt have in some cases, as in Yemen and Libya, been displaced or marginalised by less altruistic forces acting on behalf of narrower sectarian, tribal, or clan interests.

Current efforts by the Saudi-dominated Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) to mediate the terms of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh's departure – to which Washington has also somewhat reluctantly deferred – could well end up with the replacement of one group of elites by another, with little or no prospect for a significant expansion of democratic freedoms or governance.

"Is the United States confident that the dominant narrative today, of democrats vs. oppressor, will continue to play out – and will not be overtaken by latent ones such as tribe vs. tribe, haves vs. have-nots or, worse, Islam vs. 'crusaders'?" asked former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and former CIA chief Michael Hayden in an op-ed published by the Washington Post Friday.

The deference shown to the Saudi kingdom, the clear leader of the region's counter-revolutionary wave, is explained by a number of factors, not least of which is its role as the world's swing oil producer at a time when the price of petrol at the pump here has hit the four-dollar-a-gallon level.

Political analysts here warn that Obama's chances of re-election – which are currently considered pretty favourable – could be reduced in politically significant ways unless the price comes down by this time next year.

"My poll numbers go up and down depending on the latest crisis, and right now gas prices are weighing heavily on people," Obama himself noted at a fund-raising event in California earlier this week.

In addition to its great influence over oil prices, Saudi Arabia – and the UAE, for that matter – buys tens of billions of dollars in advanced U.S. weapons systems whose manufacturers are worried about the implications of a declining defence budget at home, and the risks of strained ties between Washington and their big clients overseas, for their bottom lines.

"Most Americans, to the extent that they think of it, do not understand how little leverage …the U.S. has with the Saudis," wrote Col. Pat Lang (ret.), the former top Mideast analyst at the Defensee Intelligence Agency (DIA) on his blog, Sic Semper Tyrannis, last week. "They have decided to change the basic nature of their relationship to the U.S., taking from now on a much more independent course and encouraging resistance to revolutionary groups throughout the region."

Finally, Saudi Arabia, eagerly backed by the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait and Jordan, has emerged as the principal regional rival of Iran in what Riyadh and its allies are increasingly depicting as an existential conflict between the Mideast's Sunni and Shia communities.

Their eagerness to charge Tehran with foreign interference in the Arab world's internal affairs is music to the ears of the powerful "Israel Lobby" whose patient cultivation of the idea of a "strategic consensus" uniting Israel with the Sunni-led states against Iran finally appears to be bearing fruit over their shared anxieties about the possibly dire consequences of the region's democratisation.

Thus, Congressional reluctance to provide substantial aid or even debt relief to the wounded and sinking Egyptian economy at such a critical moment in that country's political evolution is due as much to the desire for assurances that its future government will remain faithful to the Camp David Accords and co-operate with Israel on Gaza as it is to the budget-cutting mania that has seized Washington. Cairo's decision last week to begin normalising ties with Tehran will bolster those who believe that a democratic Egypt may not be such a good investment.

But the winds that are chilling the Arab Spring could make for a scorchingly hot summer, warn some analysts who believe that the growing polarisation caused by the Saudi counter-revolution both within countries and across the region carries major and increasing risks for the U.S. and its current allies there.

"The situation is increasingly urgent, especially given the intensification of acrimony between Iran and its Arab neighbors," according to a paper by Toby Jones, a Gulf expert at Rutgers University, published this week by the U.S. Institute of Peace. It warned that Washington could get "dragged into another military conflict" if it fails to take a more assertive role.

Noting that Washington's quiet appeals to the Saudis and their allies for restraint and reform have been ignored or rejected, he added that the feared expansion of Iranian influence could become a self- fulfilling prophecy – certainly in Bahrain, a point with which the prominent neo-conservative hawk, Elliott Abrams, emphatically agreed in a blog post this week entitled "Bahrain Heads for Disaster" – if not the wider region, including Saudi Arabia itself.

"Should Riyadh continue on its current path, the U.S. should make clear that a reconsideration of U.S. military commitments may be necessary," according to Jones, who suggested that Washington can protect its regional interests from "over the horizon" as it did before the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran.

Jim Lobe is the Washington bureau chief of the Inter Press Service and a contributor to IPS Right Web (http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/). He blogs at http://www.lobelog.com/.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

The Foreign Policy Initiative, founded in 2009 by a host of neoconservative figures, was a leading advocate for a militaristic and Israel-centric U.S. foreign policies.


Billionaire investor Paul Singer is the founder and CEO of the Elliott Management Corporation and an important funder of neoconservative causes.


Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is known for his hawkish views on foreign policy and close ties to prominent neoconservatives.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and a close confidante of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.


Blackwater Worldwide founder Erik Prince is notorious for his efforts to expand the use of private military contractors in conflict zones.


U.S. Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis is a retired U.S Marine Corps general and combat veteran who served as commander of U.S. Central Command during 2010-2013 before being removed by the Obama administration reportedly because of differences over Iran policy.


Mark Dubowitz, an oft-quoted Iran hawk, is the executive director of the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

The time has come for a new set of partnerships to be contemplated between the United States and Middle East states – including Iran – and between regimes and their peoples, based on a bold and inclusive social contract.


Print Friendly

Erik Prince is back. He’s not only pitching colonial capitalism in DC. He’s huckstering ex-SF-led armies of sepoys to wrest Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya and perhaps, if he is ever able to influence likeminded hawks in the Trump administration, even Iran back from the infidels.


Print Friendly

Encouraged by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s statement late last month that Washington favors “peaceful” regime change in Iran, neoconservatives appear to be trying to influence the internal debate by arguing that this is Trump’s opportunity to be Ronald Reagan.


Print Friendly

When asked about “confidence in the U.S. president to do the right thing in world affairs,” 22 percent of those surveyed as part of a recent Pew Research Center global poll expressed confidence in Donald Trump and 74 percent expressed no confidence.


Print Friendly

A much-awaited new State Department volume covering the period 1951 to 1954 does not reveal much new about the actual overthrow of Mohammad Mossadeq but it does provide a vast amount of information on US involvement in Iran.


Print Friendly

As debate continues around the Trump administration’s arms sales and defense spending, am new book suggests several ways to improve security and reduce corruption, for instance by increasing transparency on defense strategies, including “how expenditures on systems and programs align with the threats to national security.”


Print Friendly

Lobelog We walked in a single file. Not because it was tactically sound. It wasn’t — at least according to standard infantry doctrine. Patrolling southern Afghanistan in column formation limited maneuverability, made it difficult to mass fire, and exposed us to enfilading machine-gun bursts. Still, in 2011, in the Pashmul District of Kandahar Province, single…


RightWeb
share