Showing posts with label Iran–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

Pat Buchanan Asks "Who Wants War With Iran... And Why?"

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,


In the run-up to Christmas, President Donald Trump has been the beneficiary of some surprisingly good news and glad tidings.


Sunday, Vladimir Putin called to thank him and the CIA for providing Russia critical information that helped abort an ISIS plot to massacre visitors to Kazan Cathedral in St. Petersburg.


 


Monday found polls showing Trump at his highest in months.


 


Stocks soared 200 points at the opening bell in anticipation of pre-Christmas passage of the Republican tax bill. The Dow has added a record 5,000 points in Trump’s first year.


 


And the Russiagate investigation may have busted an axle. Though yet unproven, charges are being made that Robert Mueller’s sleuths gained access to Trump transition emails illicitly.


 


This could imperil prosecutions by Mueller’s team, already under a cloud for proven malice toward the president.



Recall: Daniel Ellsberg, who delivered the Pentagon Papers to The New York Times, walked free when it was learned that the White House “Plumbers” had burgled his psychiatrist’s office.


With things going Trump’s way, one must ask: What was U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley doing last week at what looked like a prewar briefing at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling in D.C.?


Looming behind Haley was part of what was said to be an Iranian missile fired at King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh.



Though the rocket had Iranian markings, it was not launched from Iran, or by Iranians. Houthi rebels, for two years victims of a savage war waged by the Saudis — using U.S.-made planes, missiles, bombs and drones — say they fired it at the Riyadh airport in retaliation for what the Saudis have done to their people and country.


If so, it was a legitimate act of war.


Indeed, so great is the Yemeni civilian suffering from a lack of food and medicine, and from malnutrition and disease, Trump himself has told the Saudis to ease up on their air, sea, and land blockades.


As there is no evidence as to when the Houthis acquired the missile, or where, the question arises: What was Haley’s motive in indicting Iran? Was this part of a new propaganda campaign to drum up support for America’s next big Mideast war?


There are reasons to think so.


Haley went on: “It’s hard to find a conflict or a terrorist group in the Middle East that does not have Iran’s fingerprints all over it.”


But Iran is Shiite, while al-Qaida, which brought down the twin towers, aided by 15 Saudi nationals, is Sunni. So, too, are ISIS, Boko Haram in Nigeria, al-Shabab in Somalia and Islamic Jihad. Most Mideast terrorist groups are Sunni, not Shiite.


As for these Mideast “conflicts,” which did Iran start?


We started the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. NATO started the war in Libya. The U.S. helped trigger the horrific Syrian civil war by arming “rebels.” Only when President Bashar Assad looked like he was about to fall did Russia and Iran intervene on his side.


As for the “Shiite crescent,” from Tehran to Bagdad to Damascus to Beirut, who created it?


Under Saddam Hussein, Iraq was Sunni dominated. It was the Americans who overthrew him and brought Shiite power to Baghdad.


In Syria, it was U.S.- and Sunni-backed “rebels,” allied at times with al-Qaida, who drew Iran and the Shiite militias in to save Assad.


And the Israelis called the Shiite Hezbollah movement into being by invading and occupying South Lebanon in 1982. As Yitzhak Rabin ruefully said, “We let the Shia genie out of the bottle.”


Are we now want to fight a new Mideast war against a larger enemy than any of the others we have fought, to clean up the bloody mess we made of the region by our previous military interventions?


Before we march, with Haley as head cheerleader, Trump should consider the likely consequences for his country, the Middle East, and his presidency.


A war in the Persian Gulf would send oil prices soaring, and stock markets plummeting, even as it would split us off from our major allies in Europe and Asia. The Airbus-Boeing deal to sell Iran 300 commercial aircraft would be dead.


While the U.S. would prevail in an air, naval and missile war, where would the troops come from to march to Tehran to “democratize” that nation? Do we think a bloodied revanchist Iran would be easier to deal with than the one with which John Kerry negotiated a nuclear deal?


Would Hezbollah go after U.S. soft targets in Beirut? Would Iraqi Shiite militias go after Americans in the Green Zone? Would the Shiite majority in Bahrain and the oil-rich northeast of Saudi Arabia rise up and rebel?


And who would our great fighting Arab ally be?


Jared Kushner’s new friend: a 32-year-old Saudi prince who has become famous for putting down $500 million each for a chateau near Versailles, a yacht on the Riviera, and a painting by Leonardo da Vinci.









Monday, December 18, 2017

Saudi Media Releases Propaganda Film Showing Invasion Of Iran

It’s been a little over three weeks since Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) called the Supreme Leader of Iran “the new Hitler of the Middle East”, escalating the war of words and ultimately launching the next leg up in the infowar between both countries.


And now the Saudi media, building on that rhetoric, just published a powerful short 3D-animated film depicting the Saudi military invading and conquering Iran.



Al-Riyadh newspaper on Friday said the video called “Saudi Deterrent Force”- was created by “young people from Saudi Arabia”, which it “depicts reality and the prestige of the Saudi Armed Forces” invading Iran by air, land, and sea.


Further, Al-Riyadh noted, “the 5-minute film tells the operational reality of how the Saudi armed forces” plan to use advanced technologies from the United States, such as weapons, aircraft, ships, and tanks in an upcoming operation against Iran.




The film “Saudi Deterrence” not only revealed the defensive power of Saudi Arabia, but went beyond the detection of strategic missile system “East Wind”, which exceeds the range of 12 thousand kilometers, and can thus reach the Iranian military bases and nuclear reactors, F15, Taifon, Tornado and AWACS, as well as strategic Abrams tanks, high-armed naval frigates and the Air Defense System of Patriot batteries  





Meanwhile, The New Arab said the short film has been widely “mocked” on social media as nothing more than propaganda from MbS. The film shows MbS in a control room orchestrating air, land, and sea missions, while the military has very little resistance against Iranian troops. At the end, the film shows the Saudi army taking control of Tehran, where the Iranian civilians are thanking the Saudis for the liberation.


A furious tweetstorm was unleashed on Twitter after the video was published on YouTube. One Twitter user said, “In the delusional world of Saudi Arabia, Saudis invade Iran, take over the country and are greeted as liberators by Iranians who hold MbS posters. You can’t make this shit up. Try not to laugh,”



Another user said (translated in Bing), “Fail and you still nfshlon in Yemen in the face of the resilience of the people and their resistance in the face of aggression and your siege you and with you, and you think you are able to make a victory over Iran? Finished with the Yemen and then just go to Iran if you have capacity and uptime is not actually animated, bin Salman. If you’re brave, offering.”



The New Arab describes tension in the region is building between the two countries, especially after the latest missile launch striking Saudi Arabia from Yemen’s Houthis (backed by Iran).


Iran and Saudi Arabia have been engaged in a regional battle for dominance being fought by proxies across the region. Last month, Saudi Arabia’s crown prince accused Iran of committing an “act of war” by arming Yemen’s Houthis after a rebel missile reached Riyadh. It provoked a heated war of words with Tehran.


The war drums beat between Saudi Arabia and Iran, however, in the meantime, sit back, grab some popcorn, and enjoy the infowar waged between both countries.









Friday, December 8, 2017

Expect Desperate, Insane Behavior From Government In 2018 - Part 3

Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,


In the first two installments of this series, I discussed the potential for the U.S. federal government to make some spectacularly foolish moves against its own people in the realms of cannabis and Bitcoin.


My basic assumption is that government tends to despise freedom, and that “leaders” of an empire in decline like the U.S. are particularly vulnerable to very bad decisions.



Government propagandists constantly instruct the public that they need to be fearful of their neighbors or some guy in a cave overseas (who they probably funded in the first place), when they themselves tend to be the most unethical, corrupt thieves of all. It’s a very clever scam.



With that in mind, today’s post will zero in on what I consider to be the greatest threat to world peace going into 2018. While I remain unsure as to what the U.S. government may attempt when it comes to cannabis and Bitcoin, I’m far more concerned about the prospects of Donald Trump entangling this nation in an escalating and increasingly disastrous conflict in the Middle East. The signs are everywhere, and it’s all becoming very obvious. In fact, I’ve probably written more articles on this topic than any other in 2017.


Rather than rehash everything I’ve already said, below are links to my October series on the matter:


Empire Destroying Wars Are Coming to America Under Trump – Part 1


Empire Destroying Wars Are Coming to America Under Trump – Part 2


Empire Destroying Wars Are Coming to America Under Trump – Part 3


Confrontation with Iran has been the holy grail of neocons for decades, but it’s become increasingly likely under Trump, as I detailed above. Since I wrote those articles, the situation has only escalated and Trump has decided to attach himself even more clearly to the hip of crazed Saudi princeling Mohamed bin Salman (MBS) and Israel. It’s become obvious that Trump sees both Israel and Saudi Arabia as direct extensions of the U.S., and is quite willing to sacrifice his own country to protect their position. In prior posts, I spent most of my time focused on why I thought Trump would go in such a non-MAGA direction. Today’s post will focus on why I think it’ll be such a historical failure.


Conventional wisdom says that a dedicated alliance of the U.S., Israel and Saudi Arabia is an unstoppable force in the Middle East. Trump’s bought into this view hook, line and sinker, which is why he’s willing to go all in on such a foolish showdown with Iran. I’m going to take the complete other side of that view, and assert than a more aggressive posture against Iran in the Middle East will lead to another huge fail, sparking a more serious collapse in the U.S. empire and ultimately Iranian domination of the region. Crazy, you say? I also heard Brexit had no shot and that Trump couldn’t win. When it comes to conventional wisdom at this point in the historical cycle, I want to be short.


Why do I think this? First of all, the U.S. simply doesn’t have the position it thinks it has in the world any longer. The moral authority, irrespective of whether it was ever deserved in the first place, is gone. Disastrous and bloody wars based on lies and media propaganda have been exposed for the world to see, and many allies won’t be willing to go along with an unnecessary Saudi/Israel/USA mission against Iran. Empires always make increasingly stupid decisions toward the end driven by hubris and a lack of self-awareness. The U.S. is no different.


Second, the U.S. would be getting in bed with a complete and total lunatic when it comes to de facto Saudi leader MBS. Pretty much everything this guy touches turns to shite, with his campaign in Yemen and attempt to isolate Qatar being prime examples. Now with his mass arrests of Saudi princes and other powerful people/family members in a quest to firm his position, he’s lost even more credibility in the region and created a slew of dangerous enemies, who will never forget what he did to them.



MBS is far, far weaker both internally and externally than he realizes. He thinks he’s this grand figure who’s destined to bring glory to himself and Saudi Arabia in the region, but he’ll end up accomplishing the exact opposite. In addition to all the the dangerous mistakes I’ve already mentioned, he recently made the biggest mistake of all by bringing the Saudi-Israeli alliance public for the world to see.


Here’s a little snippet from an NBC News article published last month to give you a little sense of what’s going on:


For Israel, Saudi Arabia’s growing willingness to confront Iranian influence in the Middle East presents an opening for an awkward alliance. As the kingdom’s dynamic new crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, tries to rally an anti-Iran coalition, Israel — with the blessing of the Trump administration — is presenting itself as a willing and able partner.


 


The appetite for cooperation between two of America’s closest allies in the Middle East has grown in recent years as their security interests have dovetailed. Both Israel and Saudi Arabia view Iran’s growing influence in the region as an existential threat and want to squash militant Islamist groups like ISIS and Iran’s main proxy, Hezbollah.


 


A U.S. official who witnessed a Saudi and Israeli official hold a closed-door meeting together recently said such informal meetings have been taking place for “at least five years.”



Remember, MBS has an undeservedly huge head and thinks of himself as some brilliant strategician. He thinks by publicly cozying up to Israel he’ll gain the total support and blessing of the Trump administration for whatever insane crusade his twisted mind can envision. In that sense, he’s correct, but I’m of the opinion he loses a lot more than he gains by going down this route. 


Everything this princeling does is shortsighted and driven by impulsive arrogance. He just gave the biggest gift possible to Iran by becoming close to Israel, because the average person on the street in the region will see this as a massive betrayal. The Iranian leadership gets this. As Reuters reported:


(Reuters) – Iranian President Hassan Rouhani urged Muslims on Tuesday to disrupt what he called a plot by unnamed countries in the region to build ties with Israel.


 


He gave no more details on the states. But an Israeli cabinet minister said last month that his government had covert contacts with Saudi Arabia linked to their common concerns over Tehran.


 


“Some regional Islamic countries have shamelessly revealed their closeness to the Zionist regime (Israel),” Rouhani said in a speech broadcast live by state TV.


 


“I am sure that the Muslims around the world will not let this sinister plot bear fruit.”



This entire thing is setting up to be the graveyard of the U.S. empire. Recall what I wrote in my October post:


It’s sad to say it, but over the course of the 21st century the U.S. government has exposed itself as a corrupt bully, not just to the outside world, but also to its own people. Moreover, those in positions of power and influence in America either don’t recognize this reality or don’t care. It’s this sort of disconnected hubris combined with rampant internal corruption that is the true graveyard of empires. I think both allies and enemies abroad have had enough, and given the right opportunity, will let the U.S. sink.



With that in mind, read the following from Reuters:


France rejected the “unilateral” decision while appealing for calm in the region. Britain said the move would not help peace efforts and Jerusalem should ultimately be shared by Israel and a future Palestinian state. Germany said Jerusalem’s status could only be resolved on the basis of a two-state solution.


 


Trump upended decades of U.S. policy in defiance of warnings from around the world that the gesture risks aggravating conflict in the tinderbox Middle East.


 


Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, in a pre-recorded speech, said Jerusalem was the “eternal capital of the State of Palestine” and that Trump’s move was “tantamount to the United States abdicating its role as a peace mediator.”


 


Lebanese President Michel Aoun said Trump’s Jerusalem decision was dangerous and threatened the credibility of the United States as a broker of Middle East peace. He said the move would put back the peace process by decades and threatened regional stability and perhaps global stability.


 


Qatar’s foreign minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani, said Trump’s undertaking was a “death sentence for all who seek peace” and called it “a dangerous escalation”.


 


Turkey said Trump’s move was “irresponsible”.


 


Iran “seriously condemns” Trump’s move as it violates U.N. resolutions on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, state media reported. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said earlier in the day that the United States was trying to destabilize the region and start a war to protect Israel’s security.



If the decision on Jerusalem ends up inflaming the region in aa major way, the entire world will see Trump and the U.S. as directly responsible. This will further the perception amongst allies that the U.S. is a global problem, and raise the likelihood that any military adventure in the region instigated by the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Israel will fail spectacularly. This trio will increasingly look like an alliance of rogue states to most of humanity.


While I’m already sufficiently concerned about the likelihood of another stupid escalation in the Middle East by Trump, there are milestones I’m looking out for to let me know it’s about to get really bad. At the core of any major disaster will be Senator Tom Cotton, a rabid neocon who I unequivocally believe is the most dangerous, anti-freedom person in the U.S. Congress. He reminds me of an American Mohamed bin Salman, and his elevated prominence around Trump earlier this year is what got me increasingly concerned in the first place.


If Cotton takes on a more senior role in the Trump administration, such as a rumored position as CIA director, you can bet the farm that U.S. foreign policy is about to take the most dangerous turn since George W. Bush. Tom Cotton is a neocon on steroids, and seems to genuinely love conflict and authoritarianism. To get a better sense of what sort of person he is, take a look at him taking Twitter legal counsel to task. He believes U.S. companies act as an active arm of state intelligence.



If that doesn’t send a shiver down your spine, I don’t know what will.


Tom Cotton policy on anything represents a guaranteed nightmare for America and its people. If Trump promotes him in any way, prepare for almost unimaginable foreign policy disaster.


*  *  *


If you liked this article and enjoy my work, consider becoming a monthly Patron, or visit our Support Page to show your appreciation for independent content creators.









Saturday, November 18, 2017

Xi Jinping Pledges To "Strengthen Relationship" Between Saudi Arabia And China

In what can only be described as a masterful play to entice Saudi Arabia to list shares of Aramco in Hong Kong (assuming the kingdom follows through with the listing, which is reportedly in jeopardy) Chinese state media reported Friday that Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged to strengthen the relationship between China and Saudi Arabia as the latter tries to reform its economy.


According to the South China Morning Post, Xi vowed to strengthen cooperation between the two states at a time when the Middle Eastern kingdom is facing a political shake-up at home, and heightened tensions with Lebanon and Iran. Xi’s vow of friendship came with the crucial qualifier that the relationship between the two countries wouldn’t be affected by shifting international circumstances.


No matter how the international and regional situation changed, China’s determination to deepen strategic cooperation with Saudi Arabia would not change, President Xi Jinping told Saudi King Salman in a telephone conversation, according to a report by China’s state broadcaster CCTV.


 


“China supports Saudi in its efforts to safeguard its sovereignty and achieve greater development,” Xi was quoted as saying.



Of course, that’s an implicit threat that China might come to KSA’s aide if the simmering hostilities between the kingdom and Iran explode out into a military conflict between the two regional rivals. However, the SCMP also stresses that China has a strong relationship with Iran as well.


Hong Kong is reportedly still in consideration to host the Aramco IPO.



And while China will presumably play the dual role of investor and adviser as the Kingdom seeks to diversify its economy into other industries besides energy, including technology and manufacturing, KSA has in returned promised to assist Xi’s “one belt, one road” economic reform program.


King Salman told Xi that Saudi Arabia was willing to become China’s “important partner” in the Gulf. The kingdom also intended to play a role in China’s “Belt and Road Initiative” and cooperate with Beijing in the energy and financial sectors, he said



Though Chinese media reports didn’t delve into too much detail about the recent purge orchestrated by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the call between the two leaders obviously follows an event two weeks for KSA, where its leaders reportedly pressured Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri to resign. Hariri had to go, allegedly, because he was deemed too soft on Hezbollah, the shiite militant group that’s affiliated with Iran and is also an important powerbroker in Lebanon.


Two weeks ago, dozens of Saudi princes and officials were detained on corruption charges, a move that is believed to have helped Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to consolidate his power. And yesterday the Financial Times exposed the “corruption crackdown” for what is truly is: A naked cash grab meant to refill KSA’s foreign currency reserves while allowing it the financial flexibility to help ensure the Aramco IPO is executed at the best possible price.


Lebanese President Michel Aoun this week accused Saudi authorities of “detaining” Hariri, but Riyadh said he was free to leave the kingdom “when he pleases”. Hariri was reportedly supposed to arrive in France on Friday.


Saudi Arabia was also seen as a protagonist in leading 11 other nations to sever diplomatic ties with Qatar earlier this year, a move meant to punish KSA’s tiny neighbor for having too close a relationship with Iran.


Despite Xi’s promise, China also maintains warm relations with Iran, meaning the likelihood that China would become involved in a military struggle against either Iran or Saudi is probably low.


According to the SCMP, China has bolstered its presence in the region by forging closer ties with both countries. Of course, Saudi has plenty to gain from closer relations with China, including expanding its foothold in the world’s largest import market for crude.


During King Salman’s first official trip to China in March, the two countries signed deals, including some in the oil sector, worth a combined US$65 billion, the SCMP noted.


However, if the feud between Saudi Arabia and Iran intensifies - and that looks likely - the threat of a geopolitical conflict will become impossible to ignore.


What then?









Thursday, November 9, 2017

The Saudi Purge: The Middle-East Is On The Verge Of A New War

Via SouthFront.org,


Saudi Arabia is going through a major internal political crisis the likes of which has rarely been seen.



A missile gets fired on the Saudi capital. A missile, which was allegedly built in Iran and smuggled to Yemen, just to be fired at Saudi Arabia.


According to initial reports, two Saudi princes died back to back in 24 hours: one in an “accidental” helicopter crash, the other during a firefight that broke out while security forces were trying to arrest him. On November 7, Saudi Arabia’s information ministry spokesman said that “Prince Abdulaziz is alive and well”. However, the prince could not be independently reached for comment by the media.


Other high-ranking members of the establishment and the royal family - the two tend to be one and the same in Saudi Arabia - get arrested on charges of corruption, with their bank accounts frozen.


Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri unexpectedly resigns after he was summoned to Riyadh by his Saudi-backers.


Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia accused Iran of conducting acts of “direct military aggression” and accused Lebanon of “declaring war” on Riyadh by allowing Hezbollah “aggression” against the kingdom.


All this happened in a span of just a few days.


With ever-growing security challenges and problems at the regional level, the crisis that took hold of Saudi Arabia does not seem to be slowing down.


One contributing factor to the ongoing crisis is a major split in the Saudi royal family: the power struggle that resulted in the former crown prince being deposed and replaced with a new one, a move that shook things up quite a bit inside the country. The echo of this can be seen in the current “anti-corruption” persecution, enforced by the current Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman.



Outside the country, several key foreign policy projects failed: the effectiveness of the Yemen intervention can be judged by the fact that it resulted in a missile being fired at Riyadh. Bashar al-Assad is still in power in Syria. The attempts to scare Qatar into submission backfired, as Qatar has been getting more and more friendly with Russia, Turkey and Iran.



Iran is gaining more and more influence in the region, while the Saudis seem to be losing it, hence they are trying to compensate for their losses by participating in proxy wars elsewhere.


The Saudis also tried to flex their diplomatic muscle. King Salman even visited Moscow, where the two sides exchanged promises with no guarantees that these will ever be fulfilled. This also backfired, as some considered it a demonstration of weakness or an attempt to make peace by making concessions.


Add economic struggles to this series of failures, and one can see why the King’s and his Crown Prince’s position seem less and less stable by the minute. The situation apparently seemed so dire, that in order to keep everything afloat active persecution seemed the only possible way to keep the King and his successor in power. The “anti-corruption” campaign is just an excuse: the corruption has always been high in Saudi Arabia, and no one batted an eye before now.


These are temporary measures.


Persecution can hardly solve foreign and internal matters, and it will not lead to a solution of the problems. Right now, the kingdom’s leadership is desperately in need of an enemy to unite the population and draw their attention away from the chaotic events that unfolding in the country.


A warlike rhetoric against Iran, Lebanon and Hezbollah are a clear sign of this. While Iran is a potent regional power in military and diplomatic terms, Hezbollah is a non-state actor. So, Riyadh may choose the group as an enemy for its risky foreign policy undertaking. Saudi Arabia and Israel are obvious allies in their will to destroy Hezbollah. On November 5, Tel Aviv started the largest-ever aerial exercise in the history of Israel. A leaked diplomatic cable confirmed that the Saudis and Israelis are coordinating their efforts against Iran and Hezbollah thus escalating the already tense situation in the Middle East.


The region may be heading for another large-scale military conflict.









Wednesday, November 8, 2017

Iran Slams Saudi, US Claims It Ordered Ballistic Missile Attack From Yemen

On Tuesday Iran slammed Saudi and US claims that it was supplying Yemen"s Houthi rebels with advanced ballistic missiles that Saudi Arabia says targeted Riyadh international airport on Saturday - which would be a violation of a UN resolution which ensures conformity to the Iran nuclear deal.


Iran"s state-run IRNA news cited a letter sent to the UN Security Council signed by Iranian ambassador Gholamali Khoshroo, saying that Iran “categorically” rejects Saudi Arabia’s “baseless and unfounded accusations and considers it as destructive, provocative and a ‘threat to use of force”’ against a UN member state in defiance of the UN charter. Iran"s foreign minister further called the Saudi claims "contrary to reality and dangerous".



Iran"s state-run PressTV file photo purporting to show a missile being fired from the direction of Yemen toward Saudi Arabia earlier during the conflict. 


Though Saudi Arabia has mounted an aggressive aerial bombing campaign of deeply impoverished and disease-ridden Yemen for over the past two years, killing and wounding tens of thousands of civilians, it is Iran that is coming under intense pressure this week. Yesterday Saudi Arabia charged its regional rival Iran with "an act of war" while stating through its military coalition executing Yemen operations that, “Iran’s role and its direct command of its Houthi proxy in this matter constitutes a clear act of aggression that targets neighboring countries, and threatens peace and security in the region and globally.”


However, the Iranian ambassador"s letter to the UN responded directly to the charges with, “Such provocative statements by the Saudis are nothing but an attempt to shift the blame and to distract attention from its war of aggression against Yemen.” Other Iranian officials, according to various reports, called the Saudi claims "fake news". 


Saudi Arabia has cast itself as the victim of external Iranian and pro-Shia plotting after its internal weekend of chaos which included a missile attack from Yemen, the deaths of two princes and other high officials within a mere 24 hours, and an aggressive crackdown against dissent in the royal family which saw close to a dozen princes placed under house arrest. While lashing out at Iran"s supposed campaign of destabilization in Yemen and in the region, it appears that the Saudis are set to step up proxy skirmishes with Iran across the Middle East, possibly with the support of regional allies


Predictably, the US immediately backed Saudi claims of direct Iranian involvement in the Yemeni conflict while citing no specific evidence. US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley pointed to a prior missile fired in July which she said was an Iranian Qiam, and likened the previous attack with Saturday"s missile launch, saying it "may also be of Iranian origin," and added that the ballistic missiles were not "a type of weapon that had not been present in Yemen before the conflict."


Haley further claimed that Iran"s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp‎s had violated UN resolutions on Yemen and Iran, and said, "We encourage the United Nations and international partners to take necessary action to hold the Iranian regime accountable for these violations."



Above: Why is Yemen ignored in US politics? The US itself has been an integral part of the coalition (also including Bahrain, Kuwait, UAE, Egypt, Sudan, and with the UK as a huge supplier of weapons) fighting Shia Houthi rebels, which overran Yemen’s north in 2014. Saudi airstrikes on the impoverished country, which have killed many thousands of civilians and displaced tens of thousands, have involved the assistance of US intelligence and use of American military hardware.


Regardless of the degree to which Iran may or may not be involved in advising and assisting Houthi rebels, it is astounding that in the rare moments that US officials actually make reference to the humanitarian disaster in Yemen, it is nebulous "Iranian agents" that are blamed even while American and British bombs are dropped from Saudi-piloted jets on a civilian population. 


Saudi Arabia has in recent years managed to use the UN to protect and enhance its image when it comes to questions of both domestic human rights abuses and rampant war crimes in Yemen. Absurdly, the autocratic country which has Wahhabi Islam for its official state religion continues to serve its 3-year term on the UN Human Rights Council.


But it appears that for now that the Saudi "but Iran did it" line is enough to satisfy Nikki Haley and the US administration. 









Lebanon - The Next Front In The Great Gas War

Via Golem XIV"s blog,


The Great Gas War has already two distinct fronts: The now relatively quiet Northern Front in Ukraine and the Southern Front in Syria in which the Western empire has been losing. It looks to me that Lebanon is being targeted as the next front, where the West hopes its loses might be recouped.


Yesterday, November 6th,  Reuters reported,


Saudi Arabia said on Monday that Lebanon had declared war against it because of attacks against the Kingdom by the Lebanese Shi‘ite group Hezbollah.



This comes after Israel, Saudi’s long time though largely un-offical best friend in the region,  has been very publicly preparing to renew its own war with Lebanon – or more accurately with Hezbollah.  As the American news journal Newsweek put it recently,


ISRAEL PREPARES FOR ANOTHER WAR WITH HEZBOLLAH AS IDF PRACTICES LEBANON INVASION.



Why now and why Lebanon?  Well the rulers of Saudi, a Sunni dominated country, will tell us that it is because Hezbollah is a Shia terrorist organisation. “Hezbollah” literally means the “Party of Allah” or “Party of God”.  Saudi Gulf affairs minister Thamer al-Sabhan yesterday pointedly referred to Hezbollah as, “the Lebanese Party of the Devil”.  Saudi is not alone of course, Hezbollah has also been listed as a terrorist organisation by America, Israel, the Arab League, the UK and the EU. It is also, however, part of the popular government of Lebanon having seats in its parliament.


I suggest, however, a powerful reason that a new war with Hezbollah may be in the offing is because Lebanon is the next link in any gas pipeline that could potentially bring Iranian Gas to Europe. That was the reason the West decided to “liberate” the Syrian people and it will be why they decide to enforce the same salvation upon the people of Lebanon. Having failed to liberate the Syrians, Saudi, the West, its Sunni Gulf allies and Israel will now see if they can succeed in blocking any Iranian gas ambitions by liberating the Lebanese from their own government.  I would not be surprised to hear quite soon from opposition groups vocally denouncing the government or at least Hezbollah. I expect spokes people from those groups to suddenly get a global platform along-side American and regional supporters such as Saudi.


When I look at Saudi I can’t help but notice that it has , all in a short space of time, begun wars in neighbouring Yemen and Syria, and declared first Qatar and now Lebanon supporters of terror if not actually themselves terrorists. Saudi has gone from a nation surrounded by allies or at least states with whom it had basic diplomatic relations, to a nation surrounded by enemies.  It begins to remind me of Israel in that respect.


Gas of course is not the be all and end all. In many ways it is a surface marker, the means for regional and global struggles for political power and influence.  For Saudi it is the basis of its struggle for regional supremacy with Qatar. For America it is the regional marker for its proxy struggle with Russia for political dominance and for control over gas supplies to Europe.  America has sided with Saudi. Russia and China have sided with Qatar.  Qatar struck a decisive blow for dominance and for a new Qatar focussed power structure when it opened the region’s only clearing house for settlement of Gas contracts in Yuan.


I see the political turmoil inside Saudi as a struggle between those who see the House of Saud’s only hope for a future to be to remain firmly aligned with America and therefore by extension, with Israel, versus those who might consider switching or at least splitting their allegiance so as to move closer to Russia/China. A move which might be correct but which would concede to Qatar some large portion of what has been up till now Saudi’s pre-eminence.


Wars in Yemen, Syria and soon Lebanon make the divide between these two possible futures for The House of Saud, very sharp.


For Israel it will mean war and troops on the ground. America will certainly help in the air but Israel will shed blood on the ground.


What will Russia do? I doubt it will put troops into Lebanon. But I could very easily see it extending in to Lebanon the air support it has deployed in Syria. I could see Iran being tempted to send troops or at least ‘advisors’ or perhaps just ‘allow’ zealots who want to go, to do so. And that itself may be part of what some in America would like – tempt Iran into lending support and then declare anew that Iran is, pointing at new evidence,  a state sponsor of international terror.  America has desired a confrontation with Iran for a long time and want a new excuse.


The Great Gas War has not finished. I suggest it is about to open a new front. A front that could ignite a wider conflict.









Sunday, October 22, 2017

Tillerson Demands Iran "Militias" Leave Iraq As Fighting Against ISIS "Comes To A Close"

One week after we reported that the head of Iran"s elite Revolutionary Guard (which two weeks ago was designated by the US as a terrorist organization), Qassem Soleimani, was observed in Erbil last Sunday where he met with Kurdistan regional president Barzani to "discuss" the growing crisis - the latest indication of Iran"s surging influence in the region - and just days before Iraq sent in troops assisted by Iranian militia into Iraq"s Kurdish region, which promptly regained control over the oil-rich Kirkuk region, on Sunday Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that Iranian "militias" need to leave Iraq as the fight against Islamic State militants was coming to an end.


“Certainly Iranian militias that are in Iraq, now that the fighting against (the Islamic State group) is coming to a close, those militias need to go home,” Tillerson said during a press conference in Riyadh, where the U.S. diplomat is holding talks with top Gulf officials. "All foreign fighters need to go home,” he added hopefully, quoted by NRT.


Tillerson"s Gulf visit came as part of concerted efforts to curb Iran"s rapidly expanding influence in the region, including boosting the clout of Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia in Shiite-majority Iraq, where Iran backs Shia militias fighting in the north - part of a wider regional battle for influence that extends from Syria to Yemen - even as there was scant hope of a breakthrough in attempts to reconcile Saudi Arabia and Qatar.


In further attempts to limit Iranian influence, Tillerson called on European governments to join a U.S.-led sanctions regime against Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, saying that countries doing business with the Islamic Republic’s force do so at their own risk.  The Revolutionary Guards “foment instability in the region and create destruction in the region,” Tillerson told reporters in Riyadh on Sunday quoted by Bloomberg, after talks with King Salman of Saudi Arabia and other top officials. European countries and companies that do business with the IRGC “really do so at great risk,” he said.



Rex Tillerson is received by Saudi King Salman prior to their meeting in Riyadh


Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Gulf states are engaged in their own efforts to roll back Shiite-led Iran’s expanding sway in the region, including in Iraq, where Shiite parties have dominated politics since the U.S. toppled the Sunni-dominated regime of Saddam Hussein in 2003. In a reference to Shiite militias in Iraq, Tillerson said “those fighters need to go home - any foreign fighters need to go home" adding that “we are facing in our region serious challenges in the form of extremism, terrorism as well as attempts to destabilize our countries,” Saudi King Salman said at the event. “These attempts require our full attention.”
* * *


Tilleron"s visit takes place just one week after President Donald Trump refused to certify the Iran nuclear deal, leaving its fate to the US Congress, and laid out an aggressive new strategy against Tehran in a bellicose speech. As well as talks with senior Saudi officials in Riyadh including King Salman, Tillerson attended a landmark meeting between Saudi Arabia and Iraq aimed at upgrading strategic ties between the Arab neighbours.


"This event highlights the strength and breadth as well as the great potential of the relations between your countries," Tillerson said at the first meeting of the joint Saudi-Iraqi coordination council in Riyadh.


Following years of tensions with Riyadh, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi hailed the meeting as an "important step toward enhancing relations", while King Salman warned of the dangers of "extremism, terrorism, as well as attempts to destabilise our countries." As part of his Saudi visit, Tillerson is also seeking more money for reconstruction in Iraq, after U.S.-backed forces ousted Islamic State from its key strongholds in the country.


Meanwhile, the question of growing Iranian influence - which has been underscored by strong diplomatic relations with Russia and Turkey  - has also been at the heart of the diplomatic conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, with Tillerson headed to Doha later Sunday for talks on defusing the crisis between two key US allies, which however looks unlikely. After initially appearing to support the effort to isolate Qatar, Trump called for mediation and recently predicted a rapid end to the crisis. But before he arrived at Riyadh"s King Salman air base on Saturday, Tillerson indicated there had been little progress.


"I do not have a lot of expectations for it being resolved anytime soon," he said in an interview with Bloomberg. "There seems to be a real unwillingness on the part of some of the parties to want to engage."


Aside from the Gulf dispute and Iran, the conflict in Yemen and counter-terrorism will also figure in his talks, the State Department said. On the Gulf crisis, the goal will be to try to persuade the two sides to at least open a dialogue. Simon Henderson, a veteran of the region now at the Washington Institute of Near East Policy, said the disputing parties do not want to lose face.


"Tillerson will say: "Come on kids, grow up and wind down your absurd demands. And let"s work on a compromise on your basic differences"," he said.


Kuwait has tried to serve as a mediator, with US support, but the parties have yet to sit down face-to-face.


During his trip, Tillerson will also visit Pakistan, India and Switzerland: in New Delhi Tillerson will try to build what he said in a recent speech could be a 100-year "strategic partnership" with India. Tillerson will stop in Islamabad to try to sooth Pakistani fears about this Indian outreach, but also pressure the government to crack down harder on Islamist militant groups.









Saturday, October 7, 2017

Is Saudi Arabia's Grand Strategy Shifting?

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Oriental Review,


Even in this era of global paradigmatic changes, Saudi Arabia’s shifting grand strategy is perhaps one of the most surprising developments to occur thus far, but the fast-moving Russian-Saudi rapprochement is likely to provoke an Iranian “zero-sum” reaction which could complicate Moscow’s multipolar efforts in managing the “New Middle East”.



Vladimir Putin with King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud at the official greeting ceremony, Moscow, October 5, 2017 (Photo: kremlin.ru)


Most observers were taken aback by what to many seemed to be the inexplicable visit of Saudi King Salman to Moscow this week, wondering how and why the two long-standing Great Power rivals were able to get so close to one another in such a short period of time – and apparently without much public fanfare, too – in making this historic event possible. The usual Alt-Media demagogues decried this as a sellout of Russia’s fundamental national interests, with the most extreme pundit-provocateurs even ranting that it amounts to President Putin siding with “terrorists” such as Daesh and Al Qaeda, especially in light of Moscow’s decision to sell the much-vaunted S-400 anti-air missile systems to Riyadh and even set up a Kalashnikov production plant in the Kingdom.


Had the Saudi Arabia of 2017 been the same country as it was half a decade ago, or even last year for that matter as some could argue, then there might be some rhetorical substance to this outlandish claim no matter how false it would still be, but what most people don’t realize is that Saudi Arabia is in the process of comprehensive changes to its foreign and domestic policies, and that there’s a very high likelihood that it will moderate its traditional behavior in becoming a more responsible actor in international (and especially regional) affairs. A lot of this has happened away from the public eye, at least in the sense that the developments weren’t “sexy” enough to draw widespread attention from most media outlets and commentators, but these piecemeal changes have altogether contributed to the formation of what looks to be a totally new grand strategy.


Russia’s Rationale


Before getting into the details of the drastic policy changes that Saudi Arabia has been up to lately, it’s important to comment a bit on why Russia is embracing its erstwhile nemesis. For starters, Russia’s foreign policy is driven nowadays by the “progressive” faction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which believes that their country’s 21st-century grand strategic ambition should be to become the supreme balancing force in the Eurasian supercontinent. To this end, they’re diligently employing “military diplomacy” and “nuclear diplomacy”; the first in selling arms to rival states in order to preserve the status quo between them and prevent a hot war from transpiring (which is the opposite of the US selling weapons in order to tip the balance in favor of its preferred partner and spark the said conflict that Russia wants to avoid), and the second in utilizing its global leadership in nuclear energy technology to make important strategic inroads with non-traditional partners.


Multipolarity In Action


Concerning Saudi Arabia, this has seen Russia sign deals with it for the S-400 anti-air missile system and Kalashnikov production plant (“military diplomacy”), and Rosatom’s proposal to build Riyadh’s first-ever nuclear power plant (“nuclear diplomacy”). Of course, there’s also traditional and energy diplomacy at play here as well, the former as it relates to cooperation in uniting the Syrian “opposition” as a prerequisite to resolving the War on Syria, and the latter when it comes to both sides’ participation in the historic OPEC+ output deal from last year and subsequent renewal earlier in 2017. Moreover, none of this is occurring in a multipolar vacuum either, as Russia’s premier Chinese partner has been making great strides with Saudi Arabia in the same timeframe, including by inking two sets of deals totaling than $130 billion in the past six months alone.



King Salman bin Abdulaziz in Moscow (photo: kremlin.ru)


Riyadh’s Reforms


Most of the Chinese-Saudi agreements were signed in the framework of Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman’s ambitious Vision 2030 project for diversifying away from his Kingdom’s present oil-exporting dependency and towards a more “real-sector” economy. This can’t happen unless crucial socio-cultural reforms are made in Saudi Arabia, and the young prince – who’s far from a fundamentalist Wahhabi in real life and therefore something like a “rock star” among his country’s majority “moderate-prone” youth population (over half of which is under 25 years old)  – recently undertook the pivotal decision to allow women to drive in the future, understanding that this a necessary step to increasing their future participation in the economy. It can be expected that more such reforms might follow in the future, such as the possible reopening of movie theaters and maybe even one day lessening the patriarchal legal restrictions placed on women’s freedom of movement.


Unipolar Pushback


Mohammed Bin Salman’s reforms aren’t without controversy, however, as they’ve produced a lot of resistance among the country’s ultra-fundamental clerical class, as was explained in the author’s recent analysis about “Why Allowing Saudi Women To Drive Is Very Dangerous”. The fact of the matter is that Saudi Arabia isn’t a pure “monarchical dictatorship” in the structural-political sense, but a “dual dictatorship” between the monarchy and the clergy, but the Crown Prince’s socio-culturally modernizing reforms are being perceived of as an unprecedented “power grab” which de-facto constitutes a “soft coup” by the monarchy against the clergy. In turn, the most extreme clerics could become a pressing national security risk if they rally their followers against the monarchy in fomenting unrest, whether manifested through street protests, a royal coup, or terrorism. It’s the fear of this happening which explains the Kingdom’s recent crackdown and the author’s subsequent investigation into “Who’s Really Trying To Overthrow Mohammed Bin Salman?


 As the aforementioned article concludes, the only serious player with the clandestine competencies to pull this off is the US, which is considering the “Balkanization” of the Kingdom into a collection of emirates aided by the duplicitous connivance of its regional UAE ally. This was elaborated on more in depth by the author in his work a couple of months ago explaining “The Machiavellian Plot to Provoke Saudi Arabia and Qatar into a ‘Blood Border’ War”, but the overriding idea is that the US has had an interest in betraying its decades-long ally ever since the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal was agreed to, which the author predicted in his summer 2015 piece about a “Polar Reorientation In The Mideast” that also described the strategic contours that would eventually lead to the present-day Russian-Saudi rapprochement. It’s this Great Power convergence between Moscow and Riyadh, as well as the latter and Beijing, which is driving the US to wage an incipient but increasingly multifaceted Hybrid War on Saudi Arabia.



Rosatom SEO Alexey Likhachev with his Saudi counterpart after signing program documents in nuclear sphere (photo: kremlin.ru)


Stopping The Saudi “Deep State” Conspiracy


Mohammed Bin Salman must masterfully manage to tame both the radical clerics and domestic terrorists if he’s to have a chance at avoiding a US-backed royalist coup against him. He already has the support of the majority-youthful masses who could come out to the streets to support him in the event of a sudden coup, just like they did for Turkish President Erdogan during last year’s failed pro-US coup attempt, so this infers that he needs to win the backing of the military-security services in order to preemptively suppress clerical-terrorist destabilizations before countering the royalist conspiracy that’s  taking form. However, Saudi forces are embroiled in the bloody War on Yemen, which was one of the first decisions that he made as Defense Minister and is therefore attributed entirely to him, but would have probably happened regardless of whoever was in power at the time due to the geopolitical dynamics involved.


In fact, the author forecast that a forceful Saudi response could be expected to developments in Yemen as early as September 2014 in his article about “Syria’s Yemeni Opportunity and the Rise of the Shia Circle”, which deliberately analyzed events from Riyadh’s sectarian perspective in an attempt to better understand the Kingdom’s future response. Likewise, the follow-up piece in January 2015 about “Yemen: The Saudi Coup That Totally Backfired” presciently concluded that “the Saudis are expected to hit back as hard as they can against the phantom ‘Iranian menace’ that they’re attributing their Yemeni failings to”, and that “no matter which form it takes, it’s not going to be pretty.” In any case, the only way for Mohammed Bin Salman to be confident in the support of his military-security services is to downscale the disastrous War on Yemen and eventually follow the Syrian peace format in resolving the conflict there in as much of a “face-saving” way as possible.


That, however, won’t necessarily endear him to any of the conspiratorial royals who are plotting his ouster, many of whom are reportedly irreconcilably opposed to him for his high-profile foreign policy failings in the aforementioned War on Yemen and Qatar Crisis, which is why the young prince so urgently needed to make up for them with a dramatic success elsewhere, ergo the reason why he decided to commence his country’s now-successful rapprochement with Russia. Conversely, it’s precisely because of his pivotal role in carrying out this game-changing foreign policy rebalancing that the US wants him out, and Washington sent a very clear message to Riyadh of its displeasure just the other day when it announced that it will be halting some of its military exercises with “Gulf countries” until the Qatar Crisis is resolved. Reading between the lines, this is the Pentagon voicing its strong opposition to King Salman’s visit to Moscow and Saudi Arabia’s S-400 deal with Russia, thereby signaling to its in-country proxies that it’s time to commence their planned regime change operation.



Russia-Saudi Arabian talks in extended format in Moscow, Oct 2017 (photo: kremlin.ru)


Moderating The Monarchy


All in all, Mohammed Bin Salman is trying to compensate for his earlier errors of judgement in “moderating” his country’s foreign policy to the most realistic extent possible under the present circumstances, which in an historical comparison amounts to an unprecedented pivot of sorts towards the Multipolar World Order.  This doesn’t just have geopolitical implications, however, as there’s the very real possibility that Saudi Arabia might de-dollarize new Vision 2030 and energy contracts with its new non-Western partners, which would in effect equate to the death of the “petrodollar”. The author predicted this in a late-September forecast after it became abundantly clear that the country was no longer as solidly in the American camp as most observers had considered it, especially following its fast-moving rapprochement with Russia and the $130 billion’s worth of deals that the Kingdom signed with China.


The combined effect of these two multipolar realignments, as well as the likely downscaling of the War on Yemen and the “Damocles’ Sword” potential that Saudi Arabia has for dealing a deathblow to the dollar, are increasingly turning Mohammed Bin Salman into the “Saudi Saddam”, in that he’s now being targeted for elimination by the US because this one-time American subordinate was brave enough to chart his country’s own sovereign path in the world. If he can successfully withstand the US-encouraged “deep state” coup against him being waged through the Hybrid War mechanisms of a rebelling clergy, a possible domestic terrorist insurgency (as partial blowback from Saudi Arabia’s support for such groups abroad), and a royalist plot, among whatever other means might soon make themselves available, then it’s expected that the end result will be a considerable moderation of the Kingdom’s destabilizing activities in the region.


Irate Iranians


Background Concepts:


While the welcoming of Saudi Arabia into the multipolar fold as a responsible member of the international community would be celebrated by many because of the far-reaching consequences that it could have in altering the entire course of the New Cold War, there’s one multipolar party which would actually be incredibly irate at this happening, and that’s Iran. The Islamic Republic is caught in an intense security dilemma with the Kingdom, inspired partly by the centuries-old but previously long-dormant Sunni-Shiite split, and also the US’ efforts since the 1979 Revolution and especially after 9/11 to exacerbate this into taking on geopolitical dimensions all across the international Muslim community (“Ummah”). Iran and Saudi Arabia both conceive of international affairs as being a “zero-sum” game between them, and it’s very likely that Riyadh and its media surrogates will intentionally misportray King Salman’s visit to Russia as being against Tehran instead of epitomizing Moscow’s skillful geopolitical balancing act.





It’s understandable if Iran feels uncomfortable with these optics, though it should recognize that Russia’s overall intent is truly apolitical and driven by neutral Great Power considerations, not anything directed against it personally no matter what the forthcoming Saudi psy-ops might infer.



That being said, it’s very tempting to perceive of events through the aforementioned “zero-sum” prism in seeing any betterment of Russian-Saudi relations as being to the overall detriment of Russian-Iranian ones, which in turn might prompt an asymmetrical response or set thereof from Tehran in countering what some of its leadership might truly believe is Russia’s “unfriendly” and “humiliating” gesture by hosting the Saudi King, selling him S-400 anti-air missiles and state-of-the-art Kalashnikovs, and bidding to produce the Kingdom’s first-ever nuclear power plant. This isn’t speculation either, as Iran already isn’t happy with the de-facto alliance that Russia has struck with “Israel” in Syria, which is explained in detail in the author’s earlier work rhetorically questioning whether “Anyone Still Seriously Thinks That Russia And Israel Aren’t Allies?


Phase 1: Syria


Moreover, Iran doesn’t like how Saudi Arabia is the main reason why it hasn’t been invited to join BRICS, and while the other four members are in a technical sense equally responsible for this too, it’s only Russia which is courting Saudi Arabia in a way which could make Iran uneasy given how impactful the latest rapprochement will be for Syria. Therefore, even though Iran’s official media has been largely silent on the implications of the Russian-Saudi rapprochement, it can’t be ruled out that the millennia-experienced Iranian diplomats are preparing one of their stereotypically asymmetrical responses to what’s happening, and that it could most immediately have consequences for Syria. For example, Iran could make the Astana talks more difficult by siding more closely with Damascus in attempting to rebuff the joint Russian-Turkish efforts to get the Syrian government to enter into certain political-administrative concessions (e.g. a “phased leadership transition” and “federalization”) as part of a comprehensive peace plan that would meet the interests of most external parties to the conflict and therefore maximize Moscow’s geopolitical “balancing” capabilities.


Phase 2: Caucasus


Apart from that and stepping its response up a notch, there’s also the possibility that Iran could work with India to redirect the North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) from Azerbaijan and Russia to Armenia and Georgia instead, the latter route of which was predicted in the Mideast chapter of the author’s book-length analytical series about “The Chinese-Indian New Cold War” and would allow both on-the-fence Great Powers to pioneer a trade route to the EU. This would be a geopolitically troubling development for Russia and contribute to its perception that Armenia has become an “obstructionist” actor vis-à-vis Moscow-led Eurasian integration processes and has probably been totally taken over by the powerful American-based diaspora lobby, though China’s latest inroads in building its second-largest embassy in the post-Soviet space in Yerevan might help to “balance” everything out in preventing this potential move from being completely disastrous for multipolarity. Nevertheless, if Iran takes this step in rerouting some or all of the NSTC to Armenia, Georgia, and the EU, then it would probably mean that it’s also seriously considering expanding its asymmetrical response to the third phase of operations in the Balkans.


Phase 3: Balkans


The third and final escalatory phase of Iran’s most realistic responses to any perceived “security dilemma” with Russia after Moscow’s rapprochement with Riyadh would be if Tehran seeks to broaden its asymmetrical measures to include energy and geopolitical dimensions in the Balkans. The author wrote about the future role that post-sanctions Iranian energy exports to Europe could have in challenging Russia’s present market dominance in certain regions, and while this might not happen if the EU reimposes sanctions against the Islamic Republic in compliance with American pressure, it still can’t be entirely discounted that Iranian LNG exports to Croatia, Ukraine, Lithuania, and even Poland could be in the cards, as well as its exit from the OPEC+ output agreement. However, the most destabilizing consequence of Iran’s irritability with Russia could be if it decides to return to its post-Yugoslav role in breaking up Bosnia, using the Serbs as stand-ins for the Russians in a new proxy war. That’s the most extreme step that Iran could take and there’s nothing right now which indicates that it will happen, but it should nevertheless be included as the worst-case “dark scenario” forecast.


Concluding Thoughts


Royal Pivot:


Saudi Arabia’s grand strategy is shifting away from its former Western-/unipolar-centric focus to a more diversified one of “multi-alignment’ with multipolar leaders such as Russia and China, motivated in part by the US’ hostile energy and geopolitical actions against it. On the domestic front, Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman is modernizing his country’s socio-cultural situation by enacting belated reforms that will complement his ambitious Vision 2030 project of multisectoral economic diversification away from its present dependency on oil exports. Taken together, the international and domestic dimensions of Saudi Arabia’s grand strategic shifts are expected to have game-changing implications in altering the global dynamics of the New Cold War, to say nothing of what would happen if the Kingdom de-dollarizes its future Vision 2030 and energy deals with its new non-Western partners, hence why the initiator of all of this, Mohammed Bin Salman, is now the “Saudi Saddam” in the sense of being targeted for elimination.


Iranian Reaction:


That’s not all that there is to it, however, since even in the event that the young prince is successful in thwarting his myriad Hybrid War adversaries and the wide variety of weaponized threats that they’re poised to utilize against him, it’s unlikely that this will result in multipolar stability in the Mideast, owing mostly to the fact that Iran is expected to be incredibly irate at its hated rival being feted as a privileged partner by Russia and China. The difference between the two Eurasian Great Powers, however, is that Moscow’s outreaches to Riyadh are having direct consequences for Syria, particularly as it relates to possibly “counterbalancing” or even “rolling back” Iran’s intended post-Daesh influence in the Arab Republic, or so it may seem, which is why Tehran looks much more suspiciously at Moscow than it does at Beijing. The problem, though, is that Russia isn’t doing any of this “against Iran”, but in the “larger multipolar interests” of becoming the supreme “balancing” force in the Eurasian supercontinent, which in and of itself necessitate having excellent relations with Saudi Arabia.


Scenario Forecasts:


If the Iranian leadership is misled into viewing Russia’s ties with Saudi Arabia as part of a “zero-sum” game and not the “win-win” strategy that it’s actually intended (key word) to be, then it’s very likely that the Islamic Republic will resort to one of its stereotypically asymmetrical responses honed by millennia of diplomatic experience in making its silent disagreements well known. This would be an unfortunate development because it would mean that Russia’s sincere efforts to balance and then mediate the Saudi-Iranian/Sunni-Shiite rivalry would be for naught, and that the US’ unstated goal of redirecting Iranian attention away from Saudi Arabia and towards Russia would have been partially successful. Nevertheless, should this happen, then it’s expected that the three-phase tier of escalatory responses could see Iran create “complications” in the Astana peace process; redirect the North-South Transport Corridor away from Azerbaijan and Russia and towards Armenia, Georgia, and the EU; and begin actively competing with Russia for part of the European energy market. At the worst, it might even try to restore its destabilizing influence in Bosnia and spark a proxy war against Russia’s Serbian partners there.


American Backup Plan:


None of Iran’s forecasted responses are certain, or even that it will negatively appraise the fast-moving Russian-Saudi rapprochement in the first place, but in the possible event that it does, then it would inadvertently be playing into the US’ intended strategy of indirectly using Iran as a backup plan for replacing Saudi Arabia in countering Russian interests in the Mideast, Caucasus, and the Balkans. In addition, Riyadh’s reversal from the unipolar camp to the multipolar one would leave the US without a regular source of jihadi recruits, thereby necessitating that it scout elsewhere in such countries as Sudan, India, Bangladesh, and Indonesia. The most likely scenario to happen in the near future is that Iran’s suspicions of the Russian-Saudi rapprochement manifest themselves subtly in Syria, at least at first, while the US begins looking to non-Mideast “Global South” countries for mercenaries while concurrently commencing its regime change operation in Saudi Arabia.


The best outcome would be if Russia’s multidimensional diplomatic efforts could bring Saudi Arabia and Iran together in a “New Détente” like how Iraq’s Muqtada al-Sadr unsuccessfully tried to do, all the while assisting both of them in warding off the US’ Hybrid War threats, but the most likely result is that this wishful thinking eventuality is still a far way’s off, if it ever happens at all, since the US is well known for flexibly adapting its unipolar grand strategy to accommodate for any multipolar contingency such as this one.


Friday, June 9, 2017

While My Qatar Gently Weeps

By Chris at www.CapitalistExploits.at


Menopause, I"m told, is horrible.


Men don"t know too much about it, and thankfully I"ve not been exposed to it... yet. One minute you"re hand in hand on the beach with your sweet adoring wife and the next she"s a sobbing wreck who wants to stab you in the thigh with a pair of knitting needles.


This is probably just how Qatar feels right now.


Sure, they"ve never been "mates" with their neighbours but they"ve always tolerated each other. Only months ago, they had joined with Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Hand in hand, they had come together with the shared vision of bombing Yemen back into the sand. Happy days! Today, knitting needles.


Two questions:


  1. What is actually going on?

  2. Should we care?

The two are related. We can only know if we should care if we actually know what"s going on.


To answer the first question, let"s begin with the second.


Consider that the most expensive, complicated, and unpopular wars are those that Western powers (which really means the US these days) wage directly. Outright wars... Washington has found... are unpopular.


And I"m not referring only to women with hairy armpits and unshaven men running around, waving silly placards chanting and throwing chairs through McDonald"s windows every time they feel triggered. After Iraq and Afghanistan, Trump faces a populace sick of "their boys" coming home without their legs.


Here"s what happens: the US military, after offloading a few billion dollars worth of hardware, flattening designated cities... I mean, "strategic targets" (remember shock and awe?) must ultimately commit ground troops to "secure the peace". Puppets need installing and that"s impossible to do without security, and security means ground troops.


And this is where the fun starts.


The average terrorist looks exactly like everybody else in the country. US ground troops, however, stand out like a sore thumb. Brave young Billy Joe Swanson, armed with pimples, testosterone, and enough hardware to take out New Zealand, doesn"t actually know why he"s there, but he"s there because he was recruited from a low socio economic area where his prospects were late shift at Taco Bell or the excitement of "fighting for freedom".


Young, uneducated, and not being the sharpest tool in the shed, Billy chose the latter and now, in a country and culture he knows absolutely nothing about, is faced with unknown and mostly unidentifiable attackers who will cut him down in an instant. Billy, together with his friends, feels increasingly isolated, frustrated, frightened, and angry. We"re here to help, he thinks. WTF is wrong with these people?


When Billy has to push what"s left of his best friends organs back into the gaping hole an IED left in his side, he quickly comes to hate the locals. They"re all terrorists or terrorist sympathisers. You can tell by the language used by Billy and his fellow soldiers where they are in the world - narcos, gooks, chinks, flops, commies, ragheads.


The countries change but the results do not. Billy and his friends hate them, and this means that more innocents are killed. This turns the country increasingly against the invaders.


The locals, now presiding over rubble, grow increasingly intolerant of arrogant, heavy handed Billy and the "liberating forces". Whatever synergy and initial euphoria may have existed rapidly disappears. The gap -- a result of cultural, religious, and value systems -- widens with each viewing the other as more alien than ever.


Remember Abu Ghraib?


The lines between acceptable and outrageous blur in war. All wars, all militaries. None are immune. It"s how it is.


Western media continue to speak of "precision strikes" and, when things inevitably go wrong, "isolated incidents".  Locals speak of genocide and murder.


For Washington it becomes an embarrassment. The world"s most sophisticated military with B1s, drones, guided missiles, satellites, helicopter gunships, and bunker busting bombs still, many years later, are struggling to win against sandal-wearing goat herders with AKs and RPGs.


Just like Musk figured with Tesla, it"s far easier to simply outsource all the parts to someone else and get someone to fund the whole thing. Enter proxy wars and the US puppet dictatorship of Saudi Arabia.


Trump likely figured this out. Ground troops in yet another Middle Eastern backwater will be as popular as herpes. So why going there?


Trump to his military advisors on Saudi Arabia: "Isn"t it time these guys started working for us?"


The real issue here isn"t Qatar.


They are merely a pawn in this. The target here is Iran, and now that Chairman Trump just gave the Saudis a "we"ve got your back" pledge, it"s time to move things forward.


This is likely to be as messy as ever. Why? Because it"s all been tried before. Direct wars, as discussed, have their problems. Proxy wars, on the other hand, aren"t all peaches and cream either.


The folks in the 5-sided building in Virginia may have higher IQs than Billy but they"re still as dumb as "isht".


Here"s what happens with proxy wars.


US forces "train" local forces to stand up and fight for whatever the US thinks they should be fighting for. All too often it involves killing the citizens of their own country.


Pray tell, why US-trained forces in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan never seem to work?


Let me put it this way. It"d be like the Russians invading the United Kingdom and having Ivan force Peter in Yorkshire to fight Luke in Devon. Only government could fail to see this for what it is: a terrible idea. This won"t stop it from happening. You can"t fix stupid.


What Now?


Iran, a country that hasn"t invaded another in 200 years, is a terrible danger to the US, and Qatar supports them. We know this because the MSM tells us it"s so.



As that thug Henry Kissinger stated:





"It is not a matter what is true that counts but a matter of what is perceived to be true."



Sadly, he is correct. That this narrative is being championed now by none other than biggest sponsor of terrorism makes it all the more laughable.



Washington have decided Iran is the enemy and that"s really what matters, which begs the question. Was Trump"s Middle Eastern visit used to drum up support for an offensive on Iran? An easy sell to the Saudis who like Iran in the same way Jews like bacon.


Given the speed with which the Saudis and 6 other Middle Eastern countries cut ties with Qatar, I think it"s safe to say there is a far broader plan in the works.


As ZeroHedge pointed out yesterday it"s about energy and the money and power that comes with it. Surprise:





"The real reason behind the diplomatic fallout may be far simpler, and once again has to do with a long-running and controversial topic, namely Qatar"s regional natural gas dominance.



Recall that many have speculated (with evidence going back as far back as 2012) that one of the reasons for the long-running Syria proxy war was nothing more complex than competing gas pipelines, with Qatar eager to pass its own pipeline, connecting Europe to its vast natural gas deposits, however as that would put Gazprom"s monopoly of European LNG supply in jeopardy, Russia had been firmly, and violently, against this strategy from the beginning and explains Putin"s firm support of the Assad regime and the Kremlin"s desire to prevent the replacement of the Syrian government with a puppet regime."




With nearly 30% of global LNG supply, Qatar has more natural gas than Michael Moore after a bowl of cauliflower. And what"s more, it has the lowest extraction rates in the world. It"s how they got to be the richest country in the world on a per capita basis.



What to Expect?


Remember Libya?


Well, it"s no coincidence that the amount of terrorist attacks in Europe have increased ever since the US-led "coalition" shoved a flag pole up Gaddafi"s bum.


Any conflict in the Middle East is likely to increase the surge of refugees into Europe, and you can read my article on this very topic "7 steps to the easiest short in recent history" for a rundown. That particular theme will only increase the already fragile political and social fabric of Europe.


While it"s currently a low probability, should the powder keg that is the Middle East really blow, expect a US-led "coalition" to first provide "support" and finally to put boots on the ground. Then we go from passive to active and Billy gets to "integrate" once more with the natives. We"ve seen it all before.


Who wins? Who loses?


  • It"s hard to see how any disruption to the supplier of 1/3rd of the natural gas market wouldn"t move prices.

  • Any escalation leading to war won"t help already ballooning deficits, and yet the treasury will almost certainly need to sell more of those. Wars don"t come cheap.

Something else to consider is that this move by Middle Eastern countries led by the Saudis -- designed no doubt to contain Qatar ahead of a more aggressive stance towards Iran -- could backfire spectacularly, pushing Qatar closer to both Turkey and Iran. Qatar has money... lots of it.. and Turkey and Iran have decent military capabilities and regional ambitions.


Qatar poll


Cast your vote here and also see what others think will happen


- Chris


"There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." — Søren Kierkegaard


--------------------------------------


Liked this article? Don"t miss our future missives and podcasts, and


get access to free subscriber-only content here.


--------------------------------------