Trump"s Jerusalem Tit-For-Tat: Orders Saudis To ‘Immediately’ End Yemen Blockade

In a brief statement issued Wednesday afternoon, President Trump called on Saudi leadership to completely lift the years long Saudi military blockade on war-torn Yemen. The unexpected announcement came on the same day President Trump delivered an extremely controversial televised address wherein he gave official US recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

“I have directed officials in my administration to call the leadership of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to request that they completely allow food, fuel, water and medicine to reach the Yemeni people who desperately need it,” Trump said through a White House press release. “This must be done for humanitarian reasons immediately.”

Image via Vice News

Though it"s unclear exactly why the directive was suddenly issued after years of humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen, it is likely connected with the widespread shock and condemnation from world leaders which immediately followed in the wake of Trump"s speech formally recognizing Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. The Yemen directive was published by the Office of the Press Secretary only a matter of two hours later.

And while Trump cites "humanitarian reasons" for the urgent directive requesting the lifting of the siege, Saudi Arabia has enforced a military blockade on deeply impoverished Yemen since it began bombing the country in 2015. Furthermore, media and human rights groups began reporting on the de facto naval blockade of Yemen"s ports - which quickly left over 20 million Yemeni civilians facing a dire humanitarian crisis - soon after the war began in March of 2015. This occurred as the US and UK stationed military and intelligence officers in Saudi command and control centers in order to assist in targeting Yemeni Houthi rebel locations.

As early as June 2015, for example, a Guardian investigation found that the US and UK were enabling the crippling blockade, which has been widely acknowledged as a "humanitarian disaster". According to the report, "nearly 80% of the population are in urgent need of food, water and medical aid, in a humanitarian disaster that aid agencies say has been dramatically worsened by a naval blockade imposed by an Arab coalition with US and British backing."

While it"s clear that the lifting of the siege is a welcome step in the right direction for the millions of suffering Yemeni men, women, and children impacted, the White House decision in reality has nothing to do with humanitarian concerns, as the US itself has for the past two years been partnering with the Saudis in all its actions in Yemen (also including Bahrain, Kuwait, UAE, Egypt, Sudan, and with the UK as a huge supplier of weapons).

Saudi airstrikes on the impoverished country, which have killed many thousands of civilians - a shocking percentage of children among them according to the UN - and displaced tens of thousands, have further involved the use of American military hardware. Cholera has recently made a comeback amidst the appalling war-time conditions, and civilian infrastructure such as hospitals have been bombed by the coalition. Though likely falling short of the true number, as of November 5,295 civilians have been killed and another 8,873 injured in the war, according to figures provided by the UN.

And the coalition"s military campaign greatly intensified this week following former President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s death, which resulted in an uptick in the aerial pounding of Sanaa, which was overrun by Houthi rebels. 

So why is Trump belatedly citing "humanitarian reasons" now?

As Middle East analyst Hassan Hassan says, it appears that today"s statement on Yemen is no doubt connected with what many described as the strong and vehement reaction to the earlier Jerusalem recognition move by both King Salman and MBS. "This sounds like a tit-for-tat statement concerning the Jerusalem move. What happened suddenly for this administration to care about Yemenis, esp given recent news the Saudi-led Coalition lifted some of the blockade?" observed Hassan Hassan shortly after the release of the Yemen directive.

This sounds like a tit-for-tat statement re Jerusalem move. What happened suddenly for this administration to care about Yemenis, esp given recent news the Saudi-led Coalition lifted some of the blockade? pic.twitter.com/xrtBjqkeBa

— Hassan Hassan ?????? (@hxhassan) December 6, 2017

No doubt, Trump understands how he can leverage regional allies on the issue of human rights anytime they don"t fall in line with the US position - he knows where the skeletons are buried as the US has long been in the trenches with Saudi Arabia and other gulf allies during the region"s "regime change" wars in places like Libya and Syria. But this goes the other way too, as we previously predicted of the recent Qatari-Saudi diplomatic war which resulted in both sides accusing the other of human rights abuses and aiding terrorism in the region: "the United States itself will not be spared in this new open season of airing dirty laundry as old allies turn on each other."

So while Trump suddenly and conveniently puts Saudi Arabia in the hot seat using human rights as an excuse, we should expect that Saudi Arabia will itself eventually retaliate, likely through some kind of leak or media interview. 

Trump has already received an immense amount of push back over his decision to recognize Jerusalem as the Israeli capital by moving the US embassy there. The countries condemning the move include the UK, France, Germany, Canada, Russia, China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Egypt, Jordan, as well as the EU and Arab League. 

As Trump finds he"s put himself in an isolated position over the Jerusalem move, and as he potentially lashes out further against US regional allies, things are about to get even more interesting in the Middle East.

Saudi "Corruption" Probe Widens: Dozens Of Military Officials Arrested

After jailing dozens of members of the royal family, and extorting numerous prominent businessmen, 32-year-old Saudi prince Mohammed bin Salman has widened his so-called "corruption" probe further still.

The Wall Street Journal reports that at least two dozen military officers, including multiple commanders, recently have been rounded up in connection to the Saudi government’s sweeping corruption investigation, according to two senior advisers to the Saudi government.

Additionally, several prominent businessmen also were taken in by Saudi authorities in recent days.

A number of businessmen including Loai Nasser, Mansour al-Balawi, Zuhair Fayez and Abdulrahman Fakieh also were rounded up in recent days, the people said.

 

Attempts to reach the businessmen or their associates were unsuccessful.

It isn’t clear if those people are all accused of wrongdoing, or whether some of them have been called in as witnesses. But their detainment signals an intensifying high-stakes campaign spearheaded by Saudi Arabia’s 32-year-old crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman.

There appear to be three scenarios behind MbS" decision to go after the military:

1) They are corrupt and the entire process is all above board and he is doing the right thing by cleaning house;

 

2) They are wealthy and thus capable of being extorted (a cost of being free) to add to the nation"s coffers; or

 

3) There is a looming military coup and by cutting off the head, he hopes to quell the uprising.

If we had to guess we would weight the scenarios as ALL true with the (3) becoming more likely, not less.

So far over 200 people have been held without charges since the arrests began on November 4th and almost 2000 bank accounts are now frozen, which could be why, as The Daily Mail reports, Saudi prince and billionaire Al-Waleed bin Talal has reportedly put two luxury hotels in Lebanon up for sale after being detained in his country during a corruption sweep.

The Saudi information ministry previously stated the government would seize any asset or property related to the alleged corruption, meaning the Savoy hotel could well become the state property of the kingdom.

"The accounts and balances of those detained will be revealed and frozen," a spokesman for Saudi Arabia"s information ministry said.

 

"Any asset or property related to these cases of corruption will be registered as state property."

As we noted previously, it appears clear that MbS has decided to enforce a 70% wealth tax...the Financial Times reports today that the Saudi government has offered the new occupants of the Riyadh Ritz-Carlton a way out.... and it’s going to cost them: In some cases, as much as 70% of their net worth.

Saudi authorities are negotiating settlements with princes and businessmen held over allegations of corruption, offering deals for the detainees to pay for their freedom, people briefed on the discussions say.

 

In some cases the government is seeking to appropriate as much as 70 per cent of suspects’ wealth, two of the people said, in a bid to channel hundreds of billions of dollars into depleted state coffers.

 

The arrangements, which have already seen some assets and funds handed over to the state, provide an insight into the strategy behind Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s dramatic corruption purge.

The country’s attorney-general has said he is investigating allegations of corruption amounting to at least $100 billion - though the total value of assets seized could be as high as $800 billion. Though the Financial Times puts the high-end figure at a relatively modest $300 billion; to make up for the delta, more arrests are still expected.

Regular Saudis, who’ve seen their benefits cut and some of their jobs taken away, support MbS’s decision.  “Why should the poor take all the pain of austerity,” said one Saudi academic. “The rich need to pay their way too.”

In Saudi Arabia, they are about to do just that.

*  *  *

While MbS also continues to get the support of US officials, not everyone is convinced that the anti-corruption probe will succeed...

As Counterpunch.org"s Patrick Cockburn warns in fact, it is doomed to fail...

About eight or nine years ago, I had an Afghan friend who previously worked for a large US aid agency funding projects in the Afghan provinces. He had been hired to monitor their progress once work had got underway, but he did not hold the job very long for reasons that he explained to me.

The problem for the Americans at the local agency headquarters in Kabul was that the risk of ambush by the Taliban was deemed too high for them personally to visit the projects that they were funding. Instead, they followed the construction from one step removed, by insisting that the Afghan company involved should transmit back to Kabul, at set intervals, detailed pictures of its activities, to show that they were fulfilling their contract to the letter.

Almost as an afterthought, the aid agency thought it might be useful to send along an Afghan in their employ to check that all was well. His first mission was to go to Kandahar province, where some plant – I seem to remember it was a vegetable packing facility – was believed to be rising somewhere in the dangerous hinterland. He went there, but, despite earnest inquiries, was unable to locate the project.

Back in Kandahar city, he asked around about the mystery of the missing vegetable plant, but found that his questions were answered evasively by those he contacted.

Finally, he met somebody who, under a pledge of secrecy about the source of the information, explained to him what was happening.

Businessmen in Kandahar receiving funds from the aid agency and knowing its reliance on photographs to monitor works in progress, had found it safer and more profitable to fake the whole process.

They engaged a small local company with experience of making TV advertisements and documentaries to rig up what was, in effect, a film studio – in which workers played by extras would be shown busily engaged in whatever activity the agency was paying for. In the case of the vegetable-packing facility, this must have been simple enough to fake by buying cabbages and cauliflowers in the market to be placed in boxes inside some shed by labourers hired by the day.

My friend returned to Kabul and hinted to his employers that this particular project in Kandahar was not doing as well as they imagined. He thought that it would be unhealthy for himself to go into detail, but he did not, at this stage, resign from his well-paying job. This only happened a few months later, when he was sent to Jalalabad to check on a chicken farm supposedly nearing completion outside the city.

Once again, he could not find the project in question and, when he met those in charge, put it to them that it did not exist. They admitted that this was indeed so, but – according to his report – they added menacingly that he should keep in mind that “it was a long road back to Kabul from Kandahar”. In other words, they would kill him if he exposed their scam: a threat that convinced him his long-term chances of survival were low unless he rapidly resigned and found new employment.

I was thinking of the story of the Kandahar packing plant and the Jalalabad chicken farm, when Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman launched his anti-corruption drive in Saudi Arabia last weekend.

There may be a big difference in the amount of money to be made out of looting the Saudi state compared to US aid agencies in Afghanistan, but the psychology and processes at work have similarities.

In both cases, those making a lot of money out of corruption will put more effort into going on doing just that, than those who say they are determined to stop them. If a few wealthy individuals are scapegoated, then others will jostle to take their place.

It is important to take on board, when considering the case of Saudi Arabia, that many oil- or resource-rich states – be they monarchies or republics – have launched their own anti-corruption drives down the years. All have failed, and for roughly the same reasons.

Iraq, so different from Saudi Arabia in terms of history, religion and politics, is likewise entirely dependent on oil revenues. Its next biggest export used to be dates, though today even these are often imported from China. Corruption is chronic, particularly in giant infrastructure projects. Four years ago, I was in Baghdad early in the year, when there was heavier than usual rainfall, which led to a large part of the eastern side of the city disappearing under a foot of grey water mixed with sewage. This was despite $7bn (£5.3bn) supposedly spent on new sewers and drainage systems, but which, in the event, turned out not to function – or even to exist.

The problem in resource-rich states is that corruption is not marginal to political power, but central to acquiring it and keeping it. Corruption at the top is a form of patronage manipulated by those in charge, to create and reward a network of self-interested loyalists. It is the ruling family and its friends and allies who cherrypick what is profitable: this is as true of Saudi Arabia as it was true of Libya under Gaddafi, Iraq under Saddam Hussein and his successors, or Iraqi Kurdistan that was supposedly different from the rest of the country.

Corruption is a nebulous concept when it comes to states with arbitrary rulers, who can decide – unrestrained by law or democratic process – what is legal and what is illegal. What typifies the politics of oil states is that everybody is trying to plug into the oil revenues in order to get their share of the cake.

This is true at the top, but the same is the case of the rest of the population, or at least a large and favoured section of it.

The Iraqi government pays $4bn a month to about seven million state employees and pensioners. These may or may not do productive work, but it would be politically risky to fire them because they are the base support of the regime in power.

Anti-corruption drives don’t work, because if they are at all serious, they soon begin to cut into the very roots of political power by touching the “untouchables”. At this point principled anti-corruption campaigners will find themselves in serious trouble and may have to flee the country, while the less-principled ones will become a feared weapon to be used against anybody whom the government wants to target.

A further consequence of the traditional anti-corruption drive is that it can paralyse government activities in general. This is because all officials, corrupt and incorrupt alike, know that they are vulnerable to investigation.

“The safest course for them is to take no decision and sign no document which might be used or misused against them,” a frustrated American businessman told me in Baghdad some years ago. He added that it was only those so politically powerful that they did not have to fear legal sanctions who would take decisions – and such people were often the most corrupt of all.

Hezbollah Leader Says Saudi Arabia Has Declared War On Lebanon

If three days ago the middle east was on the "verge of a catastrophe", then moments ago it took one big step closer to the edge.

Recall that on Tuesday we reported that Saudi Arabia had again cast itself as the victim of external 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. And while Saudi Arabia has long blamed Iran for sowing unrest in the region, Tuesday"s declaration by Saudi Gulf affairs minister Thamer al-Sabhan that Lebanon has "declared war" against the kingdom was an historic first. But perhaps the biggest problem is that international media is currently uncritically spreading the statement, whereas what such a bizarre claim actually warrants is laughter. Thankfully, Nassim Nicholas Taleb sums it up nicely with a basic geography lesson: "Either the media is stupid, or Saudi rulers are stupid, or both. Lebanon did not formally declare war and there is no common border."

Well, fast forward three days when Lebanon has still not declared war on Saudi Arabia, however it has turned the table on Riyadh, when moments ago Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Hezbollah, said that "Saudi Arabia has declared war on Lebanon and Hezbollah." In a televized address to mark Hezbollah’s so-called Martyr Day, Nasrallah warned Israel against what he called "miscalculations" and said Saudis are angry because "their dreams did not come true in Syria, Lebanon."

Nasrallah: #SaudiArabia behind Israel"s war on #Lebanon in 2006 pic.twitter.com/WyAd35DtH2

— Press TV Breaking (@BREAKING_PTV) November 10, 2017

The Hezbollah leader also said he sees an Israeli war with Lebanon as unlikely, and warns Israel against any attempt to exploit the political chaos in Lebanon, claiming "today we are stronger." Nasrallah also said that Yemenis have capacity to produce missiles, denying Saudi claims that Hezbollah fired a missile at Riyadh.

Nasrallah: Israelis don’t want war with Hezbollah, know how high its cost is#Lebanon #Israel pic.twitter.com/PBFOMZ80Kf

— Press TV Breaking (@BREAKING_PTV) November 10, 2017

Claiming that the failed Saudi faceoff with Qatar, and its intervention in Bahrain made its government bankrupt, he also warned that Saudi Arabia - which claims to be helping Yemenis, but has only killed its people, spread disease, hunger - "will fail in Lebanon as it did in all other arenas in the region."

Nasrallah: Saudis are angry because their dreams did not come true in Syria, Lebanon pic.twitter.com/BPplZ6Dzw0

— Press TV Breaking (@BREAKING_PTV) November 10, 2017

The Hezbollah leader also said former Lebanon premier Saad Hariri, who unexpectedly resigned over the weekend, is being kept under house arrest in Saudi Arabia after resigning as Lebanese Prime Minister from its capital on Saturday, and must be allowed to return home.

And now that both sides have mutually accused each other of having declared war on each other, the question is which country will break the stalemate and move from words to actions.

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."

Why don"t these congresspeople want to talk about the war in Yemen? pic.twitter.com/ghp82AtnMS

— NowThis (@nowthisnews) November 4, 2017

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. 

Did Russia"s Iranian Energy Deal Kill Four Birds With One Stone?

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Oriental Review,

Russia’s gargantuan $30 billion energy deal with Iran simultaneously accomplished four objectives that are central to the grand strategic goals behind Moscow’s “Ummah Pivot”...

Rosneft chief executive Igor Sechin announced that his company signed a roadmap to invest the mind-numbingly large sum of $30 billion in the Iranian energy sector following his and President Putin’s visit to the Islamic Republic to hold three-way talks with Azerbaijan. This masterstroke of energy diplomacy wouldn’t have been possible had it not been for Trump scaring Western investors away from Iran and pushing the country closer towards Russia as a result, which totally reversed the intended dynamic of the Obama Administration that sought to reorient Iran in the opposite direction through the multiple concessions that it offered up through the summer 2015 nuclear deal. Russia’s foreign policy “progressives” are indeed making rapid progress in advancing their 21^st-century grand strategic goal of positioning Moscow as the supreme balancing force in the Eurasian supercontinent, and this is in turn accelerating the global transition to a Multipolar World Order.

In order to appreciate just how profoundly significant of a geostrategic move Moscow made this week, one needs to look no further than the four objectives that were immediately advanced through the Russian-Iranian energy roadmap:

Unveiling A Trans-Azeri Pipeline

Russia intends to build a trans-Azeri pipeline to Iran, which will not only strengthen bilateral Russian-Iranian relations and their trilateral expansion with Azerbaijan, but also importantly demonstrates the success of the recent Russian-Azeri rapprochement over the past year. Moscow views Baku as an integrationist in the sense that it’s facilitating Russia and China’s supercontinental goal of linking the landmass closer together, while traditional Russian “ally” Armenia is seen as a Western-leaning obstructionist that’s suddenly become a wayward partner.

It shouldn’t be interpreted as coincidental that this new energy-driven milestone in Russian-Azeri relations occurred just weeks before the planned signing of Armenia’s “Comprehensive And Enhanced New Agreement” with the EU. The dichotomy of Azerbaijan moving closer to Russia at precisely the same moment that Armenia drifts towards the West is expected to have serious implications for the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process because it suggests that Moscow might more solidly support Baku’s preferred solution to this conflict in line with international law while the West (influenced to a strong degree by the powerful US-based Armenian lobby) might back Yerevan’s continued occupation of the region.

Starting The South Asian Stream

The other important outcome of this trilateral summit is that Russia also announced that it intends to build a tristate pipeline between Iran, Pakistan, and India, which the author recently remarked might signify that Russia has been successful in getting India to downscale its support for Baloch terrorism against Pakistan due to New Delhi’s newfound self-interest in this transnational region’s stability because of “South Asian Stream”. If successful with this strategy, then Moscow could prove that it’s indeed the only balancing force capable of sustaining stability in the Mideast-South Asian pivot region because of the influence that Russia is still capable of wielding in “moderating” the pro-Western pivot that India’s embarked on in recent years.

Neutralizing Iran As A European Competitor

In line with the abovementioned strategy that the Obama Administration had for gently co-opting Iran and its “moderate”-led government into the Western fold, a large part of the vision had to do with using Western investments to eventually transform the country into a formidable competitor to Russia in the European marketplace. That entire blueprint has now been neutralized because of Trump’s aggression against the Islamic Republic and the “rescue mission” that Russian energy investments are now engaged in to “save” the Iranian economy from the US’ anti-Iranian bullying of its Western partners (despite the President’s public denial thereof) and what appear to be impending sectoral sanctions against its resource sector. Under these circumstances, which are setting into motion reformatted years-long strategies by all sides, it’s all but impossible for the US to ever “guide” Iran in the direction of becoming a serious competitor to Russia’s marketplace position in Europe, thereby averting this scenario.

Reassuring Tehran About The Russian-Saudi Rapprochement

Finally, Iran had every reason to be concerned about the Russian-Saudi rapprochement if its decision makers viewed it from a “zero-sum” Neo-Realist angle, even though Moscow’s intent behind it had always been about forging a win-win solution for retaining state-to-state peace in the Mideast, but all of those fears were put to rest after the announcement about Rosneft’s $30 billion energy investment plans in the Islamic Republic. Tehran can now rest assured that Moscow isn’t “selling out” to the Saudis, but is indeed truly trying to balance the complex interstate relations of the Mideast, hence the very successful outcome of President Putin’s visit to Iran in proving just how successful Russia’s “Ummah Pivot” is shaping out to be.

Trump Prevented War Between Saudi Arabia And Qatar In Last Minute: Report

In what may be the most bizarre news of the day, Bloomberg reports that Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were "close to taking military action in the early stages of their ongoing dispute with Qatar", until Donald Trump called the leaders of both countries and warned them to back off; in other words, Trump"s intervention prevented yet another gulf war, which if true will make the U.S. Millitary-Industrial complex very unhappy as Trump"s peace effort likely cost US offense defense companies tens of billions in lost profits.

As Bloomberg writes, confirming reports from early June that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were inches away from war leading to the mobilization of Qatar"s army, Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., which both have a penchant for using their brand new weapons purchases from the US in the most practical of ways, were looking at ways to remove the Qatari regime, which they accused of sponsoring terrorism and cozying up to Iran. However, Trump told Saudi and U.A.E. leaders that any military action would trigger a crisis across the Middle East that would only benefit the Iranians.

It wasn’t clear when the conversations took place. The Saudis, backed by the U.A.E. and two other regional allies, broke off diplomatic ties with Qatar in early June, imposed an economic embargo and cut transport links. They’ve since issued multiple demands, including the closure of Qatar-based broadcaster Al Jazeera, that haven’t been met. Qatar denies all the accusations and accuses the Saudis of seeking to dominate smaller neighbors.

Of course, Saudi Arabia denied that military action was ever considered". The allegations are entirely incorrect, have already been denied, and amount to nothing more than typically misleading Qatari propaganda", said a Saudi official source familiar with the matter. At least they didn"t blame Russia.

Separately, Emirati officials have said in the past that the dispute can only be resolved by political, not military, means.

Still, despite avoiding war, the standoff has yet to be resolved, despite efforts by Kuwait to mediate. Trump made a push to settle it this month, after talks in Washington with Kuwaiti Emir Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmed Al-Sabah. He failed.

The U.S. president made a flurry of calls with Gulf leaders, saying the dispute was distracting U.S. allies from forging a united front against Iran.

Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, told the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Tuesday that the blockade amounted to a “betrayal” by the Saudis and their allies. He said his country is open to dialogue, but won’t be dictated to.

Outlining his mediation efforts at a press conference with Trump, Sheikh Sabah said: “Thank God, what’s important is that we stopped any military thing.” The Saudi-led coalition responded with a statement saying that a “military solution was never and will never be on the table.”

Meanwhile, speaking to reporters during his meeting with the Qatari Emir this afternoon near the UN, Trump denied everything and according to Bloomberg said he "didn"t warn the Saudis on military action against Qatar." In other words, everyone denied the story which is all we needed to hear. The question is if tensions between the gulf neighbors pick up again to the point of military intervention, will Trump succeed again.

Despite Sanctions, Qatar Is Still Outpacing Saudi Arabia In Economic Growth

Authored by Zainab Calcuttawala via OilPrice.com,

Despite the torrent of reports attesting to the non-impact of the Saudi Arabia-led diplomatic boycott of Doha, new estimates by Bloomberg’s economic survey predict that 2017 will be Qatar’s slowest year of GDP growth since 1995.

A previous study in June forecasted 3.1 percent and 3.2 percent growth for this year and next, respectively. New figures reduce those numbers to 2.5 percent for 2017 and 3.2 percent for 2018. The deficit figures jump to 5.1 percent for the current period, compared to previous estimates at 4.6 percent.

The current feud between Gulf monarchies began on June 5^th, when Saudi Arabia expressed its indignation at an insubordinate Qatar.

Energy interests, most notably Doha’s shared custody of the South Pars gas field – the largest of its kind – prevent Qatar from cutting relations with Shiite Iran, the Sunni Saudi government’s main rival in the Middle East.

“Even before the diplomatic crisis with regional powers, it looked like Qatar’s non-energy economy would slow,” William Jackson, of Capital Economics told World Oil.

“The early signs are that the sanctions dealt a damaging blow to Qatar’s economy in June. The impact appears to be temporary, but it will still result in weaker growth."

To be clear, Qatari exports of natural gas have not been affected by the diplomatic row.

The biggest casualty has been GCC-funded projects, namely food-processing and port facilities, that now face an uncertain future.

“The illegal actions of our neighbors have been the catalyst for us to accelerate our economic plans and renew our commitment to diversification and sustained growth,” said Sheikh Tamim bih Hamid at Thani.

“We fully expect to see a strong return of the Qatari economy this year and growth over the years to come.”

Qatar Petroleum also guarantees an increase in oil equivalent output topping one million barrels per day between the next five to seven years.

Doha’s unbeatable diplomatic flexibility plays a large role in carving out its niche in the region. The variety in its alliances will prove its immunity from the disciplinary tendencies of Saudi Arabia over the next 12 months.

"We expect the disruptive impact of the boycott to have evaporated by next year," said Farouk Soussa of Citigroup Middle East.

"Trade routes will have been fully reconfigured, confidence will have been restored, building will recommence -- all possibly against a backdrop of a continued boycott, but one that the economy has adapted to."

Though the extent of Qatar’s economic expansion sees new limits, it still outpaces its former GCC allies. It is ahead of Saudi Arabia by 0.5 percent and the United Arab Emirates by two percent, the latest surveys say. And that is a problem for the GCC, especially for Saudi Arabia.

As Hajj season approaches, Doha continues to deny any efforts to block any Muslims’ timely arrival in Mecca or Medina. Qatar’s Civil Aviation Authority issued a statement on Monday that denied its intent to block Saudi Arabian planes from landing or departing from its airports.

To be fair, the KSA has done the same. Recently, Riyadh reopened its lander border to allow Qataris to enter the Islamic holy lands, and offered other citizens a flight into the country.

Even plans for World Cup 2022 in Qatar’s desert heat seem to remain undisturbed.

According to Hassan Al-Thawadi, Secretary General of the Supreme Committee for Delivery and Legacy, the blockade has caused “an inconvenience” in delivering on its soccer field promises. Still, “progress is being made” and the predetermined schedule has yet to see adjustments.

Projections for economic growth are consistently in flux. Whether or not Qatar meets its 3.1 percent growth rate this year is a factor of will power, bureaucratic know-how and international diplomacy, especially when a country has lost its major regional allies. So far, Doha’s resilience sees no foreseeable cracks.

The Only Way Out Of The Qatar Crisis

Authored by Ahmed Chari via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Qatar has been known for years as a small peninsula nation that punches far above its weight. Its immense oil wealth and enormous influence, through its English- and Arabic-language Al Jazeera channels, have given it diplomatic clout across the Arab world. Its soft power has been felt in negotiations in Darfur, Tripoli, Sanaa and elsewhere. Everywhere it has been either admired or envied.

Now Qatar is on its back feet, fighting off criticism from all sides. Qatar’s candidate to run UNESCO is now almost certain to lose; a few months earlier, he was the frontrunner. Activists are pressing FIFA to bar Qatar from hosting the World Cup. Pressure is mounting to close the U.S. air base in Qatar; U.S. Air Force general Charles Wald, who opened the base in 2001, is now, in retirement, publicly calling for its closure. A coalition of thirty-four thousand predominantly African American churches protested Qatar in Washington, DC, on June 28, citing Qatar’s persecution of Christians, Jews and other religious minorities. (Qatar bans crosses on the outside of churches and bars public prayer by Christians, even though there may be more Christians in the country than the three hundred thousand native Qataris.) The protest, outside Qatar’s embassy at Twenty-Fifth and M Streets, is the first-ever public demonstration against Qatar in Washington. It won’t be the last.

Even more dramatically, Qatar’s neighbors and allies have turned against it. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have cut diplomatic ties with Qatar and closed their air and sea ports to Qatar’s planes and ships. The Arab-language media is full of venom directed at Qatar. Now it is either pitied or feared.

What happened? Qatar was found to be funding the enemies of America and its Arab allies. Washington policymakers are concerned that Qatar has funded, according to the U.S. State department, Al Qaeda affiliates in Syria as well as elements of ISIS—the very groups America is bombing in its campaign to liberate northern Iraq. It also supports Hamas, which both the United States and EU have designated as a terrorist organization. Bahrain believes that Qatar is supporting armed opposition groups against its royal family. The Saudis fault Qatar’s financial support to the Yemen-based Houthi rebels (opposed to the Saudi regime) as well as Qatar’s backing for violent opposition groups in the Saudi province of Al Qatif, which is mostly Shia.

Meanwhile, Qatar has offered a sanctuary to the Muslim Brotherhood and known terrorists. The oil sheikhdom also shelters the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual guide, Yusuf al-Qaradawi; Khaled Meshal, who was until recently the leader of Hamas; and Abbassi Madani, an Algerian Islamist leader—as well as many Taliban leaders. Nor was Qatar simply giving these extremists a roof and a cot. It gave them a platform, through Al Jazeera, to raise funds, woo followers and boost their prestige.

All of this duplicity and support might have been tolerable, as it too often was before the September 11 attacks, were it not for the Arab world’s confrontation with Iran. The Islamic Republic is already engaged in both a direct and a proxy war against the Sunni states. Iran’s state-run broadcasts refer to Bahrain as Iran’s “eighteenth province,” even though Persians have not ruled there for some three centuries, and call on believers to end Saudi control over the Muslim holy places in Mecca and Medina. The UAE has a bitter territorial dispute with Iran. And let’s not forget that Iran is developing atomic weapons and the missiles to carry them; it may be planning to settle its religious and regional arguments with a Hiroshima-style blast.

In contrast with its neighbors’ conflicts with Iran, Qatar is in business with the Islamic Republic. It shares with Iran the Pars Sud gas field, one of the world’s largest.

While Iran was under embargo, Qatar continued to sell Iranian natural gas to Europe. The shared gas field gave Qatar the perfect cover to help its partner in crime, Iran. Yet shipping by sea is slow, costly and risky. Qatar proposed a pipeline across Syria to move Iran’s energy products (as well as its own) to the power-starved European market. A pipeline would have cut costs while strengthening Qatar’s hand. The Syrian dictator soon put an end to this pipe dream.

In short, Qatar’s support for Iran was the last straw for its neighbors. The U.S. State Department is trying to be neutral, and is asking for evidence of Qatar’s transgressions. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has been far clearer: he has demanded that Qatar stop funding America’s enemies.

Clearly, Qatar must stop opening the money spigot for groups designated as terrorists by its allies, and it should turn over the terror leaders it is hosting to face justice in their native lands.

The U.S. State Department should also invite Morocco to help. Iran, and indirectly Qatar, is backing armed uprisings by minority Shia groups across the Sunni-majority Arab world. Morocco’s king, Mohammed VI, is also his kingdom’s supreme religious ruler. His words and moderate religious teachings have calmed restive Shia populations and inspired them to oppose violence. Under the king’s leadership, Morocco is now enjoying a new influence in Africa. Mohammed VI, as a spokesman for political and religious moderation, is an important voice to combat Shia uprisings and Sunni reprisals.

Qatar must stop fanning the flames of Islamic division, and Morocco and the Gulf Arabs should be given a real chance to head off a religious civil war between Sunnis and Shia, which could cost millions of lives in a war that could drag on for decades.

We have come to a time when confrontation with Qatar will produce peace, and compromising will lead to war. Trump’s instincts are right. If Qatar doesn’t change, the world around it will.

Saudi Hypocrisy: The Great Gas War Is Looming

Authored by Golem XIV,

Astonishing hypocrisy! Saudi and its affiliates demand end to support of terrorism while they themselves are some of its largest funders.

Their list of demands, as reported in the Guardian, should be translated as:

1) Curb ties with Iran = No talking to Shia Muslims.

2) Sever all ties to terror organisations = Declare Muslim Brotherhood terrorists who we find threatening internally and only Saudi should decide which terror organisations get funded. Not you

3) Shut down al-Jazeera = We don’t allow press freedom you can’t have it either. Especially one that criticises us. Shut down what is, for all its significant faults, one of the best media outlets in the world.

4) Shut down all other media Qatar funds = Only Saudi propaganda allowed. al-Jazeera was far too willing to report government repression during the Arab Spring. So close down all non Saudi controlled media.

5) Close down Turkish military bases in Qatar = Qatar isn’t allowed its own diplomatic sovereignty.

6) Stop funding anyone Saudi calls a terrorist = Stop funding anyone who opposes Saudi or other undemocratic regimes in the ME. No democratic dissent allowed.

7) Handover terrorist figure = Hand over to us all dissidents we want to imprison or behead.

8) Stop interfering in other countries affairs = Hand over people we don’t like that have taken refuge in Qatar. We do the interfering (see this list of demands) not you.

9 -12) Make yourself a vassal state of Saudi, pay us money, let us control your treasury and foreign policy and agree to all this NOW. Or else, Saudi, its minions, the US and Israel will try to paint you as part of a new axis of evil.

Oh and by the way oil rules! Not the gas you and Iran want to sell!

The Great Gas War is gathering towards a major escalation.

The Northern Front in Ukraine has gone quiet. Or at least unreported. But its Southern Front from Syria to Yemen, Turkey to Iran is hotting up.

Five Democrat Votes Allow Trump's Saudi Weapons Deal To Clear Senate

A bipartisan bid to block President Trump"s recently negotiated $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia failed in the Senate. The effort to stop the weapons sales, authored by Senators Rand Paul and Chris Murphy, fell short on a 47-53 vote, with four Republicans joining most Democrats in voting against it and five Democrats voting to preserve deals that will arm the Saudi Kingdom with some of the most sophisticated equipment available.

The five democrats who made the passage of the weapons deal possible were Sens. Bill Nelson, Claire McCaskill, Joe Manchin, Joe Donnelly and Mark Warner.

Despite the failure, Politico notes that Paul and Murphy fared better on Tuesday than they did last year in a similar effort to block a Saudi arms sale under former President Barack Obama, thanks entirely to new Democratic supporters: it"s curious how ideology changes ones outlook on lethal weaponry.

"Regardless of whether the number is 48 or 51 or 45" in favor of blocking the deals, Murphy told reporters before the vote, "this is an important message to the Saudis that we are all watching. And if they continue to target civilians and they continue to stop humanitarian aid from getting into Yemen, this vote will continue to go in the wrong direction for them."

Paul said after the vote that he and Murphy would discuss possible future attempts to block Trump"s arms deals to Riyadh, warning that senators are growing more concerned about the civilian toll in a Yemen conflict that is pitting Saudi-backed government forces against rebel factions reportedly supported by Iran.

Before that happens, Paul told reporters, "there needs to be a period of time to see if there"s a change in Saudi warfare tactics."

Like, for example, if Saudi Arabia plans on launching an assault on Qatar any time soon perhaps.

While Paul and Muprhy lost, the winners were the Trump administration, Saudi Arabia, and some Republicans such as Mitch McConnell, who claims this deal "will help Saudi Arabia fight ISIS and serve as a check on Iran." Bob Corker was also a big supporter of the deal: "There is no classified intelligence that shows they have ever intentionally bombed civilians — as a matter of fact, intelligence down there shows that they didn"t," Bob Corker told reporters before the vote, describing the attempted blockade of the sales as "cutting your nose off to spite your face."

While previously there was little information on the specifics of the multi-billion dollar deal, over the weekend Defense News reported that it "includes seven THAAD missile defense batteries, over 100,000 air-to-ground munitions and billions of dollars" worth of new aircraft."

Chinese Warships In Persian Gulf For First Time Since 2010

In a deployment not seen in seven years, three Chinese warships including a guided-missile destroyer warship embarked on a tour of Gulf Arab states for the first time since 2010 in what al Arabiya has called Beijing"s "desire to play a bigger role on the global stage."

The three Chinese vessels arrived in Qatar’s capital Doha on Saturday following a visit to the Saudi port city of Jeddah, according to Chinese state broadcaster CCTV.

While China’s navy regularly tours the world and its ships patrol off the coasts of Yemen and Somalia as part of international anti-piracy operations, such visits to Gulf Arab states, where both the U.S. and Britain have naval bases, are less common. In 2014, China"s navy visited Iran for the first time to take part in joint naval exercises with Saudi Arabia’s regional arch-rival.

Beijing, which relies on the Middle East for oil, has tended to leave Middle Eastern diplomacy to the other four permanent members of the U.N. Security Council - the United States, Britain, France and Russia. As reported yesterday, for the first time in history, Russia surpassed Saudi Arabia as China"s primary source of oil imports.

Perhaps this fallback option explains why China has been trying to get more involved in gulf diplomacy recently, especially in Syria peace efforts, and has taken tentative steps over the Yemen crisis too.

A senior Chinese diplomat said on Monday that Beijing could be forced to assume a role of world leadership if others step back from that position after U.S. President Donald Trump pledged in his first speech to put “America first." Naturally such an expansion in China"s global role would include taking tenative steps to declaring who its friends in the gulf region are and, by implication, its enemies.