Human rights, oil and Biden’s shifting approach to Saudi Arabia
“The 360” shows you diverse perspectives on the day’s top stories and debates.
https://news.yahoo.com/human-rights-oil-and-bidens-shifting-approach-to-saudi-arabia-140829911.html
What’s happening
President Biden will travel to Saudi Arabia — a country he once pledged to make a “pariah” — as part of a multi-country trip to the Middle East next month, the White House announced Tuesday.
Biden is expected to meet with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is widely viewed as the country’s de facto leader, even though power is formally in the hands of his elderly father. The president’s willingness to meet the crown prince, colloquially known as MBS, is a sharp departure from the diplomatic cold shoulder he has given him since the start of his presidency.
The United States and Saudi Arabia have maintained a strong relationship for roughly 80 years built on mutual interest — with the Saudis providing a steady flow of gas from their massive oil fields in exchange for military protection and weapons from the U.S. The long-standing alliance has survived, in part, because of the willingness of American leaders to tolerate some of the abuses of the Saudi regime — including its oppression of women, LGBTQ people and minorities.
Biden has pushed back on Saudi rulers in a way that his predecessor, Donald Trump, never did. Early in his presidency, the Biden administration released an intelligence report that claimed the crown prince was directly involved with the plot to assassinate Jamal Khashoggi, a journalist who wrote for the Washington Post and was brutally murdered at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. The State Department also issued sanctions on 76 Saudi nationals in response to the report. Biden also pledged to end U.S. military support for Saudi Arabia’s extended war against Iran-backed groups in Yemen, which has caused what the United Nations has called “the world’s largest humanitarian crisis.”
Why there’s debate
Biden’s decision to travel to Saudi Arabia has sparked debate over how American leaders should balance U.S. economic and security interests bound up with Saudi influence and the American mission to promote human rights around the world.
The president has faced intense criticism from human rights groups, Saudi dissidents and even Khashoggi's fiancée, who have accused him of betraying his principles in the hope of coaxing the Saudis to release more oil and lower gas prices in the U.S. There have also been more measured critiques from within his own party, with Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., arguing that Biden should be putting his efforts toward weaning the United States from fossil fuels, “so we don't have despots and murderers calling the shots.”
Some regional experts also have doubts about what Biden can gain in exchange for softening his opposition to Saudi abuses. They argue that it’s unlikely Saudi Arabia and the other oil-producing nations it influences will ramp up oil production enough to make any real difference on prices at the pump in the U.S. Some argue that a massive increase in domestic oil production in recent decades means that the U.S. no longer needs to placate the Saudis in the way it did in the past.
But others take a pragmatic view, arguing that — however distasteful it may be — the U.S. has far too much on the line to allow its relationship with the Saudis to deteriorate. They say a strong alliance with Saudi Arabia can help serve as a bulwark against Iran, promote better relations between Gulf states and Israel, prevent China from dominating the Middle East and help punish Russia economically for its invasion of Ukraine. Some also make the case that the U.S. will be in a better position to pressure the Saudis to curb their human rights abuses in the context of a friendly relationship, rather than an adversarial one.
Perspectives
Supporters of Biden's trip
Like it or not, the U.S. and Saudi Arabia still need each other
“With oil already at $100 a barrel, the U.S. and Saudi Arabia have reason to do everything possible to prevent the disruption of Saudi supply. That means the two nations must return to the security-for-oil relationship that began nearly eight decades ago. … That relationship lasted, despite ups and downs, through 14 U.S. presidencies until Mr. Biden.” — Karen Elliott House, Wall Street Journal
A strong partnership can help the U.S. pressure Saudi Arabia on human rights
“To brand a country a pariah is to marginalize it and nullify an entire relationship. Common-sense discussions on common interests would no longer occur. Opportunities for dialogue would be washed away in a sea of antagonism.” — Daniel R. DePetris, Newsweek
Biden is right to try to salvage a relationship he nearly spoiled
“Biden’s attempt to isolate the prince has been a miserable failure. … If Biden is now beating a path to the kingdom, it is because he desperately needs Saudi Arabia to increase its crude oil output to tame prices that have soared since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.” — Bobby Ghosh, Bloomberg
Protecting American interests often requires unpleasant partnerships
“There's no sugarcoating it. Sometimes presidents must do things they find distasteful or that appear hypocritical to advance what they perceive to be the national interest — that is what Biden is doing here.” — Stephen Collinson, CNN
Spurning the Saudis would be a huge gift to Russia and China
“Biden ignored and denigrated them and pushed them right into the embrace of Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. You can’t blame countries in the region for looking out for their interests, and if Washington won’t be there for them, then they will need to look elsewhere.” — Matthew Kroenig, Foreign Policy
Critics of Biden's trip
The U.S. is surrendering its authority on human rights
“At a time when the Biden administration is fighting to defend democracy in Ukraine, it's an embarrassment to be reconciling with the leader of a country who represses his own citizens.” — Aaron David Miller, CNN
Biden is making a major concession while gaining very little
“The problem is not just that a presidential visit to Riyadh would so obviously illustrate a compromise on principles. It is also that Biden probably will not gain anything meaningful in return. … If he follows through on his plans to visit Riyadh, Biden will be making a bad deal: exchanging near-certain reputational damage for the mere possibility of modest triumphs. It is a visit that should never have been planned.” — Dalia Dassa Kaye, Foreign Affairs
Biden is essentially letting MBS get away with murder
“In terms of any meaningful accountability from MBS on Khashoggi’s death or other important human rights issues, Biden is likely to come away empty-handed. … This lack of accountability is a lasting tragedy. In simple terms, MBS got away with it.” — David Ignatius, Washington Post
The right move would be to ensure the U.S. doesn't need Saudi oil at all
“Instead of getting on a plane to Saudi Arabia, the president would do better by the country if he stayed home and worked on delivering a domestic energy policy that maximized all of our resources and generated a more powerful American future.” — Editorial, Dallas Morning News
Biden is conceding far too much leverage to a much less powerful country
“Rather than rebuilding relations with Riyadh, Biden's approach will likely exacerbate the long-standing problems in US-Saudi relations. It will increase our dependence on the kingdom, which has long given its rulers carte blanche to act against American interests in the Middle East and beyond. MBS is playing hardball with the United States — and Biden just let him win.” — Trita Parsi, Common Dreams
Is there a topic you’d like to see covered in “The 360”? Send your suggestions to the360@yahoonews.com.
Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: Fayez Nureldine/AFP via Getty Images, Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images
Bizarro World: Mega-Terrorist Turkey
When it comes to Turkey, Western countries behave like weaklings.
Welcome to bizarro world.
That’s where Turkey, a notorious state sponsor of international terrorism, has the sheer gall to accuse Finland and Sweden of supporting terrorists.
Even more bizarre: Neither Finland, Sweden, the U.S., NATO, EU, nor any country or leader has, to my knowledge, pointed out Ankara’s glaring hypocrisy.
Turkey claims that Finland and Sweden host members of the PKK, the militant Kurdish organization that the U.S. and EU regard as terrorists. Both Nordic nations deny the charge.
Like many Europeans, however, Finns and Swedes sympathize with Kurds. Turkey has long repressed and ethnically cleansed the latter.
Regardless, Ankara is blocking uber-civilized Finland and Sweden from joining NATO.
Ironically, Turkey — autocratic, infamously violative of human rights, and systemically corrupt — would be unqualified to join NATO today were it not already a member.
The point is, who is Turkey to accuse others of terrorism?
Mega-Terrorist Turkey
No objective analyst disputes Turkey’s longtime sponsorship of ISIS and other terrorist groups.
- Turkey’s counterterrorism chief from 2010-2013, Ahmet S. Yayla, acknowledged in 2020 that “Turkey was a central hub for … over 50,000 ISIS foreign fighters, and the main source of ISIS logistical materials [including] IEDs, making Turkey and ISIS practically allies.”
- Terrorism expert/State Department adviser Dr. David L. Phillips directs Columbia University’s Peace-building and Human Rights Program. It has confirmed Turkey’s alliance with ISIS: ISIS-Turkey Links (2014) and Turkey-ISIS Oil Trade (2015-2016).
- The NY Times (2014): “Western intelligence officials … track ISIS oil shipments … into Turkey,” [which has] failed “to help choke off the oil trade.”
- In Turkey: A State Sponsor of Terrorism? (2021), Phillips again documents Ankara’s patronage of terrorists. If a “non-NATO country behaved like Turkey, it would warrant designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism,” like Iran and North Korea.
- The U.S. State and Treasury Departments (2021) say Turkey is a financial hub for ISIS/al-Qaeda. Yet Washington has penalized only a few Turkish individuals and companies, with minimal effect.
- In 2020, Turkey transported thousands of terrorist mercenaries to Azerbaijan to attack Armenian-populated Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabagh and Armenia. These included war criminal and former ISIS commander Sayf Balud and commanders of the Sultan Murad Brigade — several of them murderers and rapists.
So why aren’t the U.S./NATO/EU exposing Turkey’s terrorism hypocrisy over Finland/Sweden?
Partly because America and Europe are schizophrenic about ISIS and similar groups.
America’s Phony Global War on Terrorism
While the West loudly condemns and occasionally battles such groups, it sometimes deems them to be militarily useful.
The State Department, for instance, quietly wants Turkish-backed terrorists (e.g. The Free Syrian Army (FSA)/Syrian National Army (SNA)) to help depose President Assad and push Russia out of Syria. There’s no other explanation for our nation’s tolerance of Ankara’s terrorist sponsorships. Assad is also aligned with Shiite powers that America loathes: Iran and Hezbollah.
‘The enemy (Turkish-backed terrorists) of our (America’s) enemies (Assad/Russia/Iran/Hezbollah) is our friend.’
Thus, America repeatedly ignores Turkey’s support of terrorists and its invasions, occupation, and ethnic cleansing of northern Syria.
The U.S. dislikes, however, Turkey’s targeting the pro-American, anti-ISIS, Kurdish YPG in Syria. Turkey insists that the YPG is an arm of the PKK. However, America usually lets Ankara have its way with Kurds anyway.
Elsewhere, the U.S. House and European Parliament criticized Turkey’s using terrorists against Armenians in 2020. Yet the West took no action against Turkey because Armenia, a Russian ally, lost the war. This advanced America’s and NATO’s strategy of penetrating the Caucasus.
In 2021, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee openly quizzed Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland about Turkey’s deploying terrorists in Azerbaijan. She refused to answer in public, again unmasking Washington’s tacit support for Turkish-backed terrorists.
Even when America and Europe genuinely disagree with Ankara’s demands/threats, they rarely push back with their own counter-demands/counter-threats.
Western Submissiveness
Turkey’s nonstop, unhinged temper tantrums have always psychologically disarmed the West. Turks know that and exploit it.
And, despite the boasts of pro-Turkish sycophants, Turkey is not more important, and certainly not more powerful, than the U.S./NATO/EU.
Instead of pushing back against Turkey over the Finland/Sweden fuss, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg spinelessly implores us to empathize with Ankara’s demands. Meanwhile, Finnish and Swedish delegations have scampered off to Ankara to prostrate themselves before His Royal Highness, King Erdogan.
American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Dr. Michael Rubin suggests instead that NATO threaten to ban Turkish Airlines, hurt Turkey’s already battered economy, and legitimately withhold certain classified documents/intelligence from Ankara.
Only rarely does the West counter Turkish mischief. Turkey has been — temporarily, anyway — kicked out of America’s F-35 jet program because it bought Russia’s S-400 missiles. Also, by applying economic penalties on Turkey, Washington won Pastor Andrew Brunson’s release in 2018. But these happened only because the Pentagon unequivocally insisted on it and because Evangelicals pressured the White House.
Whether it’s Turkey threatening Greek islands, making illegitimate claims over Mediterranean Sea energy deposits, threatening to release millions of Syrian refugees into Europe, or countless other examples of bullying, Western capitals habitually appease Ankara.
Why should our (and NATO’s) servicemen and servicewomen spill their blood fighting a largely phony Global War on Terrorism, especially when NATO member Turkey outright supports terrorism?
Frankly, when it comes to Turkey, Western countries behave like weaklings. What’s more, they don’t even realize it.
Welcome again to bizarro world.
David Boyajian’s primary foreign policy focus is the Caucasus. His work can be found at http://www.armeniapedia.org/wiki/David_Boyajian
THE DIVISIONIST DEMOCRAT PARTY AND BLACK ANTI-SEMITICISM…. BUT BLACKS HATE EVERYONE PERIOD.
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2022/05/black-lives-murder-most-violent_8.html
Only a minority of black people are anti-Semites, but those that are, are not lone wolves. They are not inventing the wheel. Rather, they are steeped in a significant cultural trend, a trend that persons of conscience will name, confront, analyze, and denounce.
Danusha Goska is the author of God through Binoculars: A Hitchhiker at a Monastery
Whose future, indeed? If we are to repel Black Lives Matter’s full-on assault on our values, institutions, and character, it will only be if all American patriots summon the kind of courageous, truth-telling resistance David Horowitz displays in his indispensable book I Can’t Breathe to expose and condemn the corrosive racial hoaxes perpetrated by BLM and the Democrat Party.
Black Lives Matter: Not Just Communist, But Viciously Anti-Semitic Too
Biden's EPIC Fail That Media Hid.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqgTGG3W60o
Biden's new press secretary has a problem with Jews
By Edward Davis
Karine Jean-Pierre makes history this week as the first woman "of color" and the first open lesbian to become the official spokesperson for the leader of the free world.
Unfortunately, another characteristic that sets her apart from previous White House press secretaries is her malicious radical activism, which reached its low point when she made fictitious allegations against a moderate, bipartisan pro-Israel organization.
How the Biden Administration Is Funding the Effort To Delegitimize Israel
State Department offering nearly $1 million to investigate alleged human rights abuses
The Biden administration is offering nearly $1 million for groups to investigate alleged human rights abuses in Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip, an effort that will delegitimize Israel, according to sources who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon.
The State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) is soliciting nonprofit groups to apply for grant money up to $987,654 to "strengthen accountability and human rights in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza," according to a grant notice first posted online in mid-February.
Groups applying for the grant money will investigate alleged crimes inside Israel and these territories and "collect, archive, and maintain human rights documentation to support justice and accountability and civil society-led advocacy efforts, which may include documentation of legal or security sector violations and housing, land, and property rights," according to the State Department.
Israel's defenders on Capitol Hill expressed outrage over the program and said the Biden administration is helping fund international efforts to delegitimize Israel and boost the anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement. The grant is also fueling concerns about the Biden administration's relationship with Israel and its hiring of officials who have been critical of the Jewish state.
"This is disgraceful," Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) told the Free Beacon. "The Biden administration wants to use American taxpayer money to subsidize the international NGO campaign to demonize and isolate Israel, which then serves as a basis for anti-Semitic efforts to boycott and wage economic warfare against Israeli Jews. Congress did not appropriate funds for this purpose and has repeatedly condemned such campaigns."
The State Department, Cruz said, "should immediately cancel this program and investigate how it was approved."
The Biden administration's nominee to head the bureau offering the grant, Sarah Margon, has been stalled in the Senate for months due to her anti-Israel activism and statements.
Before being nominated to head the DRL bureau, Margon served as Washington director at Human Rights Watch, a nonprofit organization that routinely criticizes Israel and accuses it of engaging in "crimes against humanity."
Margon has also expressed support for Israel boycotts. Additionally, in a September 2021 confirmation hearing before the Senate, she said, "I believe the private sector across the board has an important role to play in not promoting or pursuing discriminatory policies."
The grant comes amid the Biden administration appointing multiple additional anti-Israel officials.
George Salem, who lobbied for the Palestinian government from 2015 until late 2021, was appointed chairman of the U.S. Agency for International Development's Partnership for Peace Fund board, the Free Beacon first reported. Salem was registered as a foreign agent for the Palestine Monetary Authority, a government agency directed by the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank government controlled by Fatah party leader Mahmoud Abbas. The Palestinian government, under Abbas's leadership, has faced criticism for its mishandling of foreign aid, including using funds for its "pay-to-slay" program, which pays salaries to convicted terrorists and their families.
The Biden administration recently hired Elizabeth Campbell, former director of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for Palestinian refugees, as a deputy assistant secretary of state at the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration. UNRWA has long faced criticism by lawmakers and regional experts for promoting anti-Semitism and terrorism in Palestinian schools. Campbell, in her work as a top UNRWA official, oversaw the agency's controversial use of school textbooks that promote anti-Semitism and hatred of Jews, the Free Beacon reported earlier this week.
The anti-Israel grants are part of a broader policy inside the Biden administration that aims to elevate Palestinians and attack Israel, according to former U.S. officials and aides who spoke to the Free Beacon.
"It would be a waste of taxpayer dollars and morally blind of the State Department to spend this money in Israel," said Bonnie Glick, former deputy administrator at USAID.
The State Department, Glick told the Free Beacon, "should support the people willing to drive a new era of Palestinian politics, untainted by terror, corruption, and intimidation."
A senior Republican congressional aide who works on foreign policy matters and is familiar with the grant project accused the Biden administration of treating Israel as a "pariah" state.
"This is the kind of grant you give to build civil societies in autocratic and broken regimes, not for close democratic allies like Israel," the aide told the Free Beacon. "The problem is that the Biden administration is filled with people who spent decades getting paid to try to make Israel into an international pariah. They failed, but now they're using the State Department to try to do it."
A State Department spokesman defended the grant when asked about it by the Free Beacon.
"The State Department seeks grant applications from and funds programs with a wide range of nongovernment partners around the world," the official said. "These programs are intended to foster respect for human rights and the rule of law and support democracy globally."
In Biden Aid Nominee, Repressive Gulf Monarchy Found Enthusiastic Ally
Qatar quashes free speech. Tamara Cofman Wittes praised it as a “global gathering place for dialogue.”
President Joe Biden’s nominee for a top role at the U.S. Agency for International Development has a long history of praising Qatar, the oppressive Gulf state with a shoddy human rights record that includes restrictions on free expression and the criminalization of same-sex sexual conduct.
Tamara Cofman Wittes is slated to appear before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday, where the panel will consider her nomination to be an assistant administrator of USAID. If confirmed, she would be responsible for distributing billions of American aid dollars throughout the Middle East.
As a Middle East policy fellow at the Brookings Institution, where she worked first from 2003 to 2009 and then from 2012 until earlier this month, Wittes lavished praise on Qatar, a repressive nation that discriminates against gays, lesbians, and transgender individuals. Wittes described Qatar's capital city Doha as a "global gathering place for dialogue" and amplified Qatari leaders' claims that they support human rights and oppose "extremists who exploit religion to incite violence."
The Brookings Institution was at the time raking in millions from Qatar—its "Doha Center," renamed after the organization came under scrutiny for the partnership, had a controversial 14-year run. Wittes’s confirmation hearing comes as the Brookings Institution faces renewed scrutiny over its foreign financial ties. The think tank’s president, retired general John Allen, resigned on Sunday amid news that he is under federal investigation for his alleged role in illegally lobbying for Qatar.
While the Brookings Institution took money from several foreign governments over the past decade, Qatar appears to be its most significant foreign donor, pouring at least $22 million into the think tank between 2013 and 2021, according to congressional financial disclosures and the organization’s annual donor reports.
Wittes’s record, laid out in her writing and prolific tweets that are now shielded from public view, also includes criticism of U.S.-brokered deals normalizing relations between Israel and Arab governments and of Israel’s pushback on activists calling for an economic boycott of the Jewish State. It may be an obstacle as she looks to win Republican support ahead of her confirmation hearing. It is unclear, for example, how Republican lawmakers will respond to her amplification of a tweet suggesting that Trump supporters should be subject to the same process of "denazification" that sought to rid Germany and Austria of Nazi ideology after World War II.
Congressional Republicans voiced concern about her criticism of the Abraham Accords, an agreement that normalized ties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, among others.
"Wittes was one of the most bitter opponents of the Abraham Accords. She trashed everyone involved, including and especially Israel," a senior Republican congressional aide told the Washington Free Beacon.
Wittes quoted articles decrying the deal as misogynistic, a "new Naksa"—referring to the Palestinian word for "setback"—and as a "triumph for authoritarianism."
"If I were an Arab leader weighing ties with Israel, I would have 2 things in mind," Wittes wrote on Twitter in September 2020. "1) A promise from [Trump adviser Jared] Kushner now isn’t worth much. Why not wait until after Nov elections? 2) Bibi’s backtracked on his commitments to UAE; his promises aren’t worth much either. Let’s wait & see."
Wittes argued that the several Gulf states taking steps toward normalization with Israel were engaged in a "betrayal of Palestinian interests" and the agreement would make it more difficult to extract Israeli concessions in return for a peace deal with the Palestinians.
"This is not Middle East peace. It's certainly not Middle East peace when there are horrific civil wars going on in the region," Wittes said of the accords. "That's where I think it's been oversold."
She went so far as to blame Gulf states that joined the Abraham Accords with Israel for the May 2021 war between Hamas and Israel.
"The risk now is that Arab states that normalised with Israel bought this mess and now have to live with it," she told the Independent.
Notwithstanding her extensive writing and tweeting on the subject, Wittes told the Washington Free Beacon days before her confirmation hearing that she supports the Abraham Accords.
"I have never expressed ‘strong opposition to the Abraham Accords,’" Wittes said. "I support the Accords and the profound transformation they have wrought."
"When the Accords were announced in September 2020, I told the New York Times that ‘Abu Dhabi and Jerusalem each had their own good reasons for finding a way to open the door to formal relations,’" Wittes said.
She also noted that her last column for the Brookings Institution said that the Accords "strengthened the pro-American coalition in the region and created opportunities for Arab states and Israel to pursue mutually advantageous security, economic, and social projects."
The Abraham Accords also happened to draw opposition from Qatar, whose funding for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood has put it at odds with both the Jewish state and the United Arab Emirates.
Wittes also highlighted claims that the Qatari government — which has been accused of widespread human rights violations, including jailing protesters and maintaining abusive workplace conditions for migrant workers – supports human rights and tolerance.
"Qatar deputy PM says Islam, like West, embraces human rights because they're to benefit of all, esp non-Muslim minorities in Muslim World," Wittes wrote in 2013.
"Doha’s become global gathering place for dialogue!" she wrote in one 2012 post, adding that Brookings "has partnered w/ Qatar many years."
The Brookings Institution said Qatar's donations in 2020 and 2021 were the final payments from a prior fundraising pledge. "Qatar will not be listed as a financial supporter in the 2022 annual report," a Brookings Institution spokeswoman told the Free Beacon.
WE SHOULD PAY THE PIG SAUDIS TO KEEP JOE LOCKED UP UNTIL THEY BEHEAD HIM.
Saudis Promote Biden’s Meeting With Crown as a Highlight of His Visit, While White House Downplays It
(CNSNews.com) – The Biden administration is downplaying President Biden’s scheduled interaction in Saudi Arabia with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – in stark contrast to the kingdom, which is characterizing the meeting as a high point of the president’s two-day visit next month.
The difference was evident Tuesday in a statement and comments by administration officials on one hand, and a statement from the royal court in Riyadh on the other.
The official White House announcement on the July 13-16 travel to Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Palestinian Authority areas did not mention the heir to the Saudi throne, and referred in the context of the Jeddah leg of the trip only to King Salman and to other regional leaders (“the GCC+3”) invited for a summit.
When asked by a reporter about this omission, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre again played down the significance of any meeting between Biden and Mohammed bin Salman.
“The president is going to see over a dozen leaders on this trip, including King Salman and the leadership from our Saudi hosts for the GCC+3 summit,” she said, then added that “we can expect the president to see the crown prince as well.”
Similarly, when a senior administration official briefed reporters on background on the trip, the Mohammed bin Salman meeting was again minimized.
Using virtually the same language as Jean-Pierre, the official said in response to a question about the crown prince, “I would just say he’ll see over a dozen leaders on this trip, and so that includes King Salman and the leadership from our Saudi hosts for the GCC+3 summit. So, yes, we can expect the president to see the crown prince.”
In contrast to “we can expect the president to see the crown prince,” the statement from the royal court placed the Biden-Mohammed bin Salman engagement in a central position on the itinerary, while framing the meeting with the 86-year-old king as essentially a courtesy visit.
After “a meeting between King Salman and President Biden,” it said, Biden will “hold official talks” with the crown prince, focusing on “various areas of bilateral cooperation and joint efforts to address regional and global challenges.”
The royal court statement went on to say Biden and Mohammed bin Salman “will explore cooperation on emerging technologies, economic investment, space, renewable energy, cybersecurity, climate and environmental initiatives, food and energy security, and expanding trade and commercial ties to enable both countries to confront mutual challenges and seize the opportunities of the 21st century.”
‘Very little social redeeming value’
Biden’s trip to Jeddah and his scheduled meeting with the crown prince – who is already the kingdom’s de facto leader – comes at a time when he is under pressure to take action to bring down surging gasoline prices at home. Saudi Arabia is the world’s second largest oil producer.
But Mohammed bin Salman remains a deeply controversial character due to his alleged involvement in the killing of U.S.-based Saudi writer and regime critic Jamal Khashoggi, at the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul in 2018. A U.S. intelligence assessment released early last year concluded that the crown prince approved the operation that resulted in the murder.
Biden’s planned meeting with him comes less than three years after he declared on the campaign trail that he believed the crown prince ordered the killing, that he would sell the Saudis no more weapons but “make them in fact the pariah that they are,” and that there was “very little social redeeming value” to the kingdom’s government.
He also accused the Saudi government of “murdering children” and “murdering innocent people” – presumably in the context of the costly war in Yemen – and said that “they have to be held accountable.”
Administration officials have not answered directly when asked if Biden will raise the Khashoggi murder with the crown prince, instead replying to the effect that “human rights is always part of the conversation” in foreign engagements.
They have also reiterated that when it took office the administration sought to “recalibrate” but not “rupture” relations with a country that has been a strategic partner for almost 80 years.
“In this meeting, will the president confront the crown prince on the Khashoggi murder?” Judy Woodruff of PBS NewsHour asked Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Tuesday. “And if not, why not?”
“Well, I’m not going to get ahead of what’s going to happen in Saudi Arabia, but I can say this – and again, the president’s been very clear – human rights will remain at the heart of our agenda, along with the other interests and values that we’re trying to advance,” Blinken said.
“In my own conversations with Saudi counterparts and Saudi officials, I regularly raise human rights, including individual cases and more systemic challenges that continue to be posed in Saudi Arabia,” Blinken added. “I would expect the president to do the same.”
With Mohammed bin Salman – who is also defense minister – at the helm the Saudis in 2015 launched a military campaign against the Iranian-backed Houthi militia, in support of Yemen’s internationally-recognized government. The conflict over time resulted in what the U.N. called the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.
A U.N.-mediated truce has been in place since April.
Yemen will be on the agenda when Biden visits Saudi Arabia, according to the White House announcement, which noted that the truce “has led to the most peaceful period there since war began seven years ago.”
The senior administration official briefing on background cited the truce in Yemen as “a clear example of where our engagement with the Saudis delivered results,” and added that the crown prince had “played a critical role in securing the extension of the truce” last week, for a further two months.
FUK SAUDIS!
ALONG WITH THEIR BOY JOE!
Dem Rep. Connolly: It’s Inconsistent for Biden to ‘Stand Down’ to Work with Saudis to Help Gas Prices, Keep Restrictions on U.S. Oil
On Tuesday’s broadcast of CNN’s “OutFront,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) argued that President Joe Biden has decided to “stand down” on his position on holding Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman accountable for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi and part of the reason for this change is the U.S. needing Saudi Arabia to boost oil production to bring down gas prices. Connolly added that if Biden is going to be consistent, he should be willing to also pull back restrictions on refining and drilling for oil in America.
Connolly stated, “I believe President Biden was right when he was candidate Biden about this relationship and holding to account the individual who was complicit in and ordered the brutal murder and dismemberment of my constituent, Jamal Khashoggi, and that is the Crown Prince.”
Connolly added, “I believe that he’s had counsel from some in the State Department, some on the National Security Council that the need to bring MBS, the Crown Prince, to account, to justice for his involvement in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi has to be weighed against other concerns. We’re experiencing a huge inflationary spiral in the price of oil. We need Saudi Arabia to produce more of it if we’re going to bring down the cost of gasoline here in the United States. The Saudis have been reluctant to support sanctions against Russia in the Ukrainian war, and we need their help there. So, I think that he’s getting advice that if you want their cooperation they’ve made it very clear you’ve got to stand down on your original position.”
Host Erin Burnett then added, “I will say for, just a point of consistency, if he thinks it’s worth it to bring down oil prices to — or gas prices to do business with Saudi Arabia, wouldn’t it be consistent, then, to be open to pulling back some of the restrictions on refining in the U.S. or drilling in the U.S. as well?”
Connolly responded, “Presumably. But I think we have to all ask ourselves, all of that’s interesting and fine and important, but at what price? I mean, a man was murdered by the number two official in a foreign government. That can’t be acceptable in terms of U.S. interests or U.S. foreign policy and it ought not to be acceptable to the president of the United States.”
Howard Stern Blasts Phil Mickelson, Others for ‘Selling Out’ to ‘Piece of Sh*t’ Saudis
Radio shock jock Howard Stern tore into golfer Phil Mickelson and others for their participation in the Saudi-backed LIV Tour.
Mickelson reportedly joined the LIV Tour for $200 million, resulting in his suspension from PGA Tour for his participation. Howard Stern asserted that Mickelson and other golfers were sellouts.
“They’re selling out,” Stern said on his SiriusXM show.
Stern further called the Saudi government “real pieces of shit” for essentially using their vast wealth to establish themselves on the world stage.
“They’re real pieces of shit and they got a lot of money so it allows them to be pieces of st on a big level,” Stern said. “Normally, if they didn’t have oil there, you wouldn’t hear from these guys, you’d never know what they believe, they’d be talking to a sheep and a camel.”
“But they, unfortunately, have so much money that they can spread their diseased brain power all over the world and now they wanna start a golf tournament, not a tournament, a league,” he added.
The top golfers participating in LIV have often deflected when questioned about their stance regarding Saudi Arabia’s human rights violations. “I don’t condone human rights violations. I don’t know how I can be any more clear,” Mickelson said when asked, for instance.
Howard Stern said that golfers like Mickelson are willing to “put up with it for $200 million.”
Phil Mickelson at the U.S. Open press conference (Rob Carr/Getty Images)
Though top golfer Dustin Johnson initially said he would not participate in the event, his agent said he ultimately felt it was “in his and his family’s best interest.”
“Dustin has been contemplating this opportunity off-and-on for the past couple of years. Ultimately, he decided it was in his and his family’s best interest to pursue it,” said Johnson’s agent. “Dustin has never had any issue with the PGA Tour and is grateful for all it has given him, but in the end felt this was too compelling to pass up.”
When asked about the event during the PGA Championship, Johnson said, “I think golf is in a good spot, and I think what they’re doing … could potentially be good for the game of golf. I’m excited to see what happens here in a few weeks.”
Mickelson also addressed an open letter drafted by the “9/11 Families United’’ asking for the golfers not to participate in the event since 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.
“I would say to everyone that has lost loved ones, lost friends on 9/11 that I have deep, deep empathy for them,” Mickelson said. “I can’t emphasize that enough.”
LIV founder Greg Norman sparked controversy last month when he addressed his Saudi Arabia ties by saying the government-sanctioned killing of Jamal Khashoggi was a mere mistake, no different than the many past mistakes committed by the United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment