AN (INDIRECT) ISRAELI-SAUDI ALLIANCE NO MORE?UPDATED!

FOURTH DRAFT

“We’re not asking for your hearts nor for your swords; all we’re asking is that you remain neutral.” Hezbollah’s Secretary General to the Arab governments of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt.

INTRODUCTION

The Israeli army’s heroic feats against Lebanon’s civilians are threatening Saudi participation in the Israel-led camp to contain Iran. Bandar bin Sultan, Head of Saudi Arabia’s National Security Council, and Saud al-Faisal, its Foreign Minister, are in Washington to ask the American President to stop the Israeli onslaught on Lebanon’s civilians and its economy–an onslaught that is clearly pushed along by Mr. Bush and Ms. Rice.

That the Saudis would dispatch Mr. Bandar bin Sultan, a personal friend of Mr. Bush and his father, is indication that their patience has been exhausted. The Arab World is looking to them as America’s foremost Arab friend/client to stop Israel’s massacres in Lebanon; and they are disappointing the Arab World; with disappointment, the Arab street should push towards more extremism and further rejection of the United States. Besides, they themselves had not bargained on the slaughter of civilians when they had accepted to join the Israel-led camp to contain-Iran.



SAUDI ARABIA IN THE ISRAEL-LED ARAB CAMP TO CONTAIN IRAN

An indication that the Saudis had been entrenched in that camp and now (possibly) want out could be seen in the progression in Mr. al-Faisal’s statements about Israel’s response to Hezbollah’s attack on its military. Soon after Israel had started to bomb Lebanon’s civilians, Mr. al-Faisal had called Hezbollah’s attack on the Israeli military “irresponsible.” He likely had been playing a scene in the act assigned to the Kingdom in the Israel-led camp to contain Iran. He would later swallow his words, so to speak.

A key-player in the Israel-Arab alliance against Iran, Mr. al-Faisal probably had expected the Israeli operations in Lebanon, sooner or later, in line with the Israeli-American plan to disarm Hezbollah and isolate Syria. Accordingly, Saudi policy continued to be the same a couple of days into the Israeli army’s heroic onslaught on Lebanon’s civilians and its equally heroic avoidance of hurting Syria. In fact, on July 17, Saudi Arabia had intensified its criticism of Hezbollah (and Hamas.) The Saudi cabinet had issued a statement in which it criticized the extremist elements for endangering the safety of the Lebanese and Palestinians. The statement had paralleled yet another one by Saud al-Faisal, condemning once again Hezbollah’s action.

But, in Lebanon, bloodshed had turned into slaughter. Feeling the pressure from the public, and accounting for Shiite-Sunni complications which would be too much to cover here, the Saudis began to wonder whether pleasing Bush by joining the Israel-led camp had been worth it. Al-Faisal and Crown Prince Sultan, both visiting in France, on or about July 20, came out with statements that condemned Israel’s bombing of civilians.

Crown-Prince Sultan said that Israel should not be allowed to continue to wreck the life of Lebanese civilians, and he supported the idea of dispatching a multinational force. Saud al-Faisal went further. He spoke about the arrogance of Israel and described openly its destruction of Lebanon.


WHERE THE SAUDIS MISCALCULATED

(In a nutshell: When they followed the lead of the harmful idiots, instead of leading them.)

The harmful idiots’ scheme to contain Iran for a while had focused on Lebanon. When they succeeded in driving Syrian troops out, the harmful idiots became euphoric and believed they could do more. But, to make a long story short, there was stalemate in Lebanon. Syria and Iran had way too many friends in Lebanon; they were entrenched.

The American-Israeli scheme to weaken Syria and contain Iran involved a distribution of roles, a common characteristic in regional alliances. Israel would be the military bully–the bad cop; Egypt would be the good cop, persuading the Gaza Palestinians of the advantages of obedience, without the formation of a Palestinian state; Jordan would train various functionaries and operatives to bomb, assassinate, and what have you.

A part of the role assigned to Saudi Arabia was to support Saad Hariri and be the good cop with Syria–conflicting roles, by definition. Saudi Arabia’s (silly) leverage was Abdel Halim Khaddam, once the face of Syria’s ugly occupation of Lebanon. Saudi intelligence helped him defect and placed him in a palace in France. It’s unclear whether the Saudis are playing a role in financing the Syrian Muslim Brothers; the Americans almost certainly are.

(Alert: Whoever told the harmful idiots that al Qaeda would not infiltrate the ranks of their sponsored Syrian Muslim Brothers? Or are they really that mediocre–I’m being rhetorical-- to think they can create with money a moderate Muslim Brothers? At any rate, American financing has begotten a couple of operations within Syria, clashes really, the last being in May, 2006, in the Syrian city of Reqqa.)

The Syrian President had more than once contacted King Abdallah directly to complain about Saudi intelligence inciting the Syrian Sunnis against his government, using Abdel Halim Khaddam, a Sunni. In the last contact, Asad sent his foreign minister to deliver a letter to Abdallah. Asad seemed to be aware that Saudi intelligence was side-stepping the King in its anti-Syria campaigns, to meet its obligations pursuant to its assigned role within the Israel-led Arab camp to contain Iran. He would alert King Abdallah and the campaigns would abate.


CAN SAUDI ARABIA AFFORD TO WEAKEN SYRIA?

I’m not privy to the inner circles surrounding the King. But, knowing what I know about him (he’s no Uncle Tom), I would think he had surrounded himself with some who think like him. If he hasn't, he should. Why? The evidence is quite compelling that his intelligence services have been running circles around him, so to speak. They have been unleashing their money against, for instance, Syria; Syria's President would ract by calling the King to complain; then Abdel Halim Khaddam, their stooge, and Al-Hayat, their daily propaganda tool, would refrain. But only until the King turn his attention away.

But, talking strategy, are King Abdallah's closest advisers aware or aren't they that Syria’s strength is important to the Arabs and specifically to Saudi Arabia? Here’s why:

1. Without Syria and Iran, there would be no hope whatsoever to establish a Palestinian state on all of the 1967 lands. Such state, and reparations to the refugees and to Lebanon, are absolute necessities to defuse the most destabilizing issue in the region.

(Iraq is too but, take my word for it, a Palestinian state and reparations to the Palestinians and to Lebanon would help immensely in Iraq. And please don't give a moment's attention to the ideological morons at the American Enterprise Institute who have been recruited to say on National Public Radio that all’s well in Iraq. All’s not-–and will certainly not-–be well for the next 30 to 50 years.)

Without Syria and Iran, there would be no balance to Israel’s power and no Palestinian state–-let alone reparations to the refugees and to Lebanon.

You might say, “What about the Sinai?” Didn’t Israel fully withdraw from the Sinai without any military pressure?

My answer: Israel withdrew from the Sinai after it witnessed the Egyptian army cross the Suez Canal and fight rather well. Even though Egypt eventually lost that war, the crossing of the canal brought home to the Israelis that the Arab armies can get the job done–sooner or later.

In fact, they did. Hezbollah defeated Israel in south Lebanon using new and creative strategies: road-side bombs, suicide bombs, a mix of grassroots work, and high tech knowledge.

(Once Israel absorbs the fact that Hezbollah has now carried the battle inside Israel by dispatching missiles onto Haifa, it should sooner or later come to terms with the fact that it will need to do politics. But, in the meanwhile, it's rained its American machine of death against defenseless civilians and an equally defenseless small country that had never meant harm to any other.)

(Update--7/24/06: The U.S. just granted Lebanon $30 million in humanitarian aid; that, after our bombs had orphaned dozens of children, maimed hundreds if not thousands, and murdered hundreds of civilians--all to carry out a sophomoric plan by the racist and harmful idiots to clip Iran's wings! Not to mention that Lebanon's economic losses are in the billions.)

The advisers to King Abdallah and Crown Prince Sultan should know, shouldn’t they, that the Saudis don’t have the military power to balance Israel’s, or Iran’s. To do away with Syria therefore would invite further abuse of a defenseless Arab region.


2. Syria wants its Joulan Heights back. Any compromise that does not obtain these, fully, see a Palestinian state on all of the 1967 lands, and pay reparations that are acceptable to the refugees and to Lebanon, would spell the end of the Syrian government.

Lebanon is a card in Syria’s hand to achieve the above. Tragic for Lebanon, but it’s stuck. Has been since 1967, ever since the local bullies (Israel and Syria) and the harmful idiots have been waging their wars.

Syria has lots of influence in Lebanon. It has Hezbollah (Arab/Islamic nationalist;) it has the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (pan-Syrian nationalist;) It has Usama Saad (Nasserite–Sidon;) it has Sulayman Franjieh in the north (Christian Maronite;) it has most of Tripoli and the north (Sunni; they vote for Saad Hariri to get cargo, but their heart is with Syria;) and it benefits from the neutrality of General Michel Aoun (Christian Maronite–neutral).

And it has the Palestinian refugees, over 400,000 of them. (According to the Chairman of the Committee on Refugees in the Palestinian Parliament, Mr. Jamil al-Majdalawi, on or about June 6 of this year, 411,000 Palestinian refugees were living in Lebanon.) Should Syria and Hezbollah decide to escalate, they should be able to unleash a Palestinian army in Lebanon. (My guesstimate is that the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon can field a good 50,000 to 80,000 fighters, and more when Syria's Palestinian refugees--also over 400,000--are thrown into the fray.)


Update--7/24/06: The Secretary General of Fateh in Lebanon, Sultan Abu-Aynayn, just gave SaudiPolitics yet another predictive victory. He announced that the Palestinian factions (al-fasael) will fight the Israelis should these come close to the refugee camps. That, my dears, is an escalation, or a pre-escalation--a message to the racist and harmful idiots that Lebanon will slip into wars which their sophomoric plans had not accounted for.


These Palestinian refugees would want nothing less than to face off with the Israelis in a protracted guerrilla war in the south.

Syrian unconventional power therefore is quite impressive.

Saudi Arabia, if it takes an Arab course, could benefit from that power. It can stop working from within the Israel-U.S. scheme to weaken Syria, and work from within a proud Arab scheme with Syria on rebuilding Lebanon while insisting on a general resolution of the Middle East conflict along the lines outlined by then Crown Prince Abdallah in Beirut in 2002.

Saudi Arabia would be shooting itself in the foot if it were to weaken Syria before a Palestinian state is established. Bandar can take pride in his friendhip with Bush and Cheney, both businessmen with interests in Saudi Arabia. But the people around them are ideological operatives who hold a deep-seated hate of Muslims and Arabs, especially the Saudis. These operatives should sooner or later re-float the idea of dismantling the Kingdom--the first opportunity they have.

SaudiPolitics.com predicts that, when the current President and Vice President rejoin their business world to collect oodles of Saudi money, their circles of operatives would rejoin their Israel-centric right wing "think" tanks to push for "reforms" in Saudi Arabia, and will ally themselves to what's left of the Saudi opposition.

Accordingly, ,the Kingdom would do well to bring back Arabs into its government--such as Prince Talal--and ease out some of the more kiss-ass Uncle Toms within its ranks. Words to the wise.

(There's really no other choice, anyway. The harmful idiots are stringing everyone along because their political leadership is--and forever will be--tied down by lobbies.)


CONTAINING IRAN

There’s really no way to contain Iran using an Israel-led Arab alliance.

This is especially true after the endless misery Israel has visited onto Lebanon, most recently in its killing of that Arab country’s civilians and its devastation of Lebanon’s fragile economy. Such will be on the mind of the Arabs for a good while to come. Iran, I suspect, would like nothing more than to invest in spreading the photographs of devastation and testimony about the same across the Islamic and Arab Worlds. An inexpensive investment with plenty of returns.

Saudi Arabia need not cater too much to the harmful idiots. After all, from a balance of power perspective, these have to defend the Gulf conventionally should Iran make a move. Iran knows it. So there’s no need to disturb the Arab street unnecessarily by too chummy an alliance with those who murder Lebanese Arab civilians from the air, using American-supplied tools of death.


HEZBOLLAH OUT-MANEUVERS THE HARMFUL IDIOTS

The harmful idiots' plan for Lebanon and Syria is now dead, and will be for the foreseeable future.

It therefore behooves the Saudis to think smartly, and lead (neutralize) the harmful idiots instead of being led by them. For maybe, just maybe, Hezbollah and Iran are way smarter than most. They seem to have been aware that Olmert’s Israelis would respond like a bunch of murderous killer chimps to Hezbollah’s operation against their military. And maybe, just maybe, they had been aware that Israel's murderous backlash against the civilians would neutralize the harmful idiots’ schemes within the Israel-led Arab camp to contain Iran.

Very impressive reading of Israeli politics by Hezbollah!


CAN MR. BUSH STAND UP TO HIS VICE PRESIDENT? WILL THE PRO-AMERICAN WING WITHING SAUDI ARABIA REMAIN DOMINANT?

The question remains: Should Mr. Bush cave in to the old Bandar friendship and agree to order a stop to the American-supplied slaughter in Lebanon, would he be able to stand up to his Vice-President? And to the Israel-centric cabal of extremists surrounding that (now) strongest of institutions within the White House?

Should Mr Bush fail to stop the slaughter in Lebanon, and disappoint the American Bandar, would the pro-American wing within the Saudi foreign policy establishment pay a price? Would Talal or like elements re-join politics? Would the pro-American wing at the very least cease to be the most dominant?