RECOGNIZE ISRAEL OR ELSE!

second very rough and funnier(?)draft

THE SAUDIS AND THE ISRAELIS ARE DRAWING CLOSER. MAYBE NOT THAT CLOSE.


In my last foray (“Score Yet More Civil Wars for the Harmful Idiots”) I came down hard on the Saudis. I sensed increased cooperation between their intelligence service and the Israeli. Such cooperation, I judged, was uncalled for in view of the starving by the Israeli government of Gaza. Not to mention that, strategically, jumping over the parties directly affected (the Palestinians, the Syrians, and the Lebanese), robs these of the opportunity to obtain some real long-term compensation from the Europeans. In addition, it exposes the royal family to the accusation of having sold down the Arab Street--the Palestinians, the Lebanese, and the Syrians, in particular. Finally, drawing closer to Israel hardly achieves any protection for the Kingdom from Iran. Israel in the end is useless when it come to Iran, even harmful when one considers unconventional warfare and the mobilization value to Iran and the Street of Saudi-Israeli coziness. I even made light of the Saudis’ commitment to the Mecca Accord between Mahmoud Abbas and the Hamas leadership, as I sensed a retreat from that commitment (e.g., allowing Israeli Prime Minister Olmert to address Syria on al-Arabiyyah while Israeli troops starve Gaza.)

In essence, I was right about Saudi Arabia and Israel drawing closer. But I didn’t appreciate , nor could I now assess, the relative permanence or non- of this rapprochement. I can assess with a fair amount of certainty that this rapprochement doesn’t make sense strategically for the Kingdom. (Nor would it change things much for for the wishful thinking Israelis, who are forever trying to avoid their predicament: historic brotherhood/sisterhood with the Palestinians, in one secular and democratic state which would be the envy of the world.) But the Saudi government may assess otherwise.

What I didn't appreciate was the amount of pressure being exerted by the harmful idiots on the Saudis. A NYTImes.com article (see below) came to the rescue, so to speak, to complement my earlier analytial foray.


THE HARMFUL IDIOTS TIGHTEN THE SCREWS ON THE SAUDIS–OR THEY THINK THEY ARE.

An article today’s NYTimes.com indirectly provides an explanation for the seeming back-pedaling by Saudi Arabia about some of its (more-or-less) independent policies in Iraq and Palestine–independent of the policies of the harmful idiots.

It turns out that the harmful idiots have been tightening the screws on the Saudis to achieve one concrete policy objective ( a Saudi recognition of Israel and normalization of relations with that state, before and without total Israeli withdrawal and without addressing the grievances of hte refugees and of Lebanon) and another not-so-concrete objective (achievement of peace in Iraq by trusting the Maliki government.)

To explain to the Arab readers of this blog: the first objective would steal the Jewish community away from the Democratic Party, once and for all. The second would show the semblance of success for the Republican harmful idiots before these order withdrawal.

This tightening of the screws explains in part the seeming backpedaling by the Saudis on such policies as the Mecca Accord. The Saudis are trying to please the harmful idiots. They may not be scared. But they likely are concerned. They know this administration has hardly any credibility left, domestically and overseas. They can wait it out. But they would like to accommodate it for the balance of its term, if only to keep it from causing yet more harm, as a separated couple would accommodate their grieving child–by overdoing it. After which: good riddance to it and the Jewish Right, Kissinger and the Defense Policy Board--all those who wanted to break up the Kingdom and orphan children to test their brillant Israel-on-top schemes. (This is how I feel; the Saudi leaders probably want to kiss their ass.)

CAN SAUDI ARABIA AFFORD TO LOSE THE CONVENTIONAL DEFENSE PROTECTION FROM THE UNITED STATES?

When all’s said and done, Saudi Arabia can ill-afford to lose the conventional defense protection afforded by the United States. Or can it not? Such (conventional military protection) is now increasingly proving to be counter-productive. Iraq has made it abundantly clear. The lesson: unconventional warfare is the only way to defeat the United States. Consider the expenses we go through for total security, to defend against individuals who should be the purview mostly of intelligence overseas and close cooperation with other governments. Only a fool therefore would battle the U.S. conventionally. Which makes it that American protection, conventional, isn’t that effective. To make things so much worse, the very presence of the U.S. military in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf, if extensive, to provide conventional military protection, should become a mobilization theme, powerful and effective, against the harmful idiots and the pearl of their eye. And, by extension, the Uncle Tom Arab leaders on their payroll.

THE THREAT. BUT NO ONE CARES.

The NYTimes.com’s article is by Helene Cooper et al.: “U.S. Officials Voice Frustrations With Saudis’ Role in Iraq.” (July 27, 2007)

The article is nothing more than a public communication by the harmful idiots to the Saudis, a threat. It’s similar to the repeated and not so subtle threats made against Iran, the most recent being that the Iranians have been training Iraqis to target better their shells on the Green Zone. (Yeah, so?) In good part the idea is to mobilize the U.S. public against Iran; and now Saudi Arabia. What’s missing is the following calculation: the American tax base (“the public”) has given up on Iraq and its surrounding. It doesn’t care. It had lent its support in the hope (in good part) of scoring an economic bonanza. It turned out that the bonanza was scored by the friends and families of the harmful idiots, by the Iraqi “assets,” and not by the tax base. And now, simply put, the Iraq investment has gone bad. Time to cut our economic losses and get the hell out. We don’t care about Iran’s role, nor that of Saudi Arabia. Neither is putting money in our pockets. Both and their Iraq are drawing money out of our pockets. If anything, Iraq is draining us economically.

EXCERPTS

Here are some excerpts from Ms. Cooper's article:

“Saudi Arabia has also stymied a number of other American foreign policy initiatives, including a hoped-for Saudi embrace of Israel.” (Emphasis added.)


“One senior administration official says he has seen evidence that Saudi Arabia is providing financial support to opponents of Mr. Maliki. He [meaning it’s not she, Rice, but likely Gates] declined to say whether that support was going to Sunni insurgents because, he said, ‘That would get into disagreements over who is an insurgent and who is not.’”


“...Bush administration officials are voicing increasing anger at what they say has been Saudis Arabia’s counterproductive role in the Iraq war...[T]he Saudis have offered financial support to Sunni groups in Iraq. Of an estimated 60 to 80 foreign fighters who enter Iraq each month, American military and intelligence officials say that nearly half are coming from Saudi Arabia and that the Saudis have not done enough to stem the flow.”