I read two items touching on Saudi Arabia last Sunday that deserve some discussion in this blog. The first was a letter to the editor in the latest Atlantic from a Saudi prince excoriating President Obama for not standing with his country and the “Egyptian people” (i.e., the military autocracy) in its battles with Iran and the Egyptian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. The second was a feature article in the NYT about the influence of Saudi and other Middle Eastern money in radicalizing Muslims in Kosovo.
President Obama has famously described our relationship with the Saudis as “complicated.” That sounds about right to me.
Here is my analysis of the relationship:
- We have no shared values with Saudi Arabia. None. If anything, Iran is a slightly less repressive place to live, which obviously isn’t saying much. The Kingdom is the Islamic State lite.
- Our “alliance” with the Saudis has always been based on our mutual hostility towards Iran and both parties’ need to keep the supply of oil flowing smoothly. In the past, the Saudis have also promoted political stability in the area, which is generally in our interests. All of these things are changing: the Saudis are no longer the swing producer of oil; we have succeeded in making the nuclear deal with Iran, and we have to collaborate with them to some extent in Iraq; and the Saudis have started to play their hand against the Iranians much more aggressively.
- Virtually every time there is an act of terrorism against the West, or indigenous people espousing Western values, by radical Muslims, you can ultimately find a connection to a madrassa supported by Saudi (not Iranian) money. The Saudis have built up a soft power empire in that manner that is antithetical to liberal democratic values.
- Iran is still a hostile power and must be treated with caution. Saudi Arabia is too thinly populated to defend itself against Iran, which means that it remains appropriate for the US to guarantee its security, given its continuing (if declining) importance to the world economy. That doesn’t mean we have any kind of moral obligation to serve as the tip of the Sunni spear everywhere in the Middle East. Our interest is in promoting peace, human rights, and the free flow of oil, not in underwriting Saudi dominance of the area.
- Whether we like it or not, we have to work with Iran to get rid of IS in Iraq, and the Iranians will be a player in any political solution in Syria. Our relations with Iran will, therefore, become more “complicated” (and not just hostile) over time.
In short, Obama is right to refuse to give his unconditional support to Saudi adventures in the Middle East. And if the Saudis don’t like that, what would they make of a President Trump?