Meet Saudi Arabia's Bandar bin Sultan: The Puppetmaster Behind The Syrian War

Zero Hedge ^ | 27 August 2013 | Tyler Durden

[SeekAndFind]

Yesterday the Telegraph's Evans-Pritchard [8] dug up a note that we had posted almost a month [9]ago, relating to the "secret" meeting between Saudi Arabia and Russia, in which Saudi's influential intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan met with Putin and regaled him with gifts, including a multi-billion arms deal and a promise that Saudi is "ready to help Moscow play a bigger role in the Middle East at a time when the United States is disengaging from the region", if only Putin would agree to give up his alliance with Syria's al-Assad and let Syria take over, ostensibly including control of the country's all important natgas transit infrastructure [10]. What was not emphasized by the Telegraph is that Putin laughed at the proposal and brushed aside the Saudi desperation by simply saying "nyet." However, what neither the Telegraph, nor we three weeks ago, picked up on, is what happened after Putin put Syria in its place. We now know, and it's a doozy.

[11]

Courtesy of As-Safir [12](translated here [13]), we learn all the gritty details about what really happened at the meeting, instead of just the Syrian motives and the Russian conclusion, and most importantly what happened just as the meeting ended, unsuccessfully (at least to the Saudi). And by that we mean Saudi Arabia's threats toward Russia and Syria.

First, some less well-known observations on who it was that was supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt even as US support was fading fast:

Bandar said that the matter is not limited to the kingdom and that some countries have overstepped the roles drawn for them, such as Qatar and Turkey. He added, “We said so directly to the Qataris and to the Turks. We rejected their unlimited support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. The Turks’ role today has become similar to Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war. We do not favor extremist religious regimes, and we wish to establish moderate regimes in the region. It is worthwhile to pay attention to and to follow up on Egypt’s experience. We will continue to support the [Egyptian] army, and we will support Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi because he is keen on having good relations with us and with you. And we suggest to you to be in contact with him, to support him and to give all the conditions for the success of this experiment. We are ready to hold arms deals with you in exchange for supporting these regimes, especially Egypt.”

So while Saudi was openly supporting the Egyptian coup, which is well-known, it was Turkey and most importantly Qatar, the nation that is funding and arming the Syrian rebels, that were the supporters of the now failed regime. One wonders just how much Egypt will straing Saudi-Qatari relations, in light of their joined interests in Syria.

Second, some better-known observations by Putin on Russia's relationship with Iran:

Regarding Iran, Putin said to Bandar that Iran is a neighbor, that Russia and Iran are bound by relations that go back centuries, and that there are common and tangled interests between them. Putin said, “We support the Iranian quest to obtain nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. And we helped them develop their facilities in this direction. Of course, we will resume negotiations with them as part of the 5P+1 group. I will meet with President Hassan Rouhani on the sidelines of the Central Asia summit and we will discuss a lot of bilateral, regional and international issues. We will inform him that Russia is completely opposed to the UN Security Council imposing new sanctions on Iran. We believe that the sanctions imposed against Iran and Iranians are unfair and that we will not repeat the experience again.”

Then, Putin's position vis-a-vis Turkey, whom he implicitly warns that it is "not immune to Syria's bloodbath."

Regarding the Turkish issue, Putin spoke of his friendship with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan; “Turkey is also a neighboring country with which we have common interests. We are keen to develop our relations in various fields. During the Russian-Turkish meeting, we scrutinized the issues on which we agree and disagree. We found out that we have more converging than diverging views. I have already informed the Turks, and I will reiterate my stance before my friend Erdogan, that what is happening in Syria necessitates a different approach on their part. Turkey will not be immune to Syria’s bloodbath. The Turks ought to be more eager to find a political settlement to the Syrian crisis. We are certain that the political settlement in Syria is inevitable, and therefore they ought to reduce the extent of damage. Our disagreement with them on the Syrian issue does not undermine other understandings between us at the level of economic and investment cooperation. We have recently informed them that we are ready to cooperate with them to build two nuclear reactors. This issue will be on the agenda of the Turkish prime minister during his visit to Moscow in September.”

Of course, there is Syria:

Regarding the Syrian issue, the Russian president responded to Bandar, saying, “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters. During the Geneva I Conference, we agreed with the Americans on a package of understandings, and they agreed that the Syrian regime will be part of any settlement. Later on, they decided to renege on Geneva I. In all meetings of Russian and American experts, we reiterated our position. In his upcoming meeting with his American counterpart John Kerry, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will stress the importance of making every possible effort to rapidly reach a political settlement to the Syrian crisis so as to prevent further bloodshed.”

Alas, that has failed.

So what are some of the stunning disclosures by the Saudis? First this:

Bandar told Putin, “There are many common values ??and goals that bring us together, most notably the fight against terrorism and extremism all over the world. Russia, the US, the EU and the Saudis agree on promoting and consolidating international peace and security. The terrorist threat is growing in light of the phenomena spawned by the Arab Spring. We have lost some regimes. And what we got in return were terrorist experiences, as evidenced by the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the extremist groups in Libya. ... As an example, I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics in the city of Sochi on the Black Sea next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us, and they will not move in the Syrian territory’s direction without coordinating with us. These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role or influence in Syria’s political future.”

It is good of the Saudis to admit they control a terrorist organization that "threatens the security" of the Sochi 2014 Olympic games, [14]and that house of Saud uses "in the face of the Syrian regime." Perhaps the next time there is a bombing in Boston by some Chechen-related terrorists, someone can inquire Saudi Arabia what, if anything, they knew about that.

But the piece de resistance is what happened at the end of the dialogue between the two leaders. It was, in not so many words, a threat by Saudi Arabia aimed squarely at Russia:

As soon as Putin finished his speech, Prince Bandar warned that in light of the course of the talks, things were likely to intensify, especially in the Syrian arena, although he appreciated the Russians’ understanding of Saudi Arabia’s position on Egypt and their readiness to support the Egyptian army despite their fears for Egypt's future.

 

The head of the Saudi intelligence services said that the dispute over the approach to the Syrian issue leads to the conclusion that “there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate. We believe that the Geneva II Conference will be very difficult in light of this raging situation.”

 

At the end of the meeting, the Russian and Saudi sides agreed to continue talks, provided that the current meeting remained under wraps. This was before one of the two sides leaked it via the Russian press.

Since we know all about this, it means no more talks, an implicit warning that the Chechens operating in proximity to Sochi may just become a loose cannon (with Saudi's blessing of course), and that about a month ago "there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate." Four weeks later, we are on the edge of all out war, which may involve not only the US and Europe, but most certainly Saudi Arabia and Russia which automatically means China as well. Or, as some may call it, the world.

And all of it as preordained by a Saudi prince, and all in the name of perpetuating the hegemony of the petrodollar.

P.S. Russia and Saudi Arabia account for 25% of global oil production.

[Rockingham]

That may be desirable, but it is not possible if we want Saudi Arabia as an ally. Americans are needed in country to help run the Saudi oil industry and economy and to supply and service their weapons, and Saudis want access to the US on terms that mark their country as a trusted ally. With Wahhabi Islam though binding the Saudis to a rigid, pre-modern worldview even as they enjoy the worldly benefits of great wealth, they are both repelled and attracted by America, and resentful of American power while fearful of falling out of favor. And with so many Muslims in Saudi Arabia, there is a reproach in the way that Allah has permitted infidels to become so strong and powerful in the world while his most faithful adherents seem consigned to backwardness.

[Tailgunner Joe]

We are certain that the political settlement in Syria is inevitable

A political settlement in Syria is certainly impossible.

Russia will not be immune to Syria's bloodbath.

[Tailgunner Joe]

The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us, and they will not move in the Syrian territory’s direction without coordinating with us. These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role or influence in Syria’s political future.

Bandar is admitting that the Saudis are using jihadis as useful idiots to overthrow Assad, but that they will not allow them to rise to power in Syria, just as the they did not allow the Muslim Brotherhood to rule Egypt. Once the useful idiots have served their purpose they will be dispensed with, as useful idiots always are.

It would be better for Russia if Chechen jihadis went to Syria to die in the desert fighting other muslims, instead of targeting Russians. Putin is too busy hating the USA and trying to get revenge for the Cold War to do what is best for Russians. Instead Russians suffer and die so Putin can prop up Anti-American regimes.

[Rockingham]

That is one of the “natural fault lines” in Saudi Arabia.

[GOPJ]

Look, at best it's a business relationship with people we can never trust or like... If the Sauds were honest they would admit to the same feelings. I'm sure privately they do admit to it.

Our two cultures have nothing in common - and hopefully never will. Countries based on Saudi type ideas are invariable backward and brutal. The reason the Sauds look modern is they're buying 'the look' with oil money. When the oil stops flowing - and it will eventually - they'll revert. You doubt me? Look at the types they 'recruit' here... corrupt greedy politicians and lowlifes in our prison systems. That should tell you everything you need to know ...

[Rockingham]

We are in agreement -- which is why I took note of and explained how the US could dismantle Saudi Arabia if we had a desire to do so. Such an occasion would arise if we suffered another terror attack on the US homeland that had Saudi fingerprints on it.

Faithful Saudis and other Muslim believers are profoundly disoriented by the contrast between the backwardness, poverty, tyranny, and dysfunction of the Muslim world and the extraordinary progress, power, and freedom enjoyed by the US, the West generally, and most of the rest of the world. If Islam is the only true faith, they how can Allah permit such a state of affairs?

For adherent Muslims, there are two plausible answers: the US and other infidel societies have cheated Muslims of their due, and Muslims have failed at their duty of jihad against infidels. Until Islam experiences a reformation that makes it compatible with modernity, the Saudis and the rest of the Muslim world will continue to be menace.

[GOPJ]

Faithful Saudis and other Muslim believers are profoundly disoriented by the contrast between the backwardness, poverty, tyranny, and dysfunction of the Muslim world and the extraordinary progress, power, and freedom enjoyed by the US, the West generally, and most of the rest of the world. If Islam is the only true faith, they how can Allah permit such a state of affairs?

Let's see.... Muslms take half their population and make them worthless... that would be the women.

They fill their men's heads with crap about woman and dogs being dirty... they exploit the labor of people form everywhere and still think they're cool because of it. If there's a 'slavery' case in the US it's usually a Saudi family abusing an adult from some third world hellhole that doesn't have oil... That telling.

Then they run a modern country as if it's a desert tribe - with endless palace intrigue and in fighting. The in family - the 'out' family... all wanting to kill each other.

They are either at war, planning war, in hate, wanting revenge, or spending endless time monitoring the sex lives (or non- sex-lives) of their daughters, wives, sisters, mothers etc... and still they don't succeed unless someone else is pumping their oil for them and handing them the cash.

You're right, it's a damn mystery why they're not a totally amazing culture. Must be Allah... maybe they can buy a bomb because they're too wrapped up with the bullsh*t to invent one - and they can hurt other people to prove their equal. Yeah, that's the solution, kill other people in the name of Allah.

And you question why the world sees them as losers?

[GOPJ]

We are in agreement -- which is why I took note of and explained how the US could dismantle Saudi Arabia if we had a desire to do so.

Why bother? What could we do that they don't do to each other? They are their own worst enemies.

The best solution for all sides is to see this as a business relationship. Period. If they want to sell to us, fine. If they don't, fine. If we want to trade expertise with them, fine. If not, fine. They need to keep their money and quit trying to buy people over here. It's tacky.

[Rockingham]

Unfortunately, despite the attractiveness of the idea, countries never quite have just a "business relationship." Closeness in trade inevitably fosters mutual cultural and political influence.

For example, after Hitler came to power, for the sake of the German market, several major Hollywood studios run by Jewish executives altered their films to meet actual and potential objections from the Nazis. Today, Hollywood similarly tailors their product to avoid giving offense to Muslim financiers and pressure groups like CAIR and to Chinese government censors.

More ominously, trade tends to make business elites in places like oil industry Texas advocates for Muslims and Asia trade reliant California sympathetic to China. Thus we get otherwise hard bitten Texas oil men blathering about terror spewing Islam as the "religion of peace," while libertarian minded Silicon Valley tech executives are credulously agog about China's rapid development without taking stock of its lack of freedom and rule of law, brutal labor camps for political dissenters, and forced abortions for poor peasants.

In the end, the only business and trade partners whom we can trust are those with our values. Thus, despite vital commercial relationships, we have cold eyed strategists who rightly see the Muslim world and China as potential military opponents.

[GOPJ]

Thus we get otherwise hard bitten Texas oil men blathering about terror spewing Islam as the "religion of peace," while libertarian minded Silicon Valley tech executives are credulously agog about China's rapid development without taking stock of its lack of freedom and rule of law, brutal labor camps for political dissenters, and forced abortions for poor peasants. In the end, the only business and trade partners whom we can trust are those with our values.

If the world's people only traded with those with similar values, we'd still be in the middle ages. All of us... but I see your point - and it's a good one.

Maybe a uniform commercial system could be created exclusively for trade - modeled loosely after the system used by airliners. Pilots and control towers communicate in English - all over the world - with standard English phrases and rules. Some years back it was discovered that pilots from authoritarian countries were having more crashes than pilots from non-authoritarian countries. Turned out in authoritarian culture the second in command was afraid to tell the captain of a problem (even life threatening ones) a second time. Often resulting in the plane crashing and all passengers being killed. The solution was to have the conversation take place in English - which broke the cultural taboo.

If you're in the UAE in a business meeting, and Mo's plane is landing at the airport in 30 minutes it's not unusual for the whole group to go to the airport to meet Mo in person. It's cultural. And wise Americans go along with it. But sometimes, like your Hitler story - what works in the short run is a disaster in the long run. Changing the trade culture might help.

Anyhow, we're not as far apart on some of this as it seemed... thanks for sharing Rockingham.