Posted on 01/24/2009 8:43:22 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
RIYADH (AFP)--The close relationship between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia is under threat after Washington supported Israel's onslaught on the Gaza Strip, a senior Saudi prince warned on Saturday.
Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former top diplomat and intelligence chief, told CNN television that the U.S. needs to change its tune and exert more pressure on Israel or face a deterioration in its relations with the Middle East.
He called Israel's three-week assault on Gaza, which Palestinians say killed more than 1,300 people in the densely populated enclave, "barbaric" and a " catastrophe."
Prince Turki said the new U.S. administration of President Barack Obama must also press Israel to accept an Arab peace plan or lose the Arab world's confidence.
"I think this is one of the issues that makes the relationship between the Arab world in general and Saudi Arabia in particular threatened when it comes to dealing with the United States," he said.
"The relationship that has kept America and the Arab world going for the last 17 years is in danger."
He said former President George W. Bush "callously and unforgivably gave Israel a green light to do everything that they wanted to do in Gaza without restraint."
He said he had hopes for Obama, but needed to see real steps on the ground, including Washington and Israel agreeing to negotiate with Hamas, the Islamist group which controls Gaza but which the U.S. labels a terrorist organization.
"We need to see facts on the ground change. We need to see rhetoric change. We need to see presence on the ground.
"President Obama can do something and gain the confidence and support of the Arab and Muslim nations by showing that he has done things on the ground and not simply expressed a wish for that."
Prince Turki, who has been ambassador to both London and Washington and now oversees a prominent research center, stressed that he wasn't speaking for Saudi Arabia.
But diplomats and analysts consider his views reflect important currents within the Riyadh government.
He spoke a day after writing in an opinion piece in the Financial Times daily that Saudis may join "jihad" if Washington doesn't put more pressure on Israel, including condemning its Gaza offensive.
"If the U.S. wants to continue playing a leadership role in the Middle East and keep its strategic alliances intact - especially its 'special relationship' with Saudi Arabia - it will have to drastically revise its policies vis-a-vis Israel and Palestine," he wrote.
He wrote that the Gaza war united the region's Muslims, and pointed to a call by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for Saudi Arabia "to lead a jihad against Israel."
If pursued, he said, such a campaign would "create unprecedented chaos and bloodshed in the region."
"So far, the kingdom has resisted these calls, but every day this restraint becomes more difficult to maintain."
This message is obviously intended for our newly elected novice president.
it’ll be fun to see how obama deals with this.
the bushes had long-standing ties to saudi royalty,
comrade obama does not.
Any bets on how 0bama will respond?
True, but if he ever hopes to go on hajj...
Oh, but the Clinton’s have ties to the Saudi’s. Hillary is our Sec. of St. She make nice, nice.
later
yeah, but george 41 goes back a
long
ways with the saudi family.
Hey Saudi Arabia - don’t forget you would be answering to Saddam by now if it hadn’t been for the USA. So keep your big trap shut about Gaza.
The man-child is over his head. Is there a White House psychiatrist?
That should read ‘Turkey-al-Islamacist’ ...
With friends like the Saudis, who needs enemies?
Don’t be so sure about that. While his taste tend towards Syrian and Iraqi Baathists, His Royal Oneness’s Secretary of State was nose-to-butt with Alamoudi.
Its the opposite. If the Saudis want to preserve their special relationship with the US, they should find ways to help us dispose of the "Hamas" problem.
Geopolitical Diary: A Saudi Power Struggle?
Stratfor ^ | 12/15/06
Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2006 7:39:09 PM by Valin
The sands are shifting in the Saudi kingdom,...
The questions began with the out-of-the-blue resignation of Saudi Ambassador to the United States Turki al-Faisal on Monday. Prince Turki said he resigned to spend more time with his family — the usual excuse given for abrupt diplomatic departures — but his absence has raised questions in Washington regarding the stability of the Saudi royal family.
There is no question that Prince Turki’s brother, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, is ailing, and that Prince Turki would want to ensure the al-Faisal faction stays intact by assuming his position should Saud end up dying or become incapacitated. But sources in the Saudi Embassy and personal friends of Prince Turki have recently indicated that he is not held in high regard by Saudi King Abdullah and could not be getting a promotion after all.
Prince Turki assumed his ambassadorship in Washington after Prince Bandar bin Sultan left the position in June 2005 (also citing personal reasons). Soon after Sultan returned to Riyadh, he assumed an elite position as the secretary-general of Saudi Arabia’s National Security Council (NSC) — a recent creation by King Abdullah that was designed to formalize the decision-making process in the Saudi political system and consolidate power for the Sudeiri clan. Prince Turki, meanwhile, was expected to put a fresh face on Saudi Arabia’s diplomatic offices in Washington, but apparently did not see eye-to-eye with King Abdullah on a number of issues.
Tensions between Prince Turki and King Abdullah escalated in the wake of the summer war in Lebanon, when the prince furiously objected to private meetings between Prince Bandar and the Israelis. These were primarily consultations on how to put a lid on Iranian aggressions in the region, and had the approval of King Abdullah.
(Excerpt) Read more at stratfor.com ...
We would have been more justified in conquering Saudi Arabia after 9-11 than Afghanistan or Iraq. We should have turned their country into a giant oil spigot.
interesting.
stratfor is usually on the mark.
but back to the beginning, change or no change,
the bush family i would argue understands the saudis in general better than obama ever will.
i could be wrong, and usually am.
Prince Turki al-Faisal was head of Saudi Intelligence until a couple days before 9/11.
There have long been suggestions that he at least knew about the attacks that were in the offing.
There were a three or four Saudi princes who had fatal “accidents” after 9/11. Many have thought these Saudi princes were actively involved in supporting Al Queda. Prince Turki al-Faisal would have heard about the upcoming attacks through his contacts in the Pakistani ISI rather than directly from AQ. That’s likely why the US didn’t finger him and also why he likely avoided a fatal “accident”.
The saudi’s have subsequently moved against Al Queda. I think that Prince Turki al-Faisal role in the Saudi decision making has been restricted in recent years. His warning is not a suggestion of where the Saudi’s will go if the US does not change its position. Rather his warning is a suggestion of where he would like the Saudi’s to go if the US does not change its position.
No argument here.
Good luck selling oil to russia,venezuela, or even china.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.