>We are competing against the rest of the world including the UK, France, etc.
AKA, the Great Game in a modern form, not monarchies competing for territory and lucre, but corporations from many countries competing for natural resources and lucre.
OK, I will bow to your greater experience and judgement about foreign policy, the State Department and diplomats in overseas postings.
But, don’t our words about democracy ring hollow when we don’t give a damn about the Theological Tyrants of Saudi and the Communist Gulags of China for our economic benefits.
So, who’s fooling who.
I find your use of the word "lucre" revealing. I don't find making a profit to be shameful. In any event, no matter how you try to rationalize "the Great Game" reference used by the Prince, I doubt the host country would agree with your imputed definition of the phrase to mean mercantile engagement.
If you notice in the Ambassador's cable, para 6, "she recounted that she had hosted the American Chamber of Commerce's Members Day last week (attended by the Foreign Minister and the Deputy Minister of Trade and Commerce) which had been widely attended and a resounding success (see reftel). She then described the beneficial impact on the Kyrgyz economy of the Coalition Air Base at Manas Airport." Our ambassador is engaged in promoting US business interests and was able to attract high level participation from the host government.
But, don’t our words about democracy ring hollow when we don’t give a damn about the Theological Tyrants of Saudi and the Communist Gulags of China for our economic benefits. So, who’s fooling who.
Our first and foremost concern is promoting US strategic national interests. The world is not painted in black and white but shades of gray. The Saudis have the world's largest reserves of exportable oil, by far. It is critical to the global economy that it continues to flow freely and mostly to our allies and ourselves.
The State Department produces an annual Human Rights report for every country in the world, including Saudi Arabia. US officials admonish the Saudis regularly on the issue publicly and mostly in private. I know from personal experience how much that is done. The Saudis are loosening up some, but have a long way to go. We do the same with the Chinese.
There are limits to what we can do and still remain engaged politically. The Saudis have been very helpful in some areas behind the scenes acting as an interlocator or a banker. They [meaning private Saudis, not the government] have also been unhelpful when it comes to AQ funding radical Islamic fundamentalists.
The Obama administration has been less inclined to champion democracy and human rights on a global basis. The lack of American leadership in this area is regrettable and will in the long run, make the world a more dangerous place.