Posted on 11/08/2017 4:28:42 AM PST by SJackson
What the recent political shakeup in Saudi Arabia means for global terrorism funding.
Originally published by the Jerusalem Post.
For 70 years, Saudi Arabia served as the largest and most significant incubator of Sunni jihad. Its Wahhabist Islamic establishment funded radical mosques throughout the world. Saudi princes have supported radical Islamic clerics who have indoctrinated their followers to pursue jihad against the non-Islamic world. Saudi money stands behind most of the radical Islamic groups in the non-Islamic world that have in turn financed terrorist groups like Hamas and al-Qaida and have insulated radical Islam from scrutiny by Western governments and academics. Indeed, Saudi money stands behind the silence of critics of jihadist Islam in universities throughout the Western world.
As Mitchell Bard documented in his 2011 book, The Arab Lobby, any power pro-Israel forces in Washington, DC, have developed pales in comparison to the power of Arab forces, led by the Saudi government. Saudi government spending on lobbyists in Washington far outstrips that of any other nation. According to Justice Department disclosures from earlier this year, since 2015, Saudi Arabia vastly increased its spending on influence peddling. According to a report by The Intercept, Since 2015, the Kingdom has expanded the number of foreign agents on retainer to 145, up from 25 registered agents during the previous two-year period.
Saudi lobbyists shielded the kingdom from serious criticism after 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers were shown to be Saudi nationals. They blocked a reconsideration of the USs strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia after the attacks and in subsequent years, even as it was revealed that Princess Haifa, wife of Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to Washington at the time the September 11 attacks occurred, had financially supported two of the hijackers in the months that preceded the attacks.
The US position on Saudi Arabia cooled demonstrably during the Obama administration. This cooling was not due to a newfound concern over Saudi financial support for radical Islam in the US. To the contrary, the Obama administration was friendlier to Islamists than any previous administration. Consider the Obama administrations placement of Muslim Brotherhood supporters in key positions in the federal government. For instance, in 2010, then secretary for Homeland Security Janet Napolitano appointed Mohamed Elibiary to the departments Homeland Security Advisory Board. Elibiary had a long, open record of support both for the Muslim Brotherhood and for the Iranian regime. In his position he was instrumental in purging discussion of Islam and Jihad from instruction materials used by the US military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The Obama administrations cold relations with the Saudi regime owed to its pronounced desire to ditch the USs traditional alliance with the Saudis, the Egyptians and the USs other traditional Sunni allies in favor of an alliance with the Iranian regime.
During the same period, the Muslim Brotherhoods close ties to the Iranian regime became increasingly obvious. Among other indicators, Egypts Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated president Mohamed Morsi hosted Iranian leaders in Cairo and was poised to renew Egypts diplomatic ties with Iran before he was overthrown by the military in July 2013. Morsi permitted Iranian warships to traverse the Suez Canal for the first time in decades.
Saudi Arabia joined Egypt and the United Arab Emirates in designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group in 2014.
It was also during this period that the Saudis began warming their attitude toward Israel. Through Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, and due to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahus leading role in opposing Irans nuclear program and its rising power in the Middle East, the Saudis began changing their positions on Israel.
Netanyahus long-time foreign policy adviser, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs president Dr. Dore Gold, who authored the 2003 bestseller Hatreds Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism which exposed Saudi Arabias role in promoting jihadist Islam, spearheaded a process of developing Israels security and diplomatic ties with Riyadh. Those ties, which are based on shared opposition to Irans regional empowerment, led to the surprising emergence of a working alliance between Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE with Israel during Israels 2014 war with Hamas the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.
It is in the context of Saudi Arabias reassessment of its interests and realignment of strategic posture in recent years that the dramatic events of the past few days in the kingdom must be seen.
Saturdays sudden announcement that a new anti-corruption panel headed by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and the near simultaneous announcement of the arrest of more than two dozen royal family members, cabinet ministers and prominent businessmen is predominantly being presented as a power seizure by the crown prince. Amid widespread rumors that King Salman will soon abdicate the throne to his son, it is reasonable for the 32-year-old crown prince to work to neutralize all power centers that could threaten his ascension to the throne.
But there is clearly also something strategically more significant going on. While many of the officials arrested over the weekend threaten Mohammeds power, they arent the only ones that he has purged. In September Mohammed arrested some 30 senior Wahhabist clerics and intellectuals. And Saturdays arrest of the princes, cabinet ministers and business leaders was followed up by further arrests of senior Wahhabist clerics.
At the same time, Mohammed has been promoting clerics who espouse tolerance for other religions, including Judaism and Christianity. He has removed the Saudi religious polices power to conduct arrests and he has taken seemingly credible steps to finally lift the kingdom-wide prohibition on women driving.
At the same time, Mohammed has escalated the kingdoms operations against Irans proxies in Yemen.
And of course, on Saturday, he staged the resignation of Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri amid Hariris allegations that Hezbollah and Iran were plotting his murder, much as they stood behind the 2005 assassination of his father, prime minister Rafiq Hariri.
There can be little doubt that there was coordination between the Saudi regime and the Trump administration regarding Saturdays actions. The timing of the administrations release last week of most of the files US special forces seized during their 2011 raid of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Ladens compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan was likely not a coincidence.
The files, which the Obama administration refused to release, make clear that Obamas two chief pretensions that al-Qaida was a spent force by the time US forces killed bin Laden, and that Iran was interested in moderating its behavior were both untrue. The documents showed that al-Qaidas operations remained a significant worldwide threat to US interests.
And perhaps more significantly, they showed that Iran was al-Qaidas chief state sponsor. Much of al-Qaidas leadership, including bin Ladens sons, operated from Iran. The notion touted by Obama and his administration that Shiite Iranians and Sunni terrorists from al-Qaida and other groups were incapable of cooperating was demonstrated to be an utter fiction by the documents.
Their publication now, as Saudi Arabia takes more determined steps to slash its support for radical Islamists, and separate itself from Wahhabist Islam, draws a clear distinction between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Given Saudi Arabias record, and the kingdoms 70-year alliance with Wahhabist clerics, it is hard to know whether Mohammeds move signals an irrevocable breach between the House of Saud and the Wahhabists.
But the direction is clear. With Hariris removal from Lebanon, the lines between the forces of jihad and terrorism led by Iran, and the forces that oppose them are clearer than ever before. And the necessity of acting against the former and helping the latter has similarly never been more obvious.
Muhammad bin Salmans dismissal of Prince Mutaib bin Abdullah from his position could prove to be a serious miscalculation. MbS is already unpopular with large parts of the Royal Saudi Land Forces (RSLF) for his disastrous and impetuous war in Yemen. The Saudi led war in Yemen has proceeded from failure to failure and has put tremendous pressure on the inadequately trained and led RSLF.
The National Guard has largely been spared deployment to Saudi Arabias dangerous and porous border with Yemen. This is largely due to Prince Mutaib bin Abdullahs efforts to thwart MbS war in Yemen, which is regarded by many within the House of Saud as reckless, dangerous, and deeply immoral.
Dissatisfaction with what many of the old guard regard as an upstart prince could easily manifest itself among the tribal leaders that make up the corps of the National Guard where there is considerable loyalty to the Shammar branch of the al-Saud family.
The National Guard is a potent force within Saudi Arabia and is but one of many potential pools of discontent. Muhammad bin Salmans betrayal of decades of rule by consensus and consultation in favor of determined autocracy has undoubtedly made enemies of hundreds, if not thousands, of wealthy and influential princes and businessmen. These princes and businessmen are unlikely to wait for their invitation to the Ritz Carlton.
and here is the doom and gloom prognosis:
We will know in a few days if the info in this thread is correct:
According to well informed source, Saudi Crown Prince (MBS) has lost with his latest move to force Saad Hariri’s resignation. Yesterday, head of Lebanese General Security Abbas Ibrahim was in Paris and was able to convince the French that Hariri was indeed detained in Saudi =>
https://twitter.com/EHSANI22/status/929470950990630912
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.