by Yoram Ettinger
U.S. House Members and
Senators are increasingly approached by panicky leaders of Saudi Arabia,
Bahrain, the UAE, Oman and Kuwait, who have always considered the U.S.
global leadership and unilateral national security action to be their
life insurance policy. These leaders are concerned about the adverse
ripple effects of the lowered U.S. global profile on their own survival.
Moreover, they consider the U.S. engagement with Iran their worst
nightmare. They are puzzled by the U.S. lack of awareness that a retreat
from the trenches of Islamic terrorism bolsters the presence of
terrorists' sleeper cells on the U.S. mainland.
Riyadh is aware that
Saudi Arabia and other pro-U.S. Arab oil-producing Gulf states -- and
not Israel -- would be the prime target for a nuclear Iran, ravaging the
supply and price of oil, which would devastate the economy of the U.S.
and the Free World. The Saudis know that -- unlike North Korea -- Iran
is driven by an imperialistic vision, encompassing the Persian Gulf as
the first stage and then the Sunni Muslim countries.
Riyadh is convinced
that a nuclear Iran could trigger a collapse of the pro-U.S. Gulf
regimes, by blackmailing and further fueling subversion in the Gulf
States, including the Shiite-populated Saudi oil-rich province of Hasa.
Riyadh is mindful of
the impact of a nuclear Iran on the intensification of Islamic
terrorism, which haunts every pro-U.S. Arab regime in the Middle East.
Eyad Abu Shakra, the
managing editor of the Saudi royal family-controlled, prestigious
London-based daily, Asharq al Awsat, wrote on October 17, 2013 about
"the rapid decline of the U.S. on the stage of world politics:
Washington's rhetoric was initially loud, talking of 'red-lines.'
However, neither Bashar Al-Assad nor Vladimir Putin and his counterpart
in Beijing cared much about this…. America remains strong, despite the
narrow-mindedness of its politicians…. Obama is haggling in the regional
bazaar as if he were a petty retail trader, not the head of a massive
international conglomerate…."
Amir Taheri, a
globally-respected Asharq al Awsat columnist, warned on October 4, 2013:
"Today, Americans are advised that they may not be safe in more than 40
countries. The Obama retreat could sharply increase that number. The
U.S. needs and deserves something better than a 'Fortress America'
strategy…. Bully powers may seize the opportunity provided by the U.S.
retreat.… The Khomeini regime's heightened activism in Afghanistan,
Iraq, Syria and Lebanon is yet one more example…."
Riyadh is concerned
that the U.S. may ignore President Rouhani's -- and other Iranian
leaders' - track record of masterful dissimulations, deception,
concealment and non-compliance.
Amir Taheri, who is
intimately networked with Saudi leadership, wrote on October 11, 2013:
"For more than three decades, the Mullahs and their associates have used
[an] arsenal of deception against foreign powers and internal
adversaries…. One [example] is taqiyya which means hiding one's true
faith in order to deceive others in a hostile environment. Another term
is kitman which means keeping an adversary guessing by playing one's
hand close to the chest. A third is do-pahlu which means an utterance
that could have two opposite meanings at the same time. The closest
equivalent in English is double-talk…. In New York, Rouhani tried to
seduce the Americans with smiles and sweet words…."
Riyadh knows that a
nuclear Iran would generate a tailwind for the Arab Tsunami, which does
not provide a transition to democracy, but to exacerbated violence. It
recognizes that the Middle East zero-sum-game is not between democracy
and tyranny, but between tyrannical military-backed regimes on the one
hand and tyrannical anti-U.S. Islamic, terrorist, rogue regimes on the
other hand. Riyadh is cognizant of the fact that a nuclear Iran would
tilt the Middle East balance, decisively, in favor of anti-U.S. rogue
regimes at the expense of military-backed regimes.
The well-connected
Saudi managing editor, Eyad Abu Shakra, wrote on October 3, 2013 on
"American regional blunders: Washington accepting Iran as a partner in
the project of hegemony in the Middle East, including its full control
over Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, in exchange for Iran's developing its
nuclear capabilities [supposedly] for peaceful purposes only, rather
than production of nuclear weapons…."
Riyadh dreads the devastating non-conventional arms race, in the Middle East and beyond, which would follow a nuclear Iran.
Amir Taheri noted on
Oct. 19, 2013: "There is consensus that if Iran were to build a nuclear
arsenal, it could trigger a regional arms race with incalculable
consequences. Over the past two decades, the U.N. Security Council has
unanimously passed six resolutions to force Iran to abandon activities
that could lead to a nuclear arsenal. Iran has ignored the resolutions
but managed to buy time through dilatory tactics and
"talks-about-talks…."
Riyadh is concerned
that 28 years of unilateral and multilateral U.S.-led sanctions,
accompanied by diplomatic pressure and cyber sabotage, have failed to
deter Iran's pursuit of nuclear capabilities; 60 years of sanctions on
North Korea have produced a nuclear rogue regime; the U.S. focus on
sanctions and engagement has provided Teheran with more time to obtain
nuclear capabilities; sanctions have devastated Iran's economy, but have
not made a dent on Iran's nuclearization; and, it was the military
option -- and not sanctions -- which forced Iraq's withdrawal from
Kuwait and the granting of independence to the former provinces of
Yugoslavia.
Will the U.S. heed the Saudi concern and learn from history by avoiding -- rather than repeating -- past mistakes?
Yoram Ettinger
Source: www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=6097
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment