For 70 years, Saudi Arabia and the United States have made a priority of their close alliance, which means a secure supply of oil — among other things — for the superpower, and guaranteed survival and a massive supply of arms for the feudal monarchy. This idyllic relationship is looking compromised, however, to judge by the latest Saudi maneuvers. Most spectacularly, two weeks ago Riyadh rebuffed the offer of a seat on the U.N. Security Council, despite having long cherished the idea. The decision was effectively intended as a snub to Barack Obama, who the Saudis are beginning to view as an unreliable ally.
Traditionally, Saudi grievances with the United States have been settled with surreptitious diplomacy, in the best tradition of the fundamentalist monarchy. However, the progress of events in the Middle East — largely a reflection of the unstoppable Sunni-Shiite conflict — has caused the misunderstanding to snowball. Riyadh perceives Obama to be on the wrong side of the fence. It notes his lack of resolve on whether to respond militarily to Bashar al-Assad, his zigzag policy on Egypt after the fall of Mubarak and his passivity on the issues of Israeli excesses against the Palestinians and the disintegration of Iraq. But Saudi fury has been well and truly roused by the U.S. president's sudden rapprochement with Iran, aimed at preventing the ayatollahs from developing a nuclear weapon.
Iran, as a Shiite nation, is the Saudi leadership’s archenemy in the Sunni-Shiite conflict between the two main Islamic sects. A rapprochement between Washington and Tehran would erase all the time and money so far invested in patiently building a regional front against Iran. An eventual thaw [in U.S.-Iranian relations] would not only relegate Saudi Arabia to a position of less influence in the region, it would also fuel Shiite grievances and demands in numerous countries currently within Riyadh's sphere of influence.
Though Saudi Arabia is far from an ideal ally for any country that claims to be a defender of democratic principles, its relationship with the United States has served the interests of both nations for decades. Obama is currently prioritizing a nuclear agreement with Iran and the promotion of peace between Palestinians and Israelis. These objectives will be hard to achieve against the opposition of a regime whose doctrinal influence and unlimited economic resources make it a powerful peddler of influence in the Arab world.
Una alianza debilitada
El acercamiento de Obama a Irán ensancha la desconfianza saudà hacia el presidente de EE UU
A lo largo de 70 años, Arabia Saudà y Estados Unidos han considerado prioritaria una estrecha alianza que para la superpotencia significa seguridad en el abastecimiento de petróleo, pero no solo, y para la monarquÃa feudal una garantÃa de supervivencia y el suministro masivo de armamento. Ese idilio parece comprometido a juzgar por los últimos movimientos saudÃes, el más espectacular de los cuales es su brusca renuncia, hace dos semanas, a un asiento en el Consejo de Seguridad, aspiración que Riad acariciaba desde hace años. Una decisión destinada básicamente a desairar a Barack Obama, a quien los saudÃes comienzan a ver como un aliado poco fiable.
Los agravios saudÃes con EE UU se han solventado tradicionalmente con diplomacia de sordina, en la mejor tradición de la monarquÃa integrista. Pero la evolución de los acontecimientos en Oriente Próximo, reflejo en buena medida de la imparable confrontación entre chiÃes y sunÃes, ha acelerado el desencuentro. Riad percibe a Obama en el lado equivocado. Se trate de su falta de determinación para responder militarmente a Bachar el Asad, de su zigzagueante polÃtica en Egipto tras dejar caer a Mubarak o de su pasividad ante los excesos israelÃes frente a los palestinos o la descomposición de Irak. El episodio definitivo que ha atizado la furia saudà es la súbita aproximación a Irán del presidente estadounidense, en busca de un acuerdo que impida a los ayatolás llegar al arma atómica.
Whether George HW Bush or Donald J Trump, Americanimperialism is unabated—the pathetic excuses and the violentshock-and-awe tactics don’t matter; the results do.
If this electoral gridlock [in domestic policy] does occur, it may well result in Trump — like several other reelected presidents of recent decades — increasingly turning to foreign policy.
If this electoral gridlock [in domestic policy] does occur, it may well result in Trump — like several other reelected presidents of recent decades — increasingly turning to foreign policy.
What happened to this performing arts center is paradigmatic of how Trump’s second presidency ... [is] another front in a war ... to impose an autocratic regime led by a 21st century feudal lord outside of international law.