Saudi king's outburst reflects US Mideast policy failures

[rodeodance]

Source: afp



Saudi king's outburst reflects US Mideast policy failures
by Sylvie Lanteaume
2 hours, 32 minutes ago



WASHINGTON (AFP) - Saudi Arabia's unexpectedly harsh criticism of the US occupation of Iraq marked a turning point in the complex relations between Washington and its key Sunni ally that raises serious questions about the Bush administration's Middle East policy, analysts say.

Speaking to a summit meeting of Arab leaders last week in Riyadh, Saudi King Abdullah referred to the US troop presence in Iraq as an "illegitimate foreign occupation."

US officials were dumbfounded by the portrayal of the costly US military operation that President George W. Bush defends as an effort being carried out at the request of the Iraq government to help stabilize a fledgling democracy.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice telephoned the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir, to seek an explanation of the king's remarks.

But she refrained from taking the matter up directly with her Saudi counterpart, Prince Saud al-Faisal, in an apparent bid to avoid aggravating the rift.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/ussaudiiraqdiplomacy;_ylt=Aqqz6jbkKyT6PYHpMoVRhiDMWM0F

---

I wonder if Poppy Bush and Baker are working behind the scenes to calm things down?

[cassiepriam]

1. What? Maximizing oil profits is not always the best policy??

[cassiepriam]

2. There is no doubt that repugs are trying hard to clean up Shrub's

messes. Daddy included. They have been doing it Shrub's whole life.

[Kolesar]

3. bush* wanted a "democracy", allowed a vote in Iraq, so Iraq voted to become a Shiite country

I can see why the Sunni Saudis are going nuts over this. Our "president" is an amatuer and had no idea what would happen after the invasion and after a vote.

[kaal]

4. The US Military deliberately installed a Shia Government.....

It didn't happen by mistake. When Bremmer was sent to Iraq, he did everything in his power to sideline Iraqi Sunnis and empower the Shia... He stopped the return of the Iraqi army to help restore order. He stop negotiations with Sunni trial leaders. And in the first election, which were approved by the US Admin, the Sunnis did not even vote!

A Government with proportional representation in Iraq is unworkable. The Government should have been formed with both Sunnis and Shia, if the Occupying US forces truly wanted stability for Iraq.

Neither the US nor the UK have proportional representative election...! Why enforce such a system on Iraq, knowing full well it will only empower the Shia...... The formula for Civil perfectly installed by Bremmer.....




But she refrained from taking the matter up directly with her Saudi counterpart, Prince Saud al-Faisal, in an apparent bid to avoid aggravating the rift.


This is clearly an acknowledgment by rice that the US is in the wrong.

[SemperEadem]

5. This begs a re-screening of Farenheit 911

I watched it again last night.

[bemildred]

6. The interesting point is that this calls into question the longstanding

British-US-Saudi understanding in which oil is traded for protection and support, I presume on the basis that the Bushites have made the Saudi position far more precarious than it was already. If the King is really reconsidering his options, that is a watershed event.

[rocktivity]

7. What part of "illegitimate foreign occupation" did Condi not understand

in view of the fact that the KING of Saudi Arabia said it, and ESPECIALLY in view of the fact that the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis?

:eyes:
rocknation

[LynnTheDem]

8. 'Condi, you're not going to democratize Iraq,'

-Brent Scowcroft

[wordpix]

9. this is most interesting: one would assume * had Saudi support to oust Saddam in the 1st place

I can't imagine SA would have let Cowboy George invade a Sunni-held country without screaming to high heaven that SA opposed the move back in '02; thus, it appeared SA supported the move. However, SA must have figured that with a Shiite majority, Iraq would be run by the majority once Saddam was removed.

I have been totally baffled by SA's silence all these years. Perhaps SA leaders thought * knew what he was doing with the US military. Perhaps SA wanted * to grab the oil b/c SA could share in the spoils---SA's reserves are reportedly beyond peak and Iraq has untapped reserves.

Then there are the financial questions. If SA wants us in Iraq, is it making (secret) payments to keep us there? It doesn't seem that's the case since US taxpayers have paid out something like $300 billion so far.

Finally, there's the Saudi connection to 911, and Bush's flying out dozens of members of the bin Laden family within days of 9-11.

Now this. The whole thing is very puzzling.

[kitty1]

10. I wonder if the upcoming Israeli/Palestinean peace negotiations

with the Saudis has something to do with the freeze on relations lately.
Olmert has shown legitimage interest in the Saudi peace initiative and wants to get together soon with the Saudi heads of states to discuss it.
By questioning American foreign policies, the Saudis can impress to the Palestineans that they are not American puppets. They are on board with the Palestineans and understand their issues.
By throwing some insults to the U.S. government, and cancelling the upcoming state dinner in Washington, this gives a clear message that they are not bending to Washington's wishes.
This peace plan has been in the works for awhile now, and I don't think the Saudi's want to mess up here.
Of course there could be other points of contention here, but this could be a plausible reason.