Where there is no lion, fox plays with its tail

By: Nabi Sonboli*

Saudi ambassador Khalid, posing with Zionist Henry Kissinger

Tehran, Aug 4, IRNA – Saudi Arabia is fabricating pretexts to coax the US to use its sources for confronting Iran, an analyst said warning Washington not to walk into a trap laid by an ally.

Saudi ambassador Prince Khalid posing with Bush Sr. and 
Bush Jr. who wrought havoc in Iraq. 

Prince Khalid bin Salman, the Saudi Ambassador to Washington, in an article published by Arab News on July 23rd, rightly quotes philosopher George Santayana as having said that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” In the article, he accused Iran of everything and compares Iran to Germany in 1938 under Hitler, arguing that Iran must be confronted, not appeased. 

Khalid, begins his article by mentioning his birthday three decades ago, but the history of Iran-US and Iran-Saudi relations did not begin with his birthday. When Mr. Ambassador was born, the war that Saudi Arabia and Iraq imposed on Iran for 8 years had just ended; a war that shaped Iranian strategic culture after the revolution and is imprinted on the minds of all Iranians. In the following, I will try to comment on some of his arguments briefly. Of course, the Saudi and UAE Ambassadors in Washington, and their lobbyists, are following Netanyahu line on Iran.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has not pursued an expansionist foreign policy during the past four decades. “Resistance” as the main pillar of Iran’s foreign policy is essentially a defensive posture. What others, including Saudis and Americans, expect from Iran is appeasement and retreat. Contrary to what Ambassador Khalid tries to argue, it’s the Saudis that have followed an aggressive foreign policy, supported by checkbook diplomacy and “free-riding”. The Iraqi war against Iran could not have happen and endured for eight years without Saudi support. The Saudi government paid more than 40 billion dollars to the Iraqi dictator to fight against Iran. That war imposed more than 200000 casualties, 600000 wounded, 2 million refugees and one trillion dollar in costs on Iranians. That experience shaped Iranian strategic culture and we will not let it happen ever again. 

Two years later, Saddam invaded Kuwait and attacked Saudi Arabia with the money and weapons provided by Saudi government during the Iraqi war against Iran. Saudi government invited the US to defend the Kingdom against Iraq and free Kuwait from Iraqi invasion in 1990 and asked the US to keep Saddam in power and let him kill Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis who were against him. The US-UK war against Iraq continued during 1990s. In 2003, the US had no option but to leave Saddam or get rid of him. Now, three decades later, the war trap that Saudi Arabia dragged US soldiers into in 1990s continues. It cost Iraq and the US more than 4 trillion dollars and thousands of casualties. This is the first result of America following the Saudi’s “wise” advice and expansionist policies in the Persian Gulf region. If Saudis had not supported Saddam, none of these wars and conflicts could have happened.

During the 1990s, Saudi Arabia created, supported and recognized the Taliban in Afghanistan. According to New York Times, “leading Saudi prince, Turki al-Faisal, hand a check for one billion Saudi riyals … to a top Taliban leader.” The Saudi lobby in Washington misled the US with the “Taliban project” to create “balance” against Iran and secure Afghanistan for oil transit, while even the European countries were against Taliban. In August 1998, Taliban killed Iranian diplomats and attacked Iranian cities on the border. They hosted the Al-Qaeda organization that would go on to kill 3000 innocent Americans on Sep. 11th. The Taliban is still the main threat to peace and security in Afghanistan 18 years after their removal from power by the US. The group, created and supported by Saudi Arabia and UAE, imposed billions of dollars and thousands of casualties on Afghanistan and the US. This is the second result of following expansionist Saudi policies and “wise” advice. 

In Syria, Saudi Arabia mobilized extremist elements to bring “democracy and freedom” to that country. Saudi Arabia's foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir said 'Bashar al-Assad will leave — have no doubt about it. He will either leave by a political process or he will be removed by force.' The Saudi effort to destabilize Syria and remove Assad from power led to destruction of Syria and expansion of ISIS influence. ISIS originally was created in Iraq, expanded to Syria and the rest of the world. Thousands of extremist from all around the world joined them, including Saudi citizens. They had a clear identity, ideology, money and training. Where did all these elements come from? According to a report published by Sofan Goup in 2015, 2,500 people from Saudi Arabia joined ISIS. In addition, according to Brooking Institutes, most of the people supporting ISIS on tweeter were Saudi Citizens. 

Saudi and UAE expansionist policies in Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, Lebanon, Libya, Egypt, Turkey and other countries in recent years are clear enough. Military intervention in Bahrain, intervention in Libya, supporting military coup in other countries, blockades and coup attempt in Qatar, detaining Lebanon’s prime minister and so on, demonstrate the expansionist and aggressive nature of Saudi foreign policy. The only change that has been recently witnessed in Saudi foreign policy is a shift from covert expansionism to overt expansionism with more military muscle. What have Saudi Arabia and the UAE accomplished in these cases? 

Saudi Ambassador accuses Iran of “apocalyptic pursuit of nuclear weapons”. After the 1979 revolution, Iran stopped almost all nuclear activities and Iranian leader took positions against all nuclear weapons. In 1988, Saudi Arabia was the first country in the region that acquired nuclear-capable missiles. Like other weapons, Saudi nuclear policy has been to keep the option of buying a nuclear weapon open. Prince Turki Al Faisal announced 'I have suggested that the Gulf Cooperation Council members should carefully weigh all options, including acquiring a nuclear deterrent if the Iranian leadership succeed in building a nuclear weapon”. Iran has never reciprocated these threats. In fact, Iran was among the first countries that joined NPT and has implemented all of its commitments. According to the 2015 nuclear deal, Iran reaffirmed its NPT commitment never to pursue a nuclear weapon. The IAEA has published 12 reports since JCPOA implementation, all of which confirmed that Iran has kept its commitments according to the deal. Is Saudi Arabia ready to provide the same level of transparency as Iran has on all of its nuclear activities during the past 4 decades? 

Khalid claims that “Saudi Arabia’s vision is inclusive, guided by the rule of law and international order, and promoting peace, stability and economic prosperity for all.” The main problem with Saudi Arabia is its exclusionist mentality and approach. The Middle East has a mosaic social composition. Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shiites in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, Kurds in Iraq and Syria and all ethnicities, sects and other minorities are parts of their societies and must be included. Only an inclusive system can survive in the Middle East. However, Saudi Arabia has always followed and supported exclusionist systems both at home and abroad. About 10% of Saudi population are Shiite and the same number of people are Sunnis in Iran. Compare the role of Shiites in Saudi Arabia with Sunnis in Iran. Twenty members of Parliament in Iran are Sunnis; they have their voices and positions at local levels. However, many believe their role in Iranian governance should be expanded. 

Khalid blames Iran for promoting sectarianism. In general, Shiites are in minority in the Islamic world and Iran suffer from sectarianism more than any other country. Iran good relations with Sunnis, Christians, Jews and different ethnicities like Arabs, Turks, Turkmens and Kurds in the region proves that Iran support more inclusive systems. Iran’s role in the Bonn conference and its role in supporting the inclusive system in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran peace plans for Syria and Yemen, all demonstrate that contrary to the Saudi Ambassador claim, Iran supports more inclusive and democratic systems. The Saudi invasion of Bahrain and their support for military coups in the region show that they do not believe in democracy and inclusiveness. They do not have an inclusive system at home to promote it. Just last year, the Saudi military destroyed the historical area of Awamiya, a Shia-majority city inside Saudi Arabia. Mohammed bin Salman do not even tolerate his family.

Saudi Ambassador believes that Iran is responsible for regional instabilities. After 15 years of supporting instability in Iraq, Saudis just recently changed their position. Still many people hesitate to believe that it is a real change. Saudi Arabia invaded Bahrain and Yemen against the will and consent of their peoples. Saudi approach toward Qatar, Syria and Lebanon have endangered “order, peace, stability and prosperity” of these countries. Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese, Afghans and Yemenis all have severely suffered from local and regional conflicts.

Iran has legitimate interests and security concerns in the region. Tehran has repeatedly asked for inclusive regional mechanisms for security dialogue. Saudis have always rejected dialogue and peace initiatives. In the last case, Mohammed bin Salman rejected Kuwaiti initiative for regional dialogue and subsequently declared that “we will work so that the battle is on their side, inside Iran”. The Saudi System is based on submission, and Mohammed Bin Salman expects everyone in the Persian Gulf, the Middle East and even in Washington to submit to the King. Saudi efforts to prevent JCPOA and then its efforts to undermine it, demonstrate how threatening dialogue and intentional law are for them. 

According to the Khalid’s paper, “The Iranian constitution calls for spreading “the ideological mission of jihad throughout the world.” During the Iraqi war against Islamic Republic, before Khalid was born, Iranian authorities preferred to use the term “holly defense” not “Jihad”. After the 1979 revolution, the concept of “Jihad” was used in Iran more for peaceful and development purposes. Islamic revolutionaries established “construction Jihad” to support villagers and build roads; “Scientific Jihad” to support and encourage more research and education; and “Agricultural jihad” to modernize the agricultural infrastructures and trainings in rural areas. “Jihadists” ideology all around the world come from Saudi Arabia, not Iran. Contrary to Khalid argument, during the past decades, Iran has exported more experts, not extremists.

Khalid mentions, “We are aggressively fighting Daesh and Al-Qaeda, and the extremist ideologies that underpin them.” To differentiate Saudi and Iranian policies toward terrorism, he says “The difference is that in Saudi Arabia these terrorists are on the run, while in Iran they are running the country.” In 2001, that Iran president Mohammad Khatami asked the UN to call it the “Year of dialogue among civilizations”, Saudi and UAE terrorists killed 3,000 innocent women and men in the US. He claims that the terrorist “running Iran”, while it was a coalition of Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian and Lebanese forces that prevented ISIS from capturing Bagdad, Erbil, Damascus and Beirut while 3,000 Saudi citizens were among ISIS fighters. Since 2001, many Iranian officers and soldiers have lost their life in fighting against terrorists.

Saudi Ambassador tries to depict Iran as being against modernity and Saudi Arabia as supporting it. The Saudi Arabia just recently let the women to drive and opened cinemas, while Iranian women had benefited these and much more for decade. Iranian women got their voting power in 1962 while Saudi women still struggle for that. The first Iranian woman got her driver’s license 76 years ago while the women of Saudi Arabia got their licenses in 2018. 

According to the Saudi Ambassador “Iran’s official fiscal budgets show that between 2014 and 2017, “the defense budget grew by 71 percent, from $9.29 billion to $15.9 billion… and the budget rose even further last year to $19 billion.” Based on SIPRI report in 2017, Saudi Arabia with 69 Billion dollars, had the third military budget in the world after the US and China, while Iran military budget was less than 15 billion. The Saudis spend 10.3% of their GDP on defense while Iran spends only 3.1%. During the past 5 years (P)GCC countries has spent more than 500 billion dollars on military expenditure while Iran has spent less than 60 billion dollars. This is not the military budget of a regional and global threat, as Khalid compares Iran with Germany in 1938. Iran military budget proves Iranian peaceful intention and Saudi military expenditures confirm their aggressive and expansionist approach. 

Unfortunately, we live in a highly unstable region. We have the experiences of the Iraq war, USSR and US invasion of Afghanistan, the US invasion of Iraq, Syrian and Yemeni civil wars, military coups in neighboring countries and political instabilities all over the Middle East and beyond. We cannot allow our country to become vulnerable to any kind of threat and instability again. In any deal, Iran security is the main priority. Iran will keep all its defensive capabilities in any negotiation with any country. 

Saudi Ambassador refers to the Obama redline on Syria and by quoting the US officials including Trump, tries to encourage the US to confront Iran. He compares Iran with Germany in 1938 and ask the US and the world to “stand up against Iran”, “pressure Iran”, “contain Iran”, and “confront Iran with seriousness and intent”. It seems that he has got upset from paying checks and watching inaction and hearing that “something must be done.” He tries to encourage the American people to send their sons and daughters to fight and save King Salman from the troubles that he has made for himself and others in Persian Gulf and the Middle East. Saudi officials had taken this approach before when they asked the US to “cut the head of snake”, while September 11th demonstrated to the world, that “the head of snake” is inside Saudi Arabia and that when President Trump spoke against terrorism in Riyadh last year, the main audiences of his speech were in the room.

I have traveled to many countries, however my best trip was to Saudi Arabia. I don’t’ think that Khalid Bin Salman or Mohammed Bin Salman are properly representing the Saudi People. The system is not representative. Many wise men and women there look for a better life and more freedom, peace and stability for all. The root causes of problems in the Middle East, based on Arab Development Reports in recent years, include inefficient governments, exclusion, inequality, frustration, pervasive discrimination, expansion of urbanization, population growth, environmental problems, unemployment, among others. Military interventions, securitization of the region, dictatorships, militarization of systems and societies have exacerbated the situation. Iran certainly will benefit from modernization, development, moderation and an open-minded and inclusive system in Saudi Arabia. Although we have suffered greatly from malign Saudi behavior in the region and all around the world, especially in Washington, Tehran does not look for confrontation with neighboring countries.

In sum, Khalid seems to be worried, and he should be. Former Vice President Joe Biden was right when he said, “our biggest problem is our allies.” As an Iranian proverb says, “a wise enemy is better than a stupid friend”. Obama was smart to not go “walking into a trap—one laid both by allies and by adversaries” for him in Syria. I do not think that Trump is so naïve to walk into a trap prepared for him by Khalid and his brother MBS. The Saudi government wants the US to fight for them, and impose another 10 trillion dollars on American taxpayers. It seems that Khalid has not been able to understand “America First” yet. The US needs time and energy to revitalize its economy and make it more competitive to be able to compete with rising economies. As the proverb says, “While the cat is away, the mice will play”.



*Nabi Sonboli is an international affairs expert