Today’s Allies Are Tomorrow’s Enemies

By Philip Giraldi

"Information Clearing House" -  One might postulate that the United States is regularly supporting so-called allies whose very nature will eventually generate blowback that will do terrible damage to actual American interests. The recent example of the mass shooting at the Pensacola Naval Air Station in Florida by Saudi Second Lieutenant Mohammed Alshamrani is illustrative. Alshamrani killed three American sailors while three other Saudi students filmed what was taking place, presumably for posting on social media.
Though the U.S. and The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia have no actual alliance, the American and Saudi militaries have a relationship that began during the Second World War. Currently, Washington supports Riyadh as a force multiplier and extension of U.S. power in the Persian Gulf region to serve as a check on what if perceives to be as hostile Iran. Saudi Arabia, nurturing its own regional ambitions, clearly sees Iran as its principal enemy. As the White House also appears keen to do whatever is necessary to bring about regime change in Tehran, the tendency in Washington to serve as an apologist for whatever Riyadh does will continue for the foreseeable future. And, as an added bonus, the Saudis buy billions of dollars’ worth of American made weapons annually.
Someone has to train the people who fly the expensive warplanes, so Saudi Air Force “students” are sent to American bases like Pensacola where they undergo language and flight training that is normally conducted by civilian contractors. The student pilots, surely carefully screened by Saudi security, would be unlikely candidates for staging a terrorist attack in the United States, but the Alshamrani incident suggests that there is more dissidence bubbling beneath the surface than is apparent from the rosy assurances about The Kingdom coming out of the White House and the Royal Palace in Riyadh.
The investigation of Alshamrani continues, but it seems clear that  he was unhappy with aspects of America’s pro-Israel and interventionist foreign policy. He also connected with radical websites on social media and his colleagues report that he would periodically return to the U.S. from home leave in Saudi Arabia “more religious.” On the night before the incident, he showed a film that included a mass shooting.

Alshamrani is just one element in the considerable potential downside inherent in the undeclared bilateral relationship. Apart from the regional instability created by the fact that Washington has to look the other way while the Saudis use American weapons to carry out genocide in neighboring Yemen, many observers believe that Saudi Arabia is basically unstable. Its prevailing fundamentalist Islamic sect referred to as Wahhabism is backward looking and hostile to the United States and the West. Some have even suggested that a large majority of ordinary Saudis, i.e. not those who benefit from the bilateral relationship, hate the U.S. One recalls that fifteen out of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals.

All of which means that the United States is training and arming people who just might turn their training and weapons against Washington if the al-Saud royal family cannot stay in power. The situation is somewhat comparable to that in Afghanistan, where so-called “green-on-blue” incidents in which Afghan army recruits kill their foreign trainers occur on a regular basis. The chief difference is that should the Saudi dissidents gain power, they would have a huge and much more lethally sophisticated arsenal to play around with.

The current situation with the House of Saud is not good. It is a regime that is under considerable pressure because of its corruption. Internationally, it has few friends due to its widely condemned war in Yemen as well as from the consequences arising over the killing and dismembering in Istanbul of Jamal Khashoggi. The situation also invites comparison with other current and past U.S. relationships in the region. Washington props up an unpopular and unstable regime headed by President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in Egypt while also funding and training the country’s military. In the past, the U.S. was the main arms supplier for the Shah’s Iran, ignoring abuses committed by the regime because Iran was perceived to be a major regional power, reliably stable and apparently western looking.Other regional powers are watching how the situation involving the American presence in Saudi Arabia develops. Recently Iran’s leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei commented on media reports that the Saudis would be constructing U.S. provided nuclear reactors. He said "I do not know of any regime in the region and perhaps the world as bad as the Saudi government. It is not only despotic, dictatorial, corrupt and tyrannical but also sycophantic.  [The Americans] want to supply [the Saudis] with nuclear equipment. They have announced to build missile manufacturing centers for it [and] they see no problem because Saudi Arabia depends on them and belongs to them. Of course, if they build them, I personally will not be upset because I know that God willing [all the weapons] will fall into the hands of Muslim Mujahedin [for use against the Americans] in the not too distant future.”
The United States is also in trouble with its other major regional partner in the Middle East, Israel. As is the case with Saudi Arabia, the United States has no actual alliance or pact with the Jewish state, though such an arrangement is currently being considered. As in the case of Saudi Arabia, the United States has no say in the military actions being undertaken by its client Israel. The Jewish state regularly bombs targets in Gaza, Syria and in Lebanon, just as the Saudis do in Yemen. As the United States is the arms supplier to both nations and is more-or-less the de facto guarantor of a one-sided stability in the region, it has self-assumed responsibilities without having any input into the decisions making process. Trump’s obsession with destroying Iran, which has promised to do in his next term, makes him blind to the deficiencies in the allies he seeks to use to that end.
The situation with Israel is particularly dangerous as the Jewish state possesses a nuclear arsenal and it is widely believed that many in its military command structure are prepared to use those devices against Iran. In 2015, Israeli defense minister Moshe Ya’alon explained how Israel might have to strike Iran hard to prevent a long war. He cited the examples of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and then describing the process for making such a decision as “at the end, we might take certain steps.”
Either way, the United States of America is burdened with a number of false allies that use the relationship with Washington to enable their own schemes. If and when the whole house of cards begins to collapse, the U.S. will plausibly find itself with no friends and confronted by enemies that it empowered and also helped to train and equip.

Philip Giraldi is Ph.D., Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest. A former CIA Case Officer and Army Intelligence Officer who spent twenty years overseas in Europe and the Middle East working terrorism cases. He holds a BA with honors from the University of Chicago and an MA and PhD in Modern History from the University of London. 

Yemeni Resistance to Shaykh Hamza Yusuf: Ready or Not, Here We Come!

It seems like everyone and their mother (including myself) 
penned a response to influential American scholar Shaykh 
Hamza Yusuf's claim in a viral video that Muslim's in the 
Middle East are "not ready" to fight off their oppressors.

But the best rejoinder came from the barefooted Yemeni 
Resistance, which, less than a week later, shockingly set 
ablaze the world's biggest oil refinery Aramco in Saudi 
Arabia, running up oil prices 18% and pushing down 
major stock markets in one swift move.

The poorest Arab country, Yemen has produced a strong 
resistance movement despite suffering death, devastation, 
and starvation after a coalition led by Saudi Arabia, along 
with the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.),  started bombing 
and blockading the Yemenis four years ago for overthrowing 
a repressive Saudi-backed regime.

The fearless Yemeni Resistance has also warned the U.A.E. 
of missile strikes on their port city of Dubai if they don't 
pack up and leave their country.

Guess who lives part-time in the U.A.E. working 
on a government-sponsored "peace forum"?

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf!

Now, tell me, who needs to get "ready"?

Collapse of Mecca summit, a stain on Saudi Arabia’s character

 

Perhaps no country felt alone in Mecca’s emergency summit like Saudi Arabia did. The summits that were set up to isolate Iran, and according to many analysts, led to greater isolation of the king and the government of Saudi Arabia — the 14th regular session of the “Organization of Islamic Cooperation” held in the holy city of Mecca on Saturday (June 1). Riyadh also held two extraordinary summits along with this summit that held in Mecca on Friday (2, June).

Analysts believe that Saudi Arabia organized the conference to achieve many goals and by identifying them we can decide the success or failure of this conference for the Saudi Arabian government.

The first goal in organizing these summits was the launch of a military equipment exhibition in the Yemeni war which was held at the Mecca airport. In fact, the Saudi government wanted to provoke public sentiment against the legitimate defense of Yemen against the Saudi invasion by displaying the Yemeni weapons in the holy city of Mecca during the holy month of Ramadan.

However, Saudi Arabia did this in the same fashions Americans once did it and the leaders did not welcome the exhibition, and at the same time, the countries refused to support Saudi Arabia’s war.

This showed that the position of the oppressed and oppressor is still preserved, and nations continue to believe that the Saudi-led alliance is massacring Yemeni people.

There is another issue, along with showing Saudi Arabia’s oppressed position in Yemen war in the exhibition. Saudi Arabia has proven by organizing such exhibitions that it is in trouble by the war in Yemen and is seeking support from the Arab countries for a mediation line between Ansarullah and Saudi Arabia to end the war. A war, which began with direct support from the United States and Britain, but has not yet achieved any its goals in Yemen.

And the second issue of organizing these conferences is Iran. The closing statement of the Arab League Summit includes 10 clauses, all of which somehow condemn the regional role and foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it seems that according to Saudi Arabia, the Middle East does not face any other “problem” except Iran.

This statement accused Iran of giving Yemenis missiles to fire at Saudi Arabia, supporting the Houthi Ansarullah, interfering in Bahrain’s internal affairs as well as in Syria.

And at the end, it calls on Arab countries to join forces to restore stability to the region and combat Iran’s “interference” in internal affairs of the countries.

Similar parallels are also found in the closing statement of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council. The last four sections of the 9-section statement of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council are dedicated to Iran. In this context, Iran has been called to respect the international obligations and good neighborly relations and not to risk the security of the region and the free flow of oil.

In these statements, the council not only failed to mention the major factors of destabilization, such as the occupation of the Zionist regime, the invasion of Yemen, intervention in Syria, the support of the West and its allies from terrorist groups and extremists, US interventions in the region, it also practically supported US policies in the region.

However, with all the efforts of Saudi Arabia to isolate Iran, the Iraqi President Barham Salih’s full-fledged defense of Tehran and the protest against the inclusion of the name of the Islamic Republic in the closing statement, has shown that the disagreements over Saudi political goals were serious in Mecca’s summits. Indeed, the fact that most heads of states did not mention Iran in their speeches, as well as Qatar’s disagreements with Saudi Arabia in the face of a friendly relationship with Iran and active diplomacy of Kuwait and Oman, showed that Saudi Arabia has faced a defeat in the fight of Iran’s isolation.

Saudi Arabia’s attempt to mobilize the votes of neighboring and Arab countries is an endless process that the United States and the Zionist regime are pursuing against the Islamic Republic.

In the same vein, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani also called on Islamic countries’ leaders on Friday to take advantage of the opportunity of this summit to deal with the dangerous conspiracy of the “deal of century” and the defense of Palestine.

But it seems that instead of facing the main sources of insecurity in the region, such as the Zionist regime, Saudi has lifted the sword against the Islamic Republic of Iran, and only seeks hostility.

Bread revolution in Sudan

By Ramin Hossein Abadian

TEHRAN - The rise of bread price along with loss of a large part of Sudan’s resources and other issues over the years have triggered protests in the African country.

udan has been witnessing mass protests for some time. To understand the depth of Sudanese’s’ horrible condition it suffices to refer to an interview Reuters had conducted with a protestor who said he has been unable to buy a loaf of bread for four days.

The process of development in Sudan is accelerating to an extent that it has reached the capital. Subsequently, the internet was disrupted in the country and some social networks such as Facebook, Twitter and Whatsapp were filtered. Schools closed down. In two cities of Omdurman and Atbara, police attacked demonstrators who took to the streets for rising prices and reduction in liquidity and fired tear gas.

According to media reports, protesters in Khartoum, not far away from the Presidential Palace, chanted slogans calling for the withdrawal of Omar al-Bashir, President of Sudan, from power. Some sources have reported about 10 deaths and some 22. The hub for the protestors was the city of Atbara.

Atbara is the second most important city, after the city of Ad-Damir, in the province of Nahr al-Neel. The office of the British Colonial Railway Company was located in the city of Atbara, which is why it is called the city of iron and fire. The city of Atbara is a longtime base of the Communist Party of Sudan. For this reason, throughout history, the city has been the origins of labor protests against the ruling dictatorship.

Atbara is home to the office of the president of Nile Valley University (NVU) and several cement factories and light food industries.

The first demonstration in the city of Atbara was held by students and railway workers in protest of bread shortage and began on December 19. They closed the street leading to the radio and television building.

Another demonstration took place in Alshaya area, where protesters threw stones at the building of the ruling National Congress Party while several other demonstrations took place in other areas. The number of participants in the TV street rally reached 3,000.

The most important part of the demonstrations was in the cinema street where protestors chanted slogans of overthrowing the regime, and a group of artillery units who were passing by on a vehicle lifted their guns in solidarity with protestors.

One of the most important scenes in the protest rally was when the two-story building of the ruling party was set on fire. It's unclear who set fire to this building, and whether it was the angry protesters or other people? The dissidents believe that militants and security forces burn the building and destroy public and private property to undermine the image of protesters, as happened in the September 2013 uprising.

Bread was the main cause of the protest

Although Sudanese authorities were taken aback by the demonstrations, the current situation is a result of accumulated crisis over the years. Since 2011 and following the separation of southern Sudan, the country suffers a severe economic crisis, and one reason for that is the separation of oil fields with the independence of southern Sudan from the north.

In fact, these protests were predictable from a few days ago, especially since reports from inside Sudan have been indicative of the difficult situation, especially bread and fuel. The Sudanese economy is in its worst shape with inflation, and the country’s currency is taking a sluggish trend against the dollar. The loss of oil revenues with the independence of South Sudan in 2011 has played a huge role in the country’s downward economy.

Many investors refuse to work and invest in Sudan, which is still on the list of sponsors of Washington's terrorism, and its president is being prosecuted by international tribunals for mass murder in Darfur.

Sudan has entered a nightmare and the banks have lost liquidity because Sudanese citizens have withdrawn their money from the banks and exchanged it for dollars. Only a few currency exchange stores operate in Khartoum, and banks in other parts of the country only allow citizens to withdraw $10 a day.

The situation became critical to the extent that the government could not provide flour for the bread industry as well as fuel for public transport and vehicles. After that, prices skyrocketed and the black market emerged for the basic necessities.

The Sudanese government made a strategic mistake when they allocated the fuel and flour of other states to the capital. The price of bread in Sudan increased a lot. The crackdown on the demonstrators became more violent as time went by.

Has the military lost hope in the regime?

The thing that could have happened in the city of Atbara was the army's support of the demonstrators against the police and the security forces. Army forces stationed in some areas and prevented a violent crackdown on people, and in some areas, including Atbara support the protesters. Some reports show police adherents to protesters.

Some analysts see the move as a departure from the army and military institutions of this country with Omar al-Bashir, and the withdrawal of his support and others as an attempt to calm the angry protesters.

Where do the political parties stand in the bread revolution?

Political parties initially did not take a stand on the rallies, and perhaps because they keep away from the actions of some protesters in destruction of state and private property. But when the changes became intense and they were out of control of the ruling party, and the rules of prohibition were applied in al-Qaziraf and Atbara, the National Umma Party changed position and urged supporters to take part in the rallies.

The Egyptian ruler worried about the spread of Sudan's demonstrations and movements

Egyptian security officials and the Egyptian presidency have ordered the media to refrain from addressing the Sudanese demonstrations to prevent similar incidents. According to the report, Egyptian media have not yet responded to the incident after four days of Sudanese unrest that killed and injured dozens of protesters. Even the regional newspapers of al-Ahram, al-Akhbar and al-Mumouriya have not reported any news of Sudan's incidents. The Egyptian government is worried by its neighbors with Sudan that the scope of protests will spread to Egypt in bad livelihoods and economic problems in the near future.

Omar al-Bashir's reasons refusal to leave the presidential seat

If al-Bashir resigns from power, he must surrender to the International Criminal Court, as Umar al-Bashir is prosecuted by the International Criminal Court on charges of committing war crimes, crimes against humanity and mass murder in the Darfur region of western Sudan. In 2009 and 2010 the court issued his arrest warrant.

Another reason is that al-Bashir, despite the aggravation of existing crises, prepares himself for the elections in 2020 and does not spare any efforts to overcome the constitutional obstacles; while under article 57 of the constitution adopted in the year 2005 Sudan, no one more than 2 courses can become a presidential candidate.

The role of Sudanese military involvement in the Yemeni war in a crisis

Omar al-Bashir, in hopes of grabbing money for servicing the country's military economy, sent Yemen to the fighting fronts, but many political currents and popular campaigns in Sudan demand the country’s return to the Yemeni War.

The fraction of the forces of change in Sudan's parliament also called for the immediate withdrawal of Sudanese forces from the war with Yemen and called for Sudan's armed forces to oppose the constitution to the Yemeni war.

It seems that the current crisis is different from the preceding ones, and we have to follow the course of Sudan's developments and anticipate the end of bread revolution.

President Trump “stands with” Saudi Arabia and defends Prince MBS over Khashoggi murder

By 5Pillars

President Donald Trump has issued a statement saying that the United States “stands with” Saudi Arabia whilst absolving Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman of any wrongdoing in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Turkey.

The following statement was published yesterday on the official White House website:

“The world is a very dangerous place!

The country of Iran, as an example, is responsible for a bloody proxy war against Saudi Arabia in Yemen, trying to destabilize Iraq’s fragile attempt at democracy, supporting the terror group Hezbollah in Lebanon, propping up dictator Bashar Assad in Syria (who has killed millions of his own citizens), and much more. Likewise, the Iranians have killed many Americans and other innocent people throughout the Middle East. Iran states openly, and with great force, “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!” Iran is considered “the world’s leading sponsor of terror.”

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia would gladly withdraw from Yemen if the Iranians would agree to leave. They would immediately provide desperately needed humanitarian assistance. Additionally, Saudi Arabia has agreed to spend billions of dollars in leading the fight against Radical Islamic Terrorism.

After my heavily negotiated trip to Saudi Arabia last year, the Kingdom agreed to spend and invest $450 billion in the United States. This is a record amount of money. It will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, tremendous economic development, and much additional wealth for the United States. Of the $450 billion, $110 billion will be spent on the purchase of military equipment from Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and many other great U.S. defense contractors. If we foolishly cancel these contracts, Russia and China would be the enormous beneficiaries – and very happy to acquire all of this newfound business. It would be a wonderful gift to them directly from the United States!

The crime against Jamal Khashoggi was a terrible one, and one that our country does not condone. Indeed, we have taken strong action against those already known to have participated in the murder. After great independent research, we now know many details of this horrible crime. We have already sanctioned 17 Saudis known to have been involved in the murder of Mr. Khashoggi, and the disposal of his body.

Representatives of Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an “enemy of the state” and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but my decision is in no way based on that – this is an unacceptable and horrible crime. King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman vigorously deny any knowledge of the planning or execution of the murder of Mr. Khashoggi. Our intelligence agencies continue to assess all information, but it could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event – maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!

That being said, we may never know all of the facts surrounding the murder of Mr. Jamal Khashoggi. In any case, our relationship is with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They have been a great ally in our very important fight against Iran. The United States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country, Israel and all other partners in the region. It is our paramount goal to fully eliminate the threat of terrorism throughout the world!

I understand there are members of Congress who, for political or other reasons, would like to go in a different direction – and they are free to do so. I will consider whatever ideas are presented to me, but only if they are consistent with the absolute security and safety of America. After the United States, Saudi Arabia is the largest oil producing nation in the world. They have worked closely with us and have been very responsive to my requests to keeping oil prices at reasonable levels – so important for the world. As President of the United States I intend to ensure that, in a very dangerous world, America is pursuing its national interests and vigorously contesting countries that wish to do us harm. Very simply it is called America First!”

Iranians hail Houthi 'resistance' for bringing potential end to Yemen war

Al-Monitor Staff

Official statements by US Secretary of Defense James Mattis and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on the Saudi war in Yemen were not taken for granted by Iranians, who have been anticipating a Vietnam-style quagmire for the Saudi-led coalition in the Middle East's poorest country.

"The Yemeni resistance (a term used in Iran to describe Houthi militia fighting off the Saudi war) will not give in to America's peace-seeking postures," wrote Javan, a hard-line news outlet close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Javan referred to French Defense Minister Florence Parly's comments on the humanitarian crisis in Yemen as an acknowledgment that Houthis have cornered the Saudis into a deadlock.

"The [US] call came only three days after the Yemenis unveiled their high-precision Badr P-1 ballistic missile that targeted a Saudi coalition base," the paper stated, highlighting the Shiite militia's counteroffensive capabilities. Javan lashed out at US media outlets for their failure to turn the spotlight on the plight of the Yemenis as opposed to their widespread coverage of the Oct. 2 murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul.

In other Iranian papers, the Khashoggi crisis played central to a reading between the lines of the US cease-fire call. It is a "policy reversal," According to daily Khorasan, "It is a policy reversal [that] came after pressure mounted on Washington and its allies in the wake of revelations on the Saudi complicity in the journalist's murder." The paper criticized the United States for fanning the flames of the war with its "nonstop flow of arms to the Saudis."

"This war of attrition is further eroding the Saudis and their allies," wrote Reformist paper Ebtekar, which praised the Houthis for preventing a Saudi-Emirati takeover of the strategic port of Hodeidah. "The West is now at a crossroads to decide, as it finds Saudis stuck in the Yemen quagmire." The paper claimed that following the Khashoggi scandal, the Saudi allies are trying to pull the kingdom out of one of the multiple crises it is facing. 

Kayhan, a staunch supporter of Yemen's Houthi fighters, called the development a "retreat" by Washington under public pressure and "another defeat" for Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. "But let's not forget that the US move is [mere] publicity and deception ahead of the upcoming midterm elections," Kayhan wrote. The paper noted that if the administration was sincere, "it would not have rejected calls to stop selling arms to the Saudis."

The US call for peace in Yemen was also met with sarcasm by ordinary Iranians, many of them sympathetic to the plight of fellow Muslims in an impoverished nation. "The Yemen war is no longer a lucrative market. We [Americans] need to find another place or launch another war," tweeted one user. "The Americans made the call only after they realized that there was not an intact building left in Yemen," read another post.

Nearly four years of relentless bombardments have claimed thousands of civilian lives in Yemen. But that's not where it ends. The costs of the Saudi-imposed economic blockade and the man-made famine could be beyond calculation, leaving millions on the brink of starvation and dependent on food assistance. "The blood of thousands of Yemenis did little to [force the West to] stop the war," wrote pro-Reform paper Hamdeli, wondering if "Khashoggi's blood" has now come to the rescue of Yemeni children at a time when they are slipping away one after another.

The last breath of Al-Saud in Yemen

By Mohammad Ghaderi 

Today, many global media spoke of Saudi defeat in Yemen. This issue comes as Saudi Arabia continues to kill the Yemeni people. The killing of the Yemeni people is not only not condemned by the United States and its European allies (especially Britain and France), but we are witnessing the continuation of this trend.

 Undoubtedly, one of the main losers of the Yemeni war was the United Nations. At present, the crimes of Saudi and Emirati authorities in Yemen are rising day by day. Despite the brutal killing of tens of thousands of Yemeni people by Riyadh, the United Nations still refuses to condemn the Saudis.

 It even refuses to introduce these crimes as a war crime (which deserve punishment). The world public opinion, and especially people of the region, are angry about the continuation of this war, strongly against the reverse role played by the United Nations in the Yemeni war, and the direct support of the permanent members of the Security Council (U.S., Britain and France). Since the start of the Yemeni war, people have been tens of thousands have been killed or injured.

 According to UN data in Yemen, about 8.4 million people are at risk of hunger, and there have been many victims of cholera in the country. But Saudi Arabia and its allies continue their bloodshed, and bombard the country's defenseless people. The main question, however, is that despite knowing the terrible conditions of the Yemeni people, why does the UN avoid confronting Saudi Arabia's crimes?!

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as the two countries that invaded the Yemeni people, have a bad time! Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have both failed in the Yemeni war and in the future they will also become big detainees.

 Analysts at international affairs acknowledge that the Al Saud family and its entourage have no chance of winning Yemen, and they must formally declare their defeat in this war soon and officially.

The UK-based newspaper, The Times, had published an article written by Michael Burleigh arguing that the Saudi controversial Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has only few days left in power.

Burleigh started his article saying: “Hopes that the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman would be a reformer who could heal the region have come to nothing.”

In the article, the writer went to highlight how western media had widely-reported the prince’s world tour last March drawing a picture of him as the Saudi strongman who is working for political and economic reforms.

 However, several doubts have been raised as a result of recent decisions taken by his father, King Salman. Meanwhile, the Crown Prince’s war on Yemen and the huge amount of money it is draining, in addition to the cold war he launched against Qatar, show clear signs of failure. The article created massive reactions in the Arab world. Many Saudis rushed into defending their 32-year-old Crown Prince.

The failure of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in Yemen is when the United States supported the war for Riyadh and Abu Dhabi. On the other hand, some European countries, such as Britain, Germany and France, were silenced by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates for killing the Yemeni people, and even supported Saudi Arabia by sending weapons.

 The United Nations, too, with its silence against the brutal killings of the Yemeni people, once again revealed its lack of credibility to the world's public opinion. It has been three years now that the defenseless people of Yemen are living under the aggression of al Saud and its allies.

 These three years of Saudi aggression led to Riyadh's heavy defeat, the death of a large number of aggressive forces and, most importantly, the survival of the Yemeni revolution. Sanaa and Aden and Ma'rib have become the symbols of the defeat of Al Saud in Yemen.

Saudi Arabia has even lost the power to regulate its relations with its allies in Yemen. The controversy that has formed between Riyadh and the United Arab Emirates in Yemen can be analyzed in the same vein. These conflicts are the result of the erosion of the Yemeni war and the joint defeat of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Yemen's media blackout- the language of war

Since the Saudi-led coalition declared war on impoverished Yemen: March 26, 2015, foreign journalists and independent news organizations have been prevented from entering the country – de facto putting Yemen under a media blackout. If such infringements on freedom of the press are indeed criminal as they speak of a grand political cover-up, Yemen’s media blackout has reached too grand proportion, and compounded to such an abysmal betrayal of journalistic standards that silence must absolutely be broken. The danger here is not so much in this silence Saudi regime’s war coalition architected around Yemen, so that only its voice would reach the ears of public opinion, but that our well-thinking, well-to-do so called free press was hijacked to the agenda of a minority few to purposely mislead. Yemen’s media blackout has many layers … each of which screaming of an exercise in propaganda, misinformation, and more to the point manipulation. Yemen is merely a symptom of our media apparatus’ malady. One bolder may even elude to folly as without a free press we might as well surrender free thinking to fascism. Free press those days has become yet another euphemism for political indoctrination. If we can agree that absolute impartiality is indeed impossible since our prejudices and filters very much make us who we are as individuals, a line should be drawn at organized media dishonesty and in the case of journalism: make-belief. The under-lining issue surrounding Yemen’s media blackout is not necessarily access but rather the vacuum such lack of access has allowed. If Yemen needs of course to be open to the scrutiny of the press and by extension the public, mainstream ought to serve as an information medium and not as it is currently doing, turn itself into an asymmetrical of war. For three years Yemen has suffered one of the fiercest and most vengeful military campaigns ever unleashed against a sovereign nation since WW2. Only five months into the war (back in August 2015) the head of the Red Cross confirmed that Yemen’s conflict had “wrought destruction similar to that seen in Syria after five years.” Returning from a visit to the war-ravaged nation, Peter Maurer told the Associated Press that entrenched poverty, months of intensified warfare and limits on imports because of an international embargo have contributed to “catastrophic” conditions. “The images I have from Sanaa and Aden remind of what I have seen in Syria,” said Maurer. “So Yemen after five months looks like Syria after five years.” That was three years ago. Since, Riyadh’s invasion and carnage against Yemen have reached dizzying heights … such in fact that the kingdom has deliberately, and systematically targets unarmed civilians to spend Yemenis’ will to resist and thus dismantle from within political opposition. A survey conducted by the Yemen Data Project revealed in September 2016 that over a third of the Saudi-led air raids on Yemen have hit civilian sites, such as school buildings, hospitals, markets, mosques and economic infrastructure. The independent and non-partisan survey, based on open-source data, including research on the ground, records more than 8,600 air attacks between March 2015, when the Saudi-led invasion began, and the end of August 2016. Of these, 3,577 were listed as having hit military sites and 3,158 struck non-military sites. Yemen is not at war with itself as mainstream claims. Yemen’s war came by way of a foreign invasion. Yemen’s war has been manned by foreign hands from Saudi tribal regime’s seat of power: Riyadh. More than any other war in our modern history, Yemen’s war has been labelled under grave misapprehension – decontextualized and politically vulgarized. Yemen was invaded and therefore was within its sovereign rights to defend itself. “An act of war is an action by one country against another with an intention to provoke a war or an action that occurs during a declared war or armed conflict between military forces of any origin.” Yemen is being torn apart, its borders have been breached, its skies darkened, its land set ablaze, its people wrecked by pestilence and famine while the so-called mainstream media has systematically deflected blame, mudding the waters so that the public would not demand accountability for the many lives lost. “Millions of lives are at risk in Yemen because food, fuel and medical supplies are being deliberately delayed on entry to the war-torn country by the Saudi-led coalition,” Amnesty International warned in a report released in late June 2018. The 22-page report, Stranglehold, shows how the Saudi-led coalition has imposed excessive restrictions on the entry of essential goods and aid – de facto holding an entire people hostage so that victory: political and military, could be claimed. War today has its own language and it reads like deceit. Under its ink, a person’s life – the value put on someone’s right to live free from harm and oppression has become contingent to geography, political beliefs, and religious affiliations. Yemen happens to sit beyond this invisible line where one’s fate matters, and one’s right to think independently is admissible in a court of public opinion. For well over a year Yemen’s death toll appears to have been frozen in time. Before the ravages of cholera, famine, hysteric bombing, raids, and other crazy acts we have been told that Yemen’s death count lies below the 20,000 mark … some media went as far as to claim 10,000 in their efforts to downplay genocide. This is how Bloomberg put it back in February (2018): “The death toll from fighting so far is estimated at about 10,000, relatively low compared to the 470,000 thought to have died in the seven years of civil war in Syria. Yet life in Yemen has become wretched and perilous, on a mass scale.” While we admit that getting information from Yemen is more than just challenging … the onus being on Saudi regime for making access almost impossible, war mathematics have revealed frightening numbers. In November 2017, Save the Children reported that 130 children were dying every day, with 50,000 children already believed to have died in 2017. In December 2016, UNICEF reported that a child dies every 10 minutes from preventable diseases such as diarrhea, malnutrition and respiratory tract infections. And the UK-based NGO, Disasters and Emergencies Committee’s recent report put the number of deaths from preventable causes at 10,000. As for Yemen’s cholera epidemic – a direct result of Saudi regime’s aggression on Yemen WHO attested that by July 2017 at least 2,177 deaths had been registered. To famine … Famine is now threatening over half of Yemen’s total population, throwing millions more into food insecurity. In January 2017 The UN security chief said millions would die as a direct manmade result of the war. So much for 10, 000 or even 20,000. If those numbers are in themselves harrowing, they do not offer a real reflection of reality – quite simply because reality is being kept from us for a lack of access and fair reporting. The real number of the victims of the Saudi invasion and genocidal war should be several times more that the reported figures. (By Catherine Shakdam who is the Director of Programs of the Shafaqna Institute for Middle Eastern Studies)

Saudi Monarchy A Client State of US Foreign Policy: American Analyst

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An American political analyst said both the Riyadh regime and Washington should be held accountable for the ongoing war crimes against Yemenis, noting that the US is backing the raids on the impoverished Arab country because the kingdom is a “client state of US foreign policy". “Stepping away from the local political details, one finds a rational objective in US foreign policy in Yemen. The US doesn’t care who runs the country as long as the local boss answers phone calls from Washington with, “Yes sir!” The US is supporting the Saudi attacks on Yemen because the Saudi dictatorship/monarchy is a client state of US foreign policy,” Dr. Mark Mason from California told the Tasnim News Agency on the anniversary of a Saudi-led aggression against Yemen that began on March 26, 2015. Dr. Mason offers analyses of United States domestic and foreign policies for the international news media. He was trained as a biological anthropologist educated at the University of California, Berkeley. Mason has appeared on Al-Etejah TV, Russia Today, Voice of Russia radio, as well as on Life News Russia, AcTVism Munich News, Nuestra Tele Noticias NTN24 Colombia, The Real News Network, and Radio 786 Capetown, South Africa, and KQED Forum in San Francisco, California.

Following is the full text of the interview: Tasnim: The Saudi-led coalition has been launching deadly airstrikes against the Houthi Ansarullah movement for two years in an attempt to restore power to the fugitive former President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi, a close ally of Riyadh. Some 11,000 Yemenis, including thousands of women and children, have lost their lives in the deadly military campaign. Why has the international community remained passive in the face of the ongoing Saudi crimes? Mason: That depends on how one defines the international community. In the US and Europe, which are most familiar to me, public attention is largely controlled by corporate and state mass media. People cannot be concerned about events unknown to them. Here in the US, the media has given little attention to Saudi and US war crimes in Yemen, little attention to the illegalities, and less still, attention to the human suffering in Yemen. US media focuses on questions of military effectiveness and Presidential decision-making, not on the obvious questions of morality and international law. Thus, US media trivializes distant human suffering. In the US media, there are two kinds of people: 1) People, and 2) Unpeople. Yemeni people are dehumanized Unpeople and therefore their suffering at the hands of illegal Saudi and US military violence is trivialized. Americans know nothing about Middle East conflicts and thus cannot respond appropriately. As for the “international community” in terms of the lack of UN action, and the lack of words and action from other states in the Middle East, this political condition indicates two factors related to US imperialism. The silence of some states in the Middle East has been bought by US money. For example, the US gives Egypt $1.3 billion in military aid each year and an additional $250 million in economic assistance this year alone. Money buys silence. Another factor in global silence regarding US military crimes is that state political leaders are quite capable of understanding what happens to countries that disobey orders from Washington. The lessons of the illegal US invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and a long list of other violent interventions are clear: the US government does not tolerate local autonomous rule. Independent politics and action are not allowed. The USA does not honor state sovereignty. That’s the definition of empire. That’s the context for abuses of US-backed Saudi state power. That’s the context for war crimes and other human rights abuses in Yemen. Tasnim: Certain Western countries are continuously claiming that they are champions of human rights. However, it seems that they are pursuing double standard policies on Saudi Arabia's atrocities. On March 10, 2017, the administration of US President Donald Trump approved the resumption of weapons sales to Saudi Arabia which critics have linked to Riyadh’s killing of civilians in Yemen. The $1.15 billion deal was previously blocked by former President Barack Obama after Saudi warplanes targeted a funeral hall in Yemen killing scores of civilians, provoking international outcry. How do you see the role of the US in the regime’s aggression against the impoverished Arab country? Mason: Two important questions: US human rights and US role in Yemen. Permit me to begin with some facts. The [P]GCC ([Persian]Gulf Cooperation Council), and particularly Saudi Arabia, remains the top customer for weaponry produced by US corporations. The [P]GCC purchased $33 billion in arms from the US during a one-year period, 2015-2016. The US is the world’s top arms dealer far ahead of all others. Arms sales is a capitalist business. Arms sales has nothing to do with human rights or defense. Arms sales are about profits for corporations such as Lockheed-Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, and General Dynamics. The arms-sales block emplaced by President Obama in December 2016, was partial and expected to be temporary, effective only long enough to allow public outrage to vanish. Thus, the US is in the business of selling arms. It does not care about human rights anywhere. The US does not care about American domestic human rights. Why should it care about what happens to the people of Yemen? The government of the USA is not a human rights organization; It’s a marketing department for US arms manufacturers. Zero corporate profits in peace mean peace is bad for business. Whatever is bad for business is bad for the American Empire. The success of American government administrations is measured, not in human rights defended, but in corporate dollar profits. Now we can consider the direct US war crimes against Yemen, and the US role in supporting the illegal invasion of Yemen by Saudi Arabia. The US intends to control Middle East oil due to the concentration of this energy resource in this region. The US cares about oil, not people, and the US is clear in acting globally to suppress state sovereignty. As for Yemen, wherever the US goes it creates human suffering and chaos. Since the ejection of long-time dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh, control of the Yemen government has been shifting due to civil war conflicts among local warlords, Saleh supporters, Houthi tribal groups, and small al-Qaeda enclaves. It’s a huge mess for US foreign policy because US foreign policy is a mess. Saudi Arabia supports al-Qaeda. The US claims, falsely, to be fighting ‘Islamic terrorism’, which it is not doing. The principle goal of the US in Yemen is to install anyone, any dictator, who will take orders from Washington. Saudi Arabia has been attacking Yemen in an effort to block Houthis from seizing state control. As in Syria, the US supports anyone and any group that will take up arms against any political force that claims independence from US control. Thus, the US is against everyone, including the people, in Yemen. The allegiance of putative President Hadi to either Saleh or Saudi Arabia is questionable. The US does not want Saleh, or the Houthis because they won’t take orders from Washington or Saudi Arabia. Concomitantly, the US is facing opposition to al-Qaeda. The Houthis create intense fear in US administrations because they would be friendly toward Iran. “Friends with Iran” means the US cannot give orders to Yemeni peasants. Stepping away from the local political details, one finds a rational objective in US foreign policy in Yemen. The US doesn’t care who runs the country as long as the local boss answers phone calls from Washington with, “Yes sir!” The US is supporting the Saudi attacks on Yemen because the Saudi dictatorship/monarchy is a client state of US foreign policy.

Tasnim: Since the start of its war on Yemen, the Saudi regime has failed to reach its objectives. In 2015, the kingdom had a record budget deficit of almost $100 billion, prompting it to rein in public spending in a bid to save money. Why is the regime continuing its heinous attacks on the Arab country despite its failures and cash-strapped economy? Mason: The Saudis are destroying their own economy because the Saudi ruling elites are told what to do by the US government, to no limit, not even self-destruction. There are two kinds of countries in this world: 1) those that are obedient to US power, and 2) those few who have the military power to say “no” to Washington. Unfortunately, the US has no idea what a friend is. The US has imperial subjects, and anyone else is boxed as an enemy. There is a method to this madness. The insane plan is for Saudi Arabia to continue glutting the world oil market, driving down the price of oil, and thus driving the Saudi oil business into negative cash flow— zero or worse profits— for the purpose of driving Russian, Venezuelan, and Iranian economies which are heavily dependent on oil exports, into collapse. The purpose for collapsing these economies is to create political chaos. Out of political chaos, the US intends to seize political control of Russia, Venezuela, and Iran. No doubt, the US government has promised the House of Saud a fine reward for destroying the economy of Saudi Arabia. All this is sheer madness as there is no way oil prices can ever go up again because the world economy, the entire world economy, the entire capitalist system of banking and commerce would collapse. Perhaps global climate chaos (also created primarily by the US) due to the combustion of oil will crash the planet first. It’s all an insane plan that could only have been cooked up in Washington. Meanwhile, the Yemeni people ask only to return to farming and fishing.