Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
March 28, 2007
Time For A New Initiative

The Cheney administration made an effort to "realign" the Middle East with an Arab front of moderate dictators. They were to deliver an Israel friendly solution on Palestine and a united front against Iran. The effort has faltered.

This was first visible when the Saudis fixed a deal for a unity government between the Abbas’ Fatah and Hamas.  With this done in Mekka, I suggested the Saudis were in a bind and had to deliver or lose their cred in the proverbial Arab street.

It is not yet clear how far the Saudis will really go to support the Pals, but the recent steps taken are certainly unfriendly to Cheney’s agenda. As Jim Hoagland reports, Saudi King Abdullah has canceled a state dinner at the White House:

Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi national security adviser, flew to Washington last week to explain to Bush that April 17 posed a scheduling problem. " ‘It is not convenient’ was the way it was put," says one official.

and if it rains …

Jordan’s King Abdullah, who has spent more time in George W. Bush’s Washington than any other foreign leader, has let the White House know that he can’t make that state visit discussed for September.

The President of the United Arab Emirates had this to say:

Shaikh Khalifa reiterated that the UAE totally rejects the use of its land, air and territorial waters to attack any country. “We have reiterated to our Iranian brothers in a letter delivered recently by the foreign minister  that we are not a party to the conflict between Iran and the United States and that we shall never allow the use of our soil for any military, security or intelligence activities against them,” he said.

On the Palestinian issue, where Rice tried to revive the 2002 Arab plan for peace for land with Israeli modifications, i.e. without any Israeli concessions, the Shaikh had equally clear words:

He urged the summit, which opens tomorrow in the Saudi capital, to maintain a solid stance on the issue of the right of return of the Palestinian refugees as contained in the Arab Peace Initiative.

Another snub from the Arab side had come through Egypt a few days earlier, when any help to pressure Darfur was denied.

The Israeli side is not interested in any Cheney admin activity, other than paying their bills, either. The same day Rice was negotiating about useless future Olmert/Abbas meetings, she was snubbed by Olmert when Israeli settlers with official Army protection reoccupied a settlement in the West Bank. Abbas was certainly not impressed either:

Her delegation found the Israelis sour and resistant, prone to finger-jabbing, and the Palestinians just as sullen. Advisers to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas say that once he brusquely interrupted Rice, saying: "You’ve come to me with a list of Israeli demands. Where is your list of our demands for the Israelis?"

Steve Clemons frames these issues as a split in the Bush/Cheney team, with Cheney undermining Rice by influencing Bush. That’s hogwash in my view – I do not see any split there at all – Rice is just part of the team.

But the gang has a huge problem. They have absolutely no soft power left in the Middle East. Not one of the usual dictators is following the orders anymore – not on Israel/Palestine, not on Iran, not on anything – this is unprecedented.

At home, with chaos increasing in Iraq, even proven Washington D.C. whitewashers like Gen. McCaffrey are turning away. Republican Senators did not filibuster the Iraq war bill, leaving the White House alone on the issue. Meanwhile Congressional committees are investigating scandal after scandal and there is more dirt than anyone could reasonably have expected.

So what is the administration to do? Sit back and wait for more rain to pour in Washington and more uncontrolled movement abroad? Or can it start one new initiative that changes the headlines in Washington, the situation in the Middle East and brings back some "Mission Accomplished" glory?

Comments

Abdullah is not only not coming to dinner, he condemned the occupation of Iraq in what sounds to me like no uncertain terms:
“In our dear Iraq, the blood is spilling between our brothers in light of an illegitimate foreign occupation,” he said.
And it was only three months ago that we were assured that the Saudis were terrified that the US might leave Iraq. Could it be that we were fed a line of bullshit, once again?

Posted by: Dick Durata | Mar 28 2007 19:06 utc | 1

This flurry of White House concern for the Palestinians is stagecraft.
It will look good on the Bushite’s public resume right after some unforeseen incident sparks a war of self defense with Iran.
“Just look how hard we were trying . . . before events elsewhere took precedence . . . and we’ll try again right after . . . our entire mission in the Middle East is to bring peace wherever we go.”
America will attack Iran because it has to. The nation as it is, as it functions now, cannot continue without stabilizing that corner of the globe.
Iran needs to be a closely aligned ally of USA, run by reliable men who shave every morning.

Posted by: Antifa | Mar 28 2007 19:15 utc | 2

run by reliable men who shave every morning
your best yet.
someone mentioned a while back that these moments of concern for the palestinians always come before US aggression toward their neighbors, the US gets a buy in for their adventure by promising to treat them more fairly if they will just play along. the dumb bastards fall for it every time. this time it does appear to be a bit different and Hamas is still playing hard to get but the deal has been made. Abu Mazen gets some money to help him keep power and someone will probably fix the sewer in Gaza.

Posted by: dan of steele | Mar 28 2007 19:37 utc | 3

run by reliable men who shave every morning
and wear Western style suits & ties!
On the Unexpected Developments Front, breakup of Pakistan is coming along nicely – see Wayne Madsen’s top post now. (no permalinks, so I won’t bother). If that heats up now, it could be a timely diversion.
While most people look at what xUS elites are doing abroad as fundamentally different from what they’re doing domestically, I always look for connections. I see their smashing of states -ME, Soviet Union, etc. – as akin to their destruction of Am. Central Government which is proceeding apace. It is no longer governing. It’s just a candy store they dole out to their friends. Diff. methods appropriate to diff. circumstances, but both w/the same end – insuring that only Economic Predators – Wall St. & Otherwise – have No Rivals for Power, only facilitators of their power grab.
As energy becomes more expensive, etc….look for further breakup at home…gang warfare….general Hyena Eat Hyena Universe. Anyone who didn’t have children is lucky.

Posted by: jj | Mar 28 2007 20:07 utc | 4

.look for further breakup at home…gang warfare
that is something we almost certainly will see. the PTB are taking precautions, they got the video surveillance all set up, central databanks to track “enemies”, incredibly well armed and highly secretive “security” and “laws” that protect them from the unwashed. I believe you will soon see a successful effort to disarm the US population and yes I am completely against gun control, but the republicans will urge that all guns be collected so that they won’t be used against their owners by those evil terrorists, and democrats, at least the fascist branch have always wanted to take guns away from citizens.
it used to be that the elites were smart enough to keep the masses entertained with bread and circuses. now they are going to take the bread away as a cost cutting measure. I do hope I am not around to see how that works out.

Posted by: dan of steele | Mar 28 2007 20:27 utc | 5

And, if it hits the fan here what are YOU doing? Anybody.
Got any plans?
Is anybody making actual plans?
Privately email me if you wish, if you want to exchange ideas.

Posted by: Jake | Mar 28 2007 20:52 utc | 6

And, aren’t you concerned that your email and other communications are being logged into some database?
So, how does that affect your posting on blogs? I know it inhibits what I say.

Posted by: Jake | Mar 28 2007 21:03 utc | 7

Jake,
be debt free, have a skill that can be used in exchange for food and/or protection. build a local community where you can cooperate and survive. network. above all, don’t panic. people are really quite resilient and we can survive without 7-11 and broadband.
if you have the stomach for it, get into local politics. you might be able to change things from within.
I don’t think it will come soon and it will probably be so gradual that we won’t even notice if and when it does happen…..you know, that old boiled frog analogy.
I have wanted to return to the US but the decision gets harder all the time. I am comfortable here in Europe and there just aren’t many good reasons to change that.
as for the email, oh well, let the perverts read my mail. I am not ashamed. as long as you don’t advocate violent overthrow of the gummint or talk like Anne Coulter (without actually being Anne Coulter) you will be fine. just keep in mind that everything you write is being recorded and will be around forever.

Posted by: dan of steele | Mar 28 2007 21:23 utc | 8

Can a pimp a related diary here?

Posted by: mattes | Mar 28 2007 23:46 utc | 9

mattes, do you mean can you pimp one here? i am all ears
It is no longer governing. It’s just a candy store they dole out to their friends.
good one jj. and of course antifa w/the shaved comment. lol
hmm, comment numero 10 and let me be the first to say… excellent post b.
very thorough and rounded out. it does appear we are the new kid on the block in the ME and nobody wants to play tag w/us anymore. surprise surprise and about time.

Posted by: annie | Mar 29 2007 0:35 utc | 10

King Abudullah tried to warn Bushco before 9/11.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/28/165630/122

Posted by: mattes | Mar 29 2007 0:48 utc | 11

This is a new blog on I/P:
http://evenhandeddems.blogspot.com/index.html

Posted by: mattes | Mar 29 2007 0:58 utc | 12

Rami G. Khouri Rice’s show: Is it comedy or horror?

The most galling thing about Rice’s and Washington’s approach is its fundamental dishonesty. The Bush administration spent its first six years avoiding any serious engagement in the Arab-Israeli conflict, or decisively siding with the Israelis on most key contested points, like refugees, security or settlements. Now – with little time left for Rice, President George W. Bush on the ropes, his administration in tatters, America’s army in trouble in Iraq, Washington’s credibility shattered in the region and around the world, and the Middle East slipping into greater strife and dislocation – we are asked to believe that she will dedicate her remaining time in office to securing the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Does Rice take us in the Arab world for robotic idiots – simply another generation of hapless Arabs who have no options and must go along docilely with every American-Israeli initiative, no matter how insulting, insincere or desperate it may be? This initiative is all three.
The Rice approach is not serious because she does not prod Arabs and Israelis simultaneously to comply with the rule of law and United Nations resolutions. Instead, in her hasty and insincere diplomatic fishing expedition she casts her net wide in an attempt to catch enough “moderate Sunni Arabs” to play by American-Israeli rules.

Rice will surely find a few “moderate Sunni Arabs,” for ours is a region rich in mercantile traditions, full of people ready for a deal. But those who buy into Rice’s American and Israeli rules will be so isolated and discredited, that they will represent few people beyond their guards, business partners, and cousins – a large cohort in many Arab lands, but not a credible basis for lasting peace.

Posted by: b | Mar 29 2007 8:45 utc | 13

Antifa:
America will attack Iran because it has to.
You sound like you believe it.
dos :
Abu Mazen gets some money to help him keep power and someone will probably fix the sewer in Gaza.
Abu Mazen gets some money from Abrams and Rice to “off” Hamas : Gunmen wound Hamas chief’s children.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Mar 29 2007 10:53 utc | 14

Two illegitimate occupations in one region:

The Saudi monarch has made a forceful appeal for Arab unity, denouncing US policy in Iraq and the embargo imposed by western nations on the Palestinians.
At the Arab League summit in Riyadh, King Abdullah described the US presence in Iraq as an illegitimate occupation.
Correspondents say he is seeking to show a measure of independence from Saudi Arabia’s ally, the United States.
Arab leaders are meeting to relaunch a plan for peace with Israel that they first endorsed five years ago.
The plan offers Israel normal relations with Arab states if it withdraws from land occupied in 1967, and accepts a Palestinian state.

Posted by: Dismal Science | Mar 29 2007 12:34 utc | 15

The rift may be even deeper. In Islam one has to offer peace before one is religiously allowed to attack. Bin Laden did so as did other from his corner before lauching their things. Only if such an offer is outright refused, an attack is justified.
Knowing that, this could be a sign for a bigger clash – not immediately, but in a few years: Saudi gives ultimatum to Israel

As leaders began gathering in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, for a summit of the Arab League, Prince Saud al-Faisal said the Middle East risked perpetual conflict if the peace plan failed. Under this Saudi-drafted plan, every Arab country would formally recognise Israel in return for a withdrawal from all the land captured in the war of 1967.
This would entail a Palestinian state embracing the West Bank and Gaza with East Jerusalem as its capital. Every Arab country will almost certainly endorse this blueprint when the Riyadh summit concludes tomorrow.

Speaking inside his whitewashed palace in Riyadh, Prince Saud delivered an unequivocal warning to Israel. “If Israel refuses, that means it doesn’t want peace and it places everything back into the hands of fate. They will be putting their future not in the hands of the peacemakers but in the hands of the lords of war,” he said.

Posted by: b | Mar 29 2007 17:37 utc | 16

Interesting points, next to a lot of US spin, in this WaPo piece: Saudis Publicly Get Tough With U.S.

The day after Thanksgiving, Vice President Cheney unexpectedly flew to Riyadh to meet with Abdullah. No official from either government would speak in detail about the reason for the meeting, but Saudi officials suggested that it was the diplomatic equivalent of a tongue-lashing for Cheney. In an unusual statement issued by the Saudi government after the vice president departed for Washington, the Saudis indicated that they were concerned that the administration was allowing Iran — and also the Shiites in Iraq — to gain too much power. The statement said it was important for U.S. influence “to be in accord with the region’s actual condition and its historical equilibrium,” an unsubtle reference to the traditional Sunni-Shiite balance in the region.

U.S. officials assert that, for years, the Saudis have been all talk and no real help on the Palestinian issue, providing little support to the Palestinians and exploiting the conflict for domestic purposes. Now, they say that the Saudis want to resolve the Palestinian issue so they can turn the region’s attention to combating the threat from Iran. Rice has spoken hopefully of forming a coalition of “moderate” Arab states to counter “extremists” such as Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas.
But Saudi officials say that the purported moderate-extremist divide is silly, as demonstrated by Abdullah’s brokering of the Palestinian unity accord last month.

Posted by: b | Mar 30 2007 7:03 utc | 17

Well that was quick…
Israel rejects Arab peace plan

Israel has refused to accept a revived Arab peace initiative, saying more negotiations are needed.
The plan, put forward after an Arab League summit in Saudi Arabia, offers Israel full diplomatic ties if it withdraws from all land seized in the 1967 war, allows the creation of a Palestinian state and the return of Palestinian refugees.
Amr Moussa, the league’s secretary general, read out a “Riyadh Declaration” reaffirming its commitment to an initiative offered in 2002.
The declaration “affirms a just and comprehensive peace … based on the principles and resolutions of international legitimacy and the land-for-peace formula”.

But not unexpected.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Mar 30 2007 10:02 utc | 18

Only if such an offer is outright refused, an attack is justified….Knowing that, this could be a sign for a bigger clash – not immediately, but in a few years:
interesting observation. all hell would break loose.
i love the way you wrote before launching their things

Posted by: annie | Mar 30 2007 10:36 utc | 19

Interesting, b (16 & 17). Peacemakers or Lords of War? Your choice Israel. No real moderate/extremist (peacemakers/lords of war?) Arab divide and the Palesinian approach cited as evidence. Arab consensus for action approaching? The ground is shifting underneath USrael in the ME and they can’t/won’t see it. To make a statement like this, the Saudis must feel they are are or will (“in a few years”)be in a position to back it up. (What did they talk about behind closed doors with Putin and Hu recently?) Only fools make empty threats from weak positions when doing nothing won’t hurt them, and the Saudis, whatever else they might be, aren’t fools. There is widespread thought in some Israeli circles, judging from recent (Haaretz articles, van Crevald interviews, etc.) that the Iraq invasion has been a bigger disaster for Israel than for the US and will leave Israel isolated as US power wanes. The Saudis must see it this way also to make this “offer” at this time.

Posted by: lonesomeG | Mar 30 2007 14:16 utc | 20

Prof. Cutler has a new piece about the split in the House of Saud:
Trouble with Abdullah
There has been a split (and probably still is) within the Saudi ruling class.
Prince Bandar, long time ambassador to the US and hawk, went back to SA and Prince Turki became ambassador. But Bandar kept mingling in the US business and made several secret trips to Washington. Then he had his longtime consultant Obeid write an OpEd in the Washington Post that demanded that the US stays in Iraq, or … .
Turki went balistic, fired Obaid and then left his job in protest. For a while it looked like Bandar had taken over.
But then King Abdullah stepped in and there came the Palestinian unity government, Amadinejadh’s visit to Riyadh, the renewed ultimatum to Israel (sign here or …) and the “illegal occupation” talk.
All “anti-American” in the sense of Cheney and Likudniks. Prince Bandars father is crown prince Sultan, also defense minister – they would be one fraction of the House of Saud. King Abdullah and Foreign Minister Faisal and Prince Turki are the other side, the “Feisal branch”, which for now has the lead.
Cutler assumes a split between those – I am not so sure. If Jim Hoagland is right, Bandar was recently send to Washington to call off the planed state-dinner, a snub for Bush/Cheney. Not sure he would do that if he would disgree with the king.
But who knows? Cutler closes with the very serious warning

In the 1970s, there was a previous Saudi King from the “Faisal” branch. In 1975, he was assassinated, under murky circumstances, by a nephew recently returned from the United States.

Posted by: b | Mar 30 2007 14:43 utc | 21