CNN Sees Saudi Success In Disunited Gulf Summits That Made No New Statements
Last week Saudi Arabia hosted three international summits in Mecca. The first was an emergency meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) which includes six Arab countries of the Persian Gulf. It was followed by an Arab League meeting of its 22 countries minus Syria which is currently suspended. The third summit was of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) which has 57 member states.
The Saudis had hoped that they would be able to use those summits to demonstrate a united position against Iran. Saudi Arabia had accused Iran of ordering the recent drone attacks from Yemen on its trans-Saudi pipeline. The U.S. accused Iran of being behind the recent attacks on tankers near the UAE.
The Saudi King opened the first summit with an attack on Iran:
Saudi Arabia’s King Salman told an emergency Gulf Arab meeting on Thursday that Iran’s development of nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities threatened regional and global security.He said Tehran’s actions threatened international maritime trade and global oil supplies in a “glaring violation of UN treaties,” following attacks this month on oil tankers off the United Arab Emirates and on oil pumping stations in the Kingdom.
If one is to believe CNN's Nic Robertson, the Saudis succeeded in uniting all countries behind their position:
King Salman of Saudi Arabia has pulled off in Mecca what many had thought unlikely -- getting 20 or so disparate Arab nations to unite in a common position against Iran.And while this achievement came without bellicose threats or new red lines, it is an important milepost on a road that may yet lead to regional conflict. In middle-of-night, back-to-back summits at Islam's holiest of sites, the aging but still-attentive Saudi monarch got a double endorsement of his claims that Iran is destabilizing the Middle East and a backing of his call for "the international community to shoulder its responsibility.
The six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council and 21 Arab League nations present called for Iran to stop "interfering in the internal affairs" of its neighbors and denounced Tehran's "threat to maritime security" in the Persian Gulf.
...
What we saw in Mecca was a mark being set, that the status quo with Iran will no longer be tolerated by Saudi and its allies. What happens next is in Iran's court. Talks are an option, but terrorism, insofar as it is perceived as such by Tehran's neighbors, is not.
The Saudis must have bought Nic Robertson some of their rose-colored glasses. In fact each of the three summits failed to take a new position towards Iran. The GCC summit communique does not blame Iran for the recent attacks and uses only general language to note its concern:
The Council emphasized the positions of the Supreme Council and its firm decisions on relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran, stressing the need for Iran to abide by principles based on the Charter of the United Nations and international law, the principles of good neighborliness, respect for the sovereignty of states, non-interference in internal affairs and the non-use of force.The Council also called on Iran to stop supporting, funding and arming militias and terrorist organizations, and refrain from feeding sectarian conflicts, calling on the Iranian regime to exercise wisdom, staying away from hostilities and destabilizing security and stability.
While Anderson claims that the Iran's behavior "will no longer be tolerated by Saudi and its allies", the GCC statement does not make any such threat at all. The GCC members know that they can not do anything against Iran as their countries are vulnerable to retaliation. They thus call on others to do something about their problems:
The resolution called on the international community to shoulder its responsibilities to maintain international peace and security and to take firm action against the Iranian regime and more effective and serious steps to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities and to impose stricter restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program.
In total the general language of the current GCC summit statement is not significantly different from the one used in previous GCC summit communiques:
They also urged Tehran to revise its policies in the region by means of honoring relevant international conventions and treaties, and stop harboring terrorist groups, including Hezbollah, on its soil.
The Arab League Mecca summit communique is somewhat similar to one the GCC issued. But its language is also no different than the one used in previous Arab League statements. It condemns Iran for supporting the Houthis and for supporting Syria but issues no threat whatsoever. Iraq did not sign off on the Arab League communique.
The OIC communique of the third Mecca summit does not mention Iran at all. It focuses on Palestine and rejects the ever delayed U.S. 'deal of the century' that is supposed to buy off Palestinian rights for some meager economic promises.
Of the six GCC countries Qatar and Oman have friendly relations with Iran. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are still hostile to Qatar and both countries fail in their war on Yemen. The Arab League is as dysfunctional as ever. Its north-African member states are busy with interior trouble and the Arab League country with the most effective military, Syria, is still suspended. The OIC condemned the Kushner plan which Saudi Arabia's clown prince Muhammad bin Salman and the UAE support. Turkey's president did not take part in the OIC summit because of the Saudi hostility to the Muslim Brotherhood. Iran's president was not invited. Qatar's Prime Minister al-Thani was only allowed to join the summits because the U.S. had pressed for it.
Said differently - the two summits Anderson is so exited about were nothingburgers. Their statements were similar to the once made before and the GCC and the Arab League still lack the capacity to act together on any serious issue. That they call on outsiders to tackle Iran says all one needs to know. The OIC summit was outright hostile to the U.S. and Saudi plans for the destruction of Palestine.
As long as U.S. media deliver such bad 'analysis' of foreign state positions, the policies derived from it will continue to be unrealistic.
Posted by b on June 2, 2019 at 11:21 UTC | Permalink
"The Council also called on Iran to stop supporting, funding and arming militias and terrorist organizations"
One wants to SCREAM. I suppose Saudi and the others supporting, funding and arming terrorists, etc in Syria for the last five years doesn't count.
Posted by: Guy Thornton | Jun 2 2019 11:43 utc | 2
@b
in the first part of the article you refer to that journo as “Nic Robertson”, in the second part, the name becomes “Anderson”. Typo?
Posted by: Philipe | Jun 2 2019 12:05 utc | 3
So, the outrage about killed american "journalist" seems to be burried and forgotten now
Posted by: Arioch | Jun 2 2019 12:45 utc | 4
The CNN misreporting is either deliberately trying to distract US public attention away from the Kushner-influenced Deal of the Century or it's trying to drum up US public support for a US-led invasion of Iran. Because if the Ay-rabs are seen to be united behind KSA opposition against Iran, then the US must support it.
Although one does wonder what spin The New York Times and The Washington Post will put on the same news.
Posted by: Jen | Jun 2 2019 12:54 utc | 5
"Of the six GCC countries Qatar and Oman have friendly relations with Iran. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are still hostile to Qatar and both countries fail in their war on Yemen. The Arab League is as dysfunctional as ever. Its north-African member states are busy with interior trouble and the Arab League country with the most effective military, Syria, is still suspended. The OIC condemned the Kushner plan which Saudi Arabia's clown prince Muhammad bin Salman and the UAE support. Turkey's president did not take part in the OIC summit because of the Saudi hostility to the Muslim Brotherhood. Iran's president was not invited. Qatar's Prime Minister al-Thani was only allowed to join the summits because the U.S. had pressed for it."
What a bickering nation-state farce.
Fascinating how one of Sheikh Imran Hossein's contentions is that a key (albeit mostly submerged-eschatological) aim of WW1 was the shattering of the Ottoman Empire followed by the creation of Sykes-Picot digestible bits. Forget the mindless bloodbath in Europe. That was side dish advertised as main course. Tail-wag-dog.
Moreover these bits were never meant to solidify into operable entities. Until properly digested (by the Greater Israel project), the world is meant to weather this interregnum period of endless bickering marked be endless summitting.
Posted by: Full Spectrum Domino | Jun 2 2019 13:12 utc | 6
So now Trump sticks it to CNN and its "the status quo with Iran will no longer be tolerated by Saudi and its allies."
U.S. prepared to engage with Iran without pre-conditions: Pompeo
Not quite the intolerable status quo change that CNN had in mind.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 2 2019 13:56 utc | 7
the kashoggi body choppers held a meeting in a holy city, lol... they denounced iran and think people are stupid enough to forget their treatment of kashoggi... sorry.. lots of folks not buying any of that... the msm continue to look like the paid hacks they are... the only thing these freaks bow down to is money and they share that in common with their ''allies'' too... no murder is too good for them.
Posted by: james | Jun 2 2019 14:22 utc | 8
When MBS rounded up a bunch of prominent businessmen and Princes in the Ritz Carlton, having many of them tortured while some ended up murdered or disappeared, many had millions taken from them, all without a trial, the New York Times, Bloomberg and CNN called this "cleaning up against corruption". While the recent round of public executions, many of them for protesting and sending text messages is explained by the Times..etc as being about terrorism offenses: https://fair.org/home/media-stenography-turns-beheaded-saudi-protesters-into-terrorism/
I'm struggling to find an apt word to describe this kind of "journalism" at the moment.
Posted by: Jason | Jun 2 2019 14:23 utc | 9
little noticed? on Abe/Trump meeting:
MAY 28, 2019 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR
Trump makes big-time overture to Iran
https://indianpunchline.com/trump-makes-big-time-overture-to-iran/
extract:
"And I think we’ll make a deal. I think Iran — again, I think Iran has tremendous economic potential. And I look forward to letting them get back to the stage where they can show that. "
Posted by: Charles Michael | Jun 2 2019 14:38 utc | 10
This seems like massive efforts to control the global narrative by failing empire.
While I usually say that the chaos is intentional, in this instance I believe it reflects the internal dissonance of the ME currently. At the bottom of the dissonance pile is the conflict between the monotheistic religions, including the finance angle with Iran/Israel.
Historically, empire has had success stirring the ME pot to its favor but as evidenced by this posting and the general geo-political situation, the China/Russia axis is having effect....which gets back to controlling the narrative which is the war that is being lost by empire in spite of their control of the MSM.
Posted by: psychohistorian | Jun 2 2019 14:46 utc | 11
9,
The Saudis uphold the petrodollar. Ergo, the god of Mammon.
Any and all acts of torture, hand chopping, beheadings, and murders committed by the Saudi government (not a regime!) are reasonable acts and are applauded by the USA and supported by the UN Human Rights Council.
Posted by: Kristan hinton | Jun 2 2019 14:47 utc | 12
Re#9 Jason, I believe the word you're looking for to describe CNN's "reporting" is propaganda.
Ever since NATO's Terrorism campaign on Yugoslavia, I've always operated on the principle that you don't read the Washington Post / New York Times, or watch CNN/MSNBC to get the news, you do it to get the current party line. If the mass media actually gave honest reporting and analysis to the public, the plebs would start committing wrong think and our Corporatocracy overlords can't have that.
Posted by: Kadath | Jun 2 2019 14:50 utc | 13
Just imagine the effect of an Iran statement along the lines of: "All of our militias will be out of Syria by July first, and we continue to stand ready to talk to Saudi Arabia. Mr. Trump it's your move."
. . .I can dream, can't I?
Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 2 2019 14:51 utc | 14
Posted on an Open Thread, but reproducing in this discussion:
"The rocky partnership between Russia and Iran in the Syrian conflict is entering a turbulent period. The unprecedented US-Russia-Israel security summit due to take place in Jerusalem next month has no other explanation.
A tersely worded White House statement on May 29 said that the summit, which will be attended by the national security advisors of the US and Russia — John Bolton and Nikolai Patrushev — will discuss regional security issues. The Israeli media expect that the focus will be on Syria — Iran and “other destabilising actors”.
Out of the two competing narratives regarding Russian-Iranian cooperation in Syria — one, that Russia and Iran are time-tested allies who smashed the West’s geopolitical conspiracies over Syria, and, two, the contrarian view that their alliance is but a marriage of convenience — the latter seems to be gaining ground. The great game theorists and acolytes of Eurasianism will be disappointed. "
https://indianpunchline.com/russia-has-more-in-common-with-israel-than-meets-the-eye/
Posted by: daffyDuct | Jun 2 2019 15:04 utc | 15
OT
For the first time, Green Party becomes the most popular party in Germany. SPD in collapse.
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201906021075551437-euroepan-parliament-elections-green-party/
https://www.rt.com/news/460872-germany-head-spd-resignation/
Posted by: Passer by | Jun 2 2019 15:06 utc | 16
out of topic.
Unable to reach presstv,com this am.
Any idea why?
Posted by: CarlD | Jun 2 2019 15:07 utc | 17
The Saudis have always came to the aid of Arab nations fighting against Israel a day late and a dollar short. If they were really any threat to the Israelis do you thing APAC would stand buy and let the massive arms sales to the Saudis continue? I have always suspect, with no evidence available, that there is some type of rake off going on with some of the weapons and money allotted to the Saudis ending up in Israel.
In the '48 war they sent only one tiny contingent and then withdrew the contingent shortly after sending them to prepare for battle. In the '67 war Egypt and Nasser's secular nationalism was as much a threat to the Saudis as it was to the International Order so they did little to nothing. At the time many Saudi pilots would defect to Egypt with their jets because they liked Nasser. More than a few times the Saudis had to ground their air force over these events.
In the 1973 Yom Kippur war the Saudis did nothing with their massive arsenal of democracy given to them by the US. Back then the Israelis would protest a little in public over arms sales to the Saudis. In fact, the Saudis were considered a non military ally who could use the oil weapon against the West by Assad in Egypt.
In fact, they did just that but one insider, Fletcher Proudy, said that this was wanted by the Saudis and some powerful players in the US to increase the price of a barrel of oil, increase revenues, as well as cold cash profits. Basically they deftly took advantage of an event to increase profits.
Kissinger downplayed the oil embargo threats even when he knew the Saudis did the same thing after the 1967 war and failed. Back then the oil market was quite different and with the introduction of supertankers the oil market recovered quickly.
While this is nothing more than a thumbnail of some events of the past we would be wise to remember history in the run up to a war with Iran even if some of the history is bullshit provided by the victors
Posted by: dltravers | Jun 2 2019 15:29 utc | 18
If one is to believe CNN's Nic Robertson, the Saudis succeeded in uniting all countries behind their position(Emphasis added.)
In week of September 3 2018, CNN dropped 41% compared to a year ago.
In April 2019, CNN dropped another 26%.
With "reporting" like Robertson's, no wonder.
Posted by: Cyril | Jun 2 2019 15:54 utc | 19
@15
"Out of the two competing narratives regarding Russian-Iranian cooperation in Syria — one, that Russia and Iran are time-tested allies who smashed the West’s geopolitical conspiracies over Syria, and, two, the contrarian view that their alliance is but a marriage of convenience — the latter seems to be gaining ground. The great game theorists and acolytes of Eurasianism will be disappointed."
Exactly. The Eurasian Century analysis has been plagued with excessive wishfulness, driven, to be fair at times, by justifiable moral outrage. The obscenity of the 'Jose Padillo' treatment of Assange is but the latest example. Eurasiaism WILL arrive, but perhaps with a slow creep and not a bang. All parties should cheer this. But I'm seeing an emergent third way where you're seeing a still-valid polarity.
Xi moved too early and in so doing violated Deng's prescription for disciplined forbearance. Arguably, Xi was compelled to assert as he found himself faced with
Here are the latest minority poll numbers for Trump:
Trump Approval; (Aggregate Blacks 17% Hispanics 34%)
The Hill Blacks 20% Hispanics 31%
HarrisX Blacks 16% Hispanics 36%
Economist Blacks 19% Hispanics 33%
YouGov Blacks 14% Hispanics 37%
These are landslide figures should they hold up. Trump's natural inclination is for peace. These figures will act to cement his natural inclinations. Trump will not be starting WW3. (As to whether some renegade proxy trip-wires the world into war, well, that cannot be dismissed; yet the likelihood recedes now that Iran and the US have stepped back from the highwater mark.)
As I've insisted for months, Trump's an international golf course builder. Golf is a leisure sport. He doesn't have a MacKinderite bone in his body-spur-ravaged body.
What Trump DID do is show me whatcha got. Venezuela served well (Gd bless the suffering people) as a Venue of Humiliation for Bolton/Pompeo. That show will NOT be taken on the road anytime soon, thank you very much. The walk-back between Pompeo's '12 Demands' to Iran in May 2018 and his 'no pre-conditions' capitulation today is a 'vexed and exhausted' one-year trail of excruciation. Pompeos Maximus has been publicly minimized.
So Bhadrakumar has it right when he says: "The bottom line, however, is that the Iranian leadership understands that Trump is quintessentially a man of peace who has no intentions of waging a war."
@15
"Out of the two competing narratives regarding Russian-Iranian cooperation in Syria — one, that Russia and Iran are time-tested allies who smashed the West’s geopolitical conspiracies over Syria, and, two, the contrarian view that their alliance is but a marriage of convenience — the latter seems to be gaining ground. The great game theorists and acolytes of Eurasianism will be disappointed."
Exactly. The Eurasian Century analysis has been plagued with excessive wishfulness, driven, to be fair at times, by justifiable moral outrage. But emotional, not analytical. The obscenity of the 'Jose Padillo' treatment of Assange is but the latest example of merited outrage. Eurasiaism WILL arrive, but perhaps with a slow creep and not a bang, and on the strength of organic economic growth, not climactic military achievement . All parties should cheer this desired trajectory.
Xi moved too early and in so doing violated Deng's prescription for disciplined forbearance. He hadn't yet realized he was facing the first US President who was NOT a US Chamber of Commerce dupe and was not on-board with WTO 2001. Trump's serious as a heart attack as Lighthizer, Navarro, et al. China has been normalized into American lightweights who seize upon any signed bit of paper as yet more fodder for personal ascent. Peace (of crap paper) in our time. Of course this Managed Decline approach was welcomed by their overlords. So the Chinese were truly flummoxed when Trump proved himself not to be yet another politician. Their stateside Wall Street consultancies led them astray.
I go back to Yu Zhi, Economics professor from Shanghai University of Finance and Economics (Bloomberg, 6/18):
“Has China completed the task of ‘getting rich’? Has China completed the primary stage of socialism as Deng Xiaoping described? Can you begin to compete directly with the United States and other Western countries?” Yu wrote. “China should rethink its general strategic direction.”
But again, did Xi have a choice? The fall-out's not over for Xi imo.
Here are the latest minority poll numbers for Trump:
Trump Approval; (Aggregate Blacks 17% Hispanics 34%)
The Hill Blacks 20% Hispanics 31%
HarrisX Blacks 16% Hispanics 36%
Economist Blacks 19% Hispanics 33%
YouGov Blacks 14% Hispanics 37%
To those familiar with US electoral politics, these are landslide figures should they hold up --and they should. Trump's natural inclination is for peace. These figures will act to cement his natural inclinations. Trump will not be starting WW3. (As to whether some renegade proxy trip-wires the world into war, well, that cannot be dismissed; yet the likelihood recedes now that Iran and the US have stepped back from the highwater mark.)
As I've insisted for months, Trump's an international golf course builder. Golf is a leisure sport. Trump's a businessman not a dark nihilist. He doesn't have a MacKinderite bone in his body-spur-ravaged body.
What Trump DID do to the MilIndustComplex was 'show me whatcha got' --and they ain't got. Venezuela served well (Gd bless that suffering people) as a Venue of Humiliation for Bolton/Pompeo. That show will NOT be taken on the road anytime soon, thank you very much. The walk-back between Pompeo's May 2018 '12 Demands' to Iran and his 'no pre-conditions' capitulation today is a 'vexed and exhausted' one-year trail of pure excruciation. Pompeos Maximus has been publicly minimized. Bolton could be on the outs. Though Trump enjoys the theatre and thinks it helps his leverage.
So Bhadrakumar has it right when he says: "The bottom line, however, is that the Iranian leadership understands that Trump is quintessentially a man of peace who has no intentions of waging a war."
I am more positive today than I've been for many years that Trump may in fact engineer the turn that the world so desperately needs.
Posted by: Full Spectrum Domino | Jun 2 2019 16:15 utc | 20
Agree with psychohistorian @11 that this amounts to an effort to keep the current narrative afloat, particularly the idea that Iran's nuclear activities pose a threat. And although they're mostly backed by Turkey, the timing with the escalation of Syria's Idlib offensive must be noted as the only reason Syria's treated as some sort of enemy is due to the failure of the Outlaw US Empire's war for regime change. That Qatar attended is a bit of a surprise. As noted on open thread, China seems to have finally decided to deepen its involvement with the Arc of Resistance as the players arrange their cards for the upcoming G-20 in Osaka at June's end.
Posted by: karlof1 | Jun 2 2019 16:18 utc | 21
CNN's reporting lays bare the synchronization between the neo-cons, neo-libs, executive figureheads and the media. Kafkaesque doesn't even describe it, perhaps tragicomic comes closer. That CNN is carrying Saudi and duo-con water to this extent shows how serious the threat to Iran is. Or alternatively the lengths that the "liberal media" will go to allow Trump to swoop in with his 'deal of the century' and carry 2020.
The actual readings of the communique offer some hope, particularly the OIC, as well as the glaring absence of MbS. Events or non- events this summer will ultimately tell.
@dltravers 18
All great points. The house of Saud has always been the fox put in charge of the henhouse, a fifth column installed to act in accord with the west. What I find hopeful is the utter contempt with which the average Saudi citizen views the royal family and to a lesser extent, the religious authorities that rule the country. Their grasp on power has always been rather tenuous despite their best efforts to dispel that fact.
Saudi behavior in '48 was reprehensible as you note. I would add that unfortunately they were not alone. There simply wasn't a united Arab response to the full scale ethnic cleansing that Israel started the year prior. Egypt and Jordan primarily sought to cement control over Gaza and the West Bank, which they had tacitly agreed to prior with Israel. The serious resistance came from -- surprise, surprise -- Lebanon and Syria, but lacked the dollar and material backing that the Zionists had at their disposal.
Posted by: Don Wiscacho | Jun 2 2019 16:33 utc | 24
Unfortunately Iran is (so far) not responding favorably to Trump's recent initiatives. Big mistake.
..from an ABC interview
Iran will not be intimidated by President Trump’s "art of the deal pressure" by using economic sanctions to push Iran to negotiate a new nuclear deal, the country's top diplomat told ABC News.
In an exclusive interview, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif also told "This Week" Co-Anchor Martha Raddatz that "there will be consequences" if the United States keeps up its economic pressure campaign against Iran’s people. . .here
Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 2 2019 16:50 utc | 25
Re:27 Don Bacon,
If by that you mean Trump's big mistake, then yes, Trump has blundered into a disastrous position by letting his advisors (Bolton & Pompeo) get ahead of him on Iran at the worst possible time for the US. On it's own, the US could "manage" another disastrous war with an isolated Iran, it would of course be another failure, far worse than Iraq, but the empire could survive it. However, Iran is not alone, the US is provoking political, trade and military crises with Iran, Syria, Turkey, Russia, China, North Korea, Mexico and now India. The US would at the very least require China and Russia to remain neutral during a war with Iran, but I doubt Russia and China would remain neutral like they did with Iraq and now I suspect India, Turkey and Iraq would swing their support to Iran. While this may not save Iran, the vast economic, political, diplomatic and military capital the US would lose in such a conflict would kill the empire.
The bottom line is that Trump allowed this situation to develop, even if we assume he doesn't want a war with Iran (which is an uncertain assumption at best), he hired Bolton and Pompeo when they were both already well-know for their hatred of Iran and their desire for a war with Iran (remember Bolton wrote his famous article "to stop Iran bomb, bomb Iran") and he allowed them to run wild with crazy demands (Pompeo's 12 points demand for Iran). Thinking that Iran made a big mistake by not immediately submitting to Trump after his dunderhead lackeys painted Trump into a corner with insane demands is ridiculous. The constellation of forces is clearly allied against the US in this particular situation. The rational thing to do in this situation for Trump is to back down and resolve the other crises first then come back to Iran in 2-3 years. Attacking Iran now would simultaneously escalate all of these crises and undoubtedly produce even more crises down the road (some of which would be unforeseeable). However Neo-cons always double down and nothing infuriates them more then being ignored, so I know Bolton & Pompeo will continue to escalates things in the Middle East until either Trump fires their asses or they get that war they want, so the choice is Trump's, what's it going to be?
Posted by: Kadath | Jun 2 2019 17:38 utc | 26
28
Trump does not have the luxury of time to come back later.
They will not be intimidated, they have no need to be,another few years of sanctions on top of the existing forty isn't going change their position.Trump has already demonstrated his signature is worth nothing on any deal anyway.Iran remains at the center of the Great Game as it has for 160 years,its vital to both Russia and China so they would intervene,covertly or openly remains to be seen,but Iran by itself
will send home more body bags than the US public could ever stomach even if they lost,whatever your definition of that is, but that would require many millions of boots on the ground because of their demographics and geography.
Posted by: Winston2 | Jun 2 2019 18:08 utc | 27
Posted by: Kadath | Jun 2, 2019 1:38:11 PM | 28
US foreign policy never fails to amaze me. I remember an older colleague explaining to me during the Vietnam War that the average US-American does not care or needs to care what happens abroad, so a small foreign policy elite do as they wish.
The story eventually took Levine and Wernham far beyond the parched Central Valley, and into the heart of America’s Israel lobby. It turned out that the Resnicks had been pumping their money into some of the most militantly pro-Israel think tanks in Washington, including the American Jewish Committee and the Washington Institute on Near East Policy (WINEP). Both of these outfits have lobbied heavily for sanctions on Iran and against the Iran nuclear deal. One WINEP executive, Pat Clawson, has even called on the US to stage a false flag attack that could trigger a war with Iran.Levine and Wernham recognized that the Resnicks’ support for the Israel lobby was all about protecting their monopoly from a nation traditionally recognized as the producer of the world’s best pistachios. The billionaire nut barons were not only threatening the environment and livelihoods of their local competitors, they were bankrolling forces determined to take America to war against a rising Middle Eastern power. This is why the title of Levine and Wernham’s work in progress, “Pistachio Wars,” is so apt.
Posted by: somebody | Jun 2 2019 19:21 utc | 28
Add to no30
From the above link
There is a bigger issue here that goes beyond pistachios and water in California. The fact is that we in America cannot fix our belligerent and destructive foreign policy without first reigning in the economic interests that drive it and benefit from it. In that sense, the pistachio business is no different than oil companies or weapons makers — it’s just that it is not so well know.
Posted by: somebody | Jun 2 2019 19:30 utc | 29
add 32
The BBC did notice.
The US and Iranian battle over the pistachio nut trade
Posted by: somebody | Jun 2 2019 19:38 utc | 30
@ Don Wiscacho | Jun 2, 2019 12:33:15 PM | 26
“What I find hopeful is the utter contempt with which the average Saudi citizen views the royal family and to a lesser extent, the religious authorities that rule the country.”
A friend of mine was (before retirement) an avionics technician stationed for a while at a Saudi air base, working on US-made military aircraft. He told me that the Saudi technicians with whom he worked had constantly expressed extreme hatred for the Saudi religious police, above all other officials.
Posted by: AntiSpin | Jun 2 2019 20:53 utc | 31
@15
I usually enjoy the insights by MK Bhadrukumar.
But this article sights “ Syrian observatory on human rights”
And “voice of America”. Both these sources I do not trust.
We shall just have to wait and see what comes out of this meeting btw Bolton / Russia / Israel.
My sense is that nothing will come out of it - as there is not trust btw the parties.
Posted by: James2 | Jun 2 2019 21:41 utc | 32
Someone looks a little wobbly about the whole thing. Trump's not playing the Managed Decline game. Spoil sport.
china-signals-it-is-willing-to-return-to-trade-talks-with-u-s
Posted by: Full Spectrum Domino | Jun 2 2019 21:56 utc | 33
Do not swallow neocon fables. MbS was not there, not because he is not rehabilitated
but because he will play a beand new role in all this. GCC barely repeated the narrative
on Iean, and mimicked US. King is NOT demented, get this neocon propaganda out of
commentary. Saudi King is telling US what it wants to hear, and Qatar’s participation
has zero to do with US. The elephant in the room — Iran’s and Turkish military in Qatar.
Kuweit, 40% Shia population, UAE — largest trade with Iran, Bahrein 80% Shia, Iraq,
65%, Oman its own Islam sect in good relations with Iran, UAE producing two movies in
Syria on two historic figures in Sufi Islam, incidentally Sufism was spread by Ottoman
Empire and was deeply rooted in Syria. Why sudden love for Sufism, greatly respected in
Iran, place with famous Sufi poetry? Hmmmm. Clearly, with Syrian government blessing,
Sufism is to be given major media attention, countering harsh Wahhabism, and providing
emotional links with Turkey, Iran, and the Middle East, and as far to the West as Balkans,
and to the East as China. All coincidences?
Clearly, UAE and Bahrain, Jordan and others that are now working in Syria to heal the
sectarian wounds — the presence of Iranians in Syria is not disguisting.
Who has a probkem with this? Clearly Israel, trying to torpedo any efforts aimed
at reintegrating Syria. But it is happening, and will happen. Middle East style.
Posted by: Bianca | Jun 2 2019 22:50 utc | 34
Posted by: Bianca | Jun 2, 2019 6:50:06 PM | 36
MbS was not there, not because he is not rehabilitated but because he will play a beand new role in all this.Absurd. If MbS wasn't there, it can only be because he's no longer running the show in Saudi. Not because someone's planning a new secret role for him - it was MbS who was running the show himself, planning roles for others. Now he isn't, and that's a major change.
Sounds like Bianca is trolling for the Saudis - they are known for recruiting people who don't fully follow the party line. At least she's got the proper fear/hatred of the Shi'a that is needed for the job.
Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 3 2019 3:44 utc | 36
The Iraqi PM defended Iran in a statement addressed to summit leaders.
Posted by: ninel | Jun 3 2019 4:07 utc | 37
U.S. prepared to engage with Iran without pre-conditions: PompeoNot quite what Pompeo actually said. "... without preconditions" includes "must stop supporting Hezballah and Syria" and "must start acting like a normal country." So they really aren't ready to engage with Iran.
Posted by: Procopius | Jun 3 2019 4:49 utc | 38
Seems the Saudis made up that GCC statement ....
Qatar says it has reservations about Arab statements on Iran
Qatar said on Sunday it has reservations about hardline statements on Iran made at emergency summits of Gulf and wider Arab states called by Saudi Arabia, becoming the second Arab country to reject the statement following Iraq.Qatar’s foreign minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani, said statements at the summits were not adopted using traditional procedures.
“The statements condemned Iran but did not refer to a moderate policy to speak with Tehran,” he said in remarks reported by Qatar’s state-owned Al Jazeera television.
“They adopted Washington policy towards Iran, rather than a policy that puts neighbourhood with Iran into consideration,” he added.
@ 41 b...memo to qatar.. ksa - vassal state of the usa... thus isis army with sunni headchopping cult primarily belongs to the usa...
Posted by: james | Jun 3 2019 15:10 utc | 40
F S D @ 35
Please learn how to post links.
_______________
My apologies. I made a real hash of one in particular yesterday.
Posted by: Full Spectrum Domino | Jun 3 2019 16:29 utc | 41
Seems that what King Salman "pulled off in Mecca" was not so much unity but more discontent.
Qatar Criticizes Mecca Summits as Hopes for Reconciliation Fade
Days after emergency summits on Iran raised hopes of a reconciliation between Qatar and its Gulf neighbors, their ministers were locked in a media spat.Qatar’s foreign minister criticized statements at the three meetings Saudi Arabia convened in Mecca last week as too "hardline” to engage Tehran in dialogue.
They "adopted Washington’s policy toward Iran and not one that takes the neighborhood into consideration," Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani told Al Jazeera TV on Sunday. "Qatar has reservations on the Arab and Gulf summits because some of their terms are contrary to Doha’s foreign policy," he told the U.K.-based Al-Araby broadcaster.
Foreign ministers from the three Gulf countries that imposed an embargo on Qatar in June 2017 were swift to respond.
States should "declare their positions and reservations at the meetings and in accordance with established norms, not after the meetings have ended," Saudi Arabia’s Adel Al-Jubeir said in a tweet.
@44
The normalization or Nuclear Winter of our discontent...
So, what are the independent/dependent variables? Did Sykes-Picot invent the dissension or is bickering native to the region? Perhaps the European cartographers ingeniously played upon an apriori condition, merely advantaging a nagging precondition.
When you read the likes of Goldman (aka Spengler) he glories in the Thirty Year War aspects --two generations of Arabs (soon to be joined perhaps by Persians) bloodying themselves to exhaustion through two generations of angry young men.
Divide - Self-immolate - and- Conquer
Posted by: Full Spectrum Domino | Jun 3 2019 17:06 utc | 43
The most interesting aspect of these so-called International Summits is the proportion which are convened to 'debate' a myopic perspective, and have AmeriKKKa's fingerprints all over them.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 4 2019 8:49 utc | 44
The comments to this entry are closed.
The continuing "elephant in the room" is that MbS was not there in any significant way. He hasn't been able to re-habilitate himself - it seems, I haven't done any deep digging. That could be the reason for no great development in policy. It's just the old man and his dementia fronting the show.
Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 2 2019 11:38 utc | 1