Embattled Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman could prove to be not only a cat with nine lives but also one that makes even stranger jumps.

King Salman’s announcement that Prince Mohammed was put in charge of reorganising Saudi intelligence at the same time that the kingdom for the first time admitted that journalist Jamal Khashoggi had been killed in its Istanbul consulate signalled that the crown prince’s wings were not being clipped, at least not immediately and not publicly.

With little prospect for a palace coup and a frail King Salman unlikely to assume for any lengthy period full control of the levers of power, Prince Mohammed, viewed by many as reckless and impulsive, could emerge from the Khashoggi crisis, that has severely tarnished the kingdom’s image and strained relations with the United States and Western powers, even more defiant rather than chastened by international condemnation of the journalist’s killing.

A pinned tweet by Saud Al-Qahtani, the close associate of Prince Mohammed who this weekend was among several fired senior official reads: “Some brothers blame me for what they view as harshness. But everything has its time, and talk these days requires such language.” That apparently was and could remain Prince Mohammed’s motto.

Said former CIA official, Middle East expert and novelist Graham E. Fuller in a bid to identify the logic of the madness: “As the geopolitics of the world changes—particularly with the emergence of new power centres like China, the return of Russia, the growing independence of Turkey, the resistance of Iran to US domination in the Gulf, the waywardness of Israel, and the greater role of India and many other smaller players—the emergence of a more aggressive and adventuristic Saudi Arabia is not surprising.”

Prince Mohammed’s domestic status and mettle are likely to be put to the test as the crisis unfolds with Turkey leaking further evidence of what happened to Khashoggi or officially publishing whatever proof it has.

Turkish leaks or officially announced evidence would likely cast further doubt on Saudi Arabia’s assertion that Khashoggi died in a brawl in the consulate and fuel US Congressional and European parliamentary calls for sanctions, possibly including an arms embargo, against the kingdom.

In a sharp rebuke, US President Donald J. Trump responded to Saudi Arabia’s widely criticised official version of what happened to Khashoggi by saying that “obviously there's been deception, and there have been lies.”.

A prominent Saudi commentator and close associate of Prince Mohammed, Turki Aldakhil, warned in advance of the Saudi admission that the kingdom would respond to Western sanctions by cosying up to Russia and China. No doubt that could happen if Saudi Arabia is forced to seeks alternative to shield itself against possible sanctions.

That, however, does not mean that Prince Mohammed could not be brazen in his effort to engineer a situation in which the Trump administration would have no choice but to fully re-engage with the kingdom.

Despite pundits’ suggestion that Trump’s Saudi Arabia-anchored Middle East strategy that appears focussed on isolating Iran, crippling it economically with harsh sanctions, and potentially forcing a change of regime is in jeopardy because of the damage Prince Mohammed’s international reputation has suffered, Iran could prove to be the crown prince’s window of opportunity.

“The problem is that under MBS, Saudi Arabia has become an unreliable strategic partner whose every move seems to help rather than hinder Iran. Yemen intervention is both a humanitarian disaster and a low cost/high gain opportunity for Iran,” tweeted former US Middle East negotiator Martin Indyk, referring to Prince Mohammed by his initials.

“Trump needed to make clear he wouldn’t validate or protect him from Congressional reaction unless he took responsibility. It’s too late for that now. Therefore I fear he will neither step up or grow up, the crisis will deepen and Iran will continue to reap the windfall,” Indyk said in another tweet.

If that was likely an unintended consequence of Prince Mohammed’s overly assertive policy and crude and ill-fated attempts to put his stamp on the Middle East prior to the murder of Khashoggi, it may since in a twisted manner serve his purpose.

To the degree that Prince Mohammed has had a thought-out grand strategy since his ascendancy in 2015, it was to ensure US support and Washington’s reengagement in what he saw as a common interest: projection of Saudi power at the expense of Iran.

Speaking to The Economist in 2016, Prince Mohammed spelt out his vision of the global balance of power and where he believed Saudi interests lie. “The United States must realise that they are the number one in the world and they have to act like it,” the prince said.

In an indication that he was determined to ensure US re-engagement in the Middle East, Prince Mohammed added: “We did not put enough efforts in order to get our point across. We believe that this will change in the future.”

Beyond the shared US-Saudi goal of clipping Iran’s wings, Prince Mohammed catered to Trump’s priority of garnering economic advantage for the United States and creating jobs. Trump’s assertion that he wants to safeguard $450 billion in deals with Saudi Arabia as he contemplates possible punishment for the killing of Khashoggi is based on the crown prince’s dangling of opportunity.

“When President Trump became president, we’ve changed our armament strategy again for the next 10 years to put more than 60 percent with the United States of America. That’s why we’ve created the $400 billion in opportunities, armaments and investment opportunities, and other trade opportunities. So this is a good achievement for President Trump, for Saudi Arabia,” Prince Mohammed said days after Khashoggi disappeared.

The crown prince drove the point home by transferring $100 million to the US, making good on a long-standing promise to support efforts to stabilize Syria, at the very moment that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last week landed in Riyadh in a bid to defuse the Khashoggi crisis.

A potential effort by Prince Mohammed to engineer a situation in which stepped-up tensions with Iran supersede the fallout of the Khashoggi crisis, particularly in the US, could be fuelled by changing attitudes and tactics in Iran itself.

The shift is being driven by Iran’s need to evade blacklisting by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an international anti-money laundering and terrorism finance watchdog. Meeting the group’s demands for enhanced legislation and implementation is a pre-requisite for ensuring continued European support for circumventing crippling US sanctions.

In recognition of that, Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei dropped his objection to the adoption of the FATF-conform legislation.

If that were not worrisome enough for Prince Mohammed, potential Iranian efforts to engage if not with the Trump administration with those segments of the US political elite that are opposed to the president could move the crown prince to significantly raise the stakes, try to thwart Iranian efforts, and put the Khashoggi crisis behind him.

Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh, head of parliament’s influential national security and foreign policy commission, signalled the potential shift in Iranian policy by suggesting that “there is a new diplomatic atmosphere for de-escalation with America. There is room for adopting the diplomacy of talk and lobbying by Iran with the current which opposes Trump… The diplomatic channel with America should not be closed because America is not just about Trump.”

Should he opt, to escalate Middle Eastern tensions, Prince Mohammed could aggravate the war in Yemen, viewed by Saudi Arabia and the Trump administration as a proxy war with Iran, or seek to provoke Iran by attempting to stir unrest among its multiple ethnic minorities.

To succeed, Prince Mohammed would have to ensure that Iran takes the bait. So far, Iran has sat back, gloating as the crown prince and the kingdom are increasingly cornered by the Khashoggi crisis, not wanting to jeopardize its potential outreach to Trump’s opponents as well as Europe.

That could change if Prince Mohammed decides to act on his vow in 2017 that “we won’t wait for the battle to be in Saudi Arabia Instead, we will work so that the battle is for them in Iran, not in Saudi Arabia.” 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Embattled Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman could prove to be not only a cat with nine lives but also one that makes even stranger jumps. King Salman’s announcement that Prince Mohammed was put in charge of reorganising Saudi intelligence at the same time that the kingdom for the first time admitted that journalist Jamal Khashoggi had been killed in its Istanbul consulate signalled that the crown prince’s wings were not being clipped, at least not immediately and not publicly.

Embattled Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman could prove to be not only a cat with nine lives but also one that makes even stranger jumps. King Salman’s announcement that Prince Mohammed was put in charge of reorganising Saudi intelligence at the same time that the kingdom for the first time admitted that journalist Jamal Khashoggi had been killed in its Istanbul consulate signalled that the crown prince’s wings were not being clipped, at least not immediately and not publicly. With little prospect for a palace coup and a frail King Salman unlikely to assume for any lengthy period full control of the levers of power, Prince Mohammed, viewed by many as reckless and impulsive, could emerge from the Khashoggi crisis, that has severely tarnished the kingdom’s image and strained relations with the United States and Western powers, even more defiant rather than chastened by international condemnation of the journalist’s killing. A pinned tweet by Saud Al-Qahtani, the close associate of Prince Mohammed who this weekend was among several fired senior official reads: “Some brothers blame me for what they view as harshness. But everything has its time, and talk these days requires such language.” That apparently was and could remain Prince Mohammed’s motto. Said former CIA official, Middle East expert and novelist Graham E. Fuller in a bid to identify the logic of the madness: “As the geopolitics of the world changes—particularly with the emergence of new power centres like China, the return of Russia, the growing independence of Turkey, the resistance of Iran to US domination in the Gulf, the waywardness of Israel, and the greater role of India and many other smaller players—the emergence of a more aggressive and adventuristic Saudi Arabia is not surprising.” Prince Mohammed’s domestic status and mettle are likely to be put to the test as the crisis unfolds with Turkey leaking further evidence of what happened to Khashoggi or officially publishing whatever proof it has. Turkish leaks or officially announced evidence would likely cast further doubt on Saudi Arabia’s assertion that Khashoggi died in a brawl in the consulate and fuel US Congressional and European parliamentary calls for sanctions, possibly including an arms embargo, against the kingdom. In a sharp rebuke, US President Donald J. Trump responded to Saudi Arabia’s widely criticised official version of what happened to Khashoggi by saying that “obviously there's been deception, and there have been lies.”. A prominent Saudi commentator and close associate of Prince Mohammed, Turki Aldakhil, warned in advance of the Saudi admission that the kingdom would respond to Western sanctions by cosying up to Russia and China. No doubt that could happen if Saudi Arabia is forced to seeks alternative to shield itself against possible sanctions. That, however, does not mean that Prince Mohammed could not be brazen in his effort to engineer a situation in which the Trump administration would have no choice but to fully re-engage with the kingdom. Despite pundits’ suggestion that Trump’s Saudi Arabia-anchored Middle East strategy that appears focussed on isolating Iran, crippling it economically with harsh sanctions, and potentially forcing a change of regime is in jeopardy because of the damage Prince Mohammed’s international reputation has suffered, Iran could prove to be the crown prince’s window of opportunity. “The problem is that under MBS, Saudi Arabia has become an unreliable strategic partner whose every move seems to help rather than hinder Iran. Yemen intervention is both a humanitarian disaster and a low cost/high gain opportunity for Iran,” tweeted former US Middle East negotiator Martin Indyk, referring to Prince Mohammed by his initials. “Trump needed to make clear he wouldn’t validate or protect him from Congressional reaction unless he took responsibility. It’s too late for that now. Therefore I fear he will neither step up or grow up, the crisis will deepen and Iran will continue to reap the windfall,” Indyk said in another tweet. If that was likely an unintended consequence of Prince Mohammed’s overly assertive policy and crude and ill-fated attempts to put his stamp on the Middle East prior to the murder of Khashoggi, it may since in a twisted manner serve his purpose. To the degree that Prince Mohammed has had a thought-out grand strategy since his ascendancy in 2015, it was to ensure US support and Washington’s reengagement in what he saw as a common interest: projection of Saudi power at the expense of Iran. Speaking to The Economist in 2016, Prince Mohammed spelt out his vision of the global balance of power and where he believed Saudi interests lie. “The United States must realise that they are the number one in the world and they have to act like it,” the prince said. In an indication that he was determined to ensure US re-engagement in the Middle East, Prince Mohammed added: “We did not put enough efforts in order to get our point across. We believe that this will change in the future.” Beyond the shared US-Saudi goal of clipping Iran’s wings, Prince Mohammed catered to Trump’s priority of garnering economic advantage for the United States and creating jobs. Trump’s assertion that he wants to safeguard $450 billion in deals with Saudi Arabia as he contemplates possible punishment for the killing of Khashoggi is based on the crown prince’s dangling of opportunity. “When President Trump became president, we’ve changed our armament strategy again for the next 10 years to put more than 60 percent with the United States of America. That’s why we’ve created the $400 billion in opportunities, armaments and investment opportunities, and other trade opportunities. So this is a good achievement for President Trump, for Saudi Arabia,” Prince Mohammed said days after Khashoggi disappeared. The crown prince drove the point home by transferring $100 million to the US, making good on a long-standing promise to support efforts to stabilize Syria, at the very moment that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last week landed in Riyadh in a bid to defuse the Khashoggi crisis. A potential effort by Prince Mohammed to engineer a situation in which stepped-up tensions with Iran supersede the fallout of the Khashoggi crisis, particularly in the US, could be fuelled by changing attitudes and tactics in Iran itself. The shift is being driven by Iran’s need to evade blacklisting by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an international anti-money laundering and terrorism finance watchdog. Meeting the group’s demands for enhanced legislation and implementation is a pre-requisite for ensuring continued European support for circumventing crippling US sanctions. In recognition of that, Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei dropped his objection to the adoption of the FATF-conform legislation. If that were not worrisome enough for Prince Mohammed, potential Iranian efforts to engage if not with the Trump administration with those segments of the US political elite that are opposed to the president could move the crown prince to significantly raise the stakes, try to thwart Iranian efforts, and put the Khashoggi crisis behind him. Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh, head of parliament’s influential national security and foreign policy commission, signalled the potential shift in Iranian policy by suggesting that “there is a new diplomatic atmosphere for de-escalation with America. There is room for adopting the diplomacy of talk and lobbying by Iran with the current which opposes Trump… The diplomatic channel with America should not be closed because America is not just about Trump.” Should he opt, to escalate Middle Eastern tensions, Prince Mohammed could aggravate the war in Yemen, viewed by Saudi Arabia and the Trump administration as a proxy war with Iran, or seek to provoke Iran by attempting to stir unrest among its multiple ethnic minorities. To succeed, Prince Mohammed would have to ensure that Iran takes the bait. So far, Iran has sat back, gloating as the crown prince and the kingdom are increasingly cornered by the Khashoggi crisis, not wanting to jeopardize its potential outreach to Trump’s opponents as well as Europe. That could change if Prince Mohammed decides to act on his vow in 2017 that “we won’t wait for the battle to be in Saudi Arabia Instead, we will work so that the battle is for them in Iran, not in Saudi Arabia.” (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Jamal Khashoggi's killing: What are Trump's options?

Growing Western political and corporate reluctance to be associated with Saudi Arabia in the wake of the suspected killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi spotlights fundamentally different investment strategies and environments in the bulk of Asia and the oil-rich Gulf states, the continent’s most western flank.

The Khashoggi crisis highlighted the fact that much of investment in the Gulf, irrespective of whether it is domestic, Western or Chinese, comes from financial, technology and other service industries, the arms industry or Gulf governments. It is focused on services, infrastructure or enhancing the state’s capacities rather than on manufacturing, industrial development, and the nurturing of an independent private sector.

The crisis has put on display the risks Gulf governments run by adopting policies that significantly tarnish their international reputations. Technology, media, financial and other services industries, as well as various European ministers and the US Treasury Secretary, have cancelled, in the wake of Khashoggi’s disappearance and likely killing while visiting the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, their participation in Davos in the Desert, a high-profile investors’ conference in Riyadh later this month.

By contrast, the military industry, with US President Donald J. Trump’s encouragement, has proven so far less worried about reputational damage.

Sponsored by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is suspected of being responsible for Khashoggi’s likely murder, the conference was intended to attract investment in his Vision 2030 plan to reform and diversify the Saudi economy.

In highlighting differences in investment strategies in the Middle East and the rest of Asia, the fallout of Khashoggi’s disappearance goes beyond the parameters of a single incident. It suggests that foreign investment must be embedded in broader social and economic policies as well as an environment that promises stability to ensure that it is productive, contributes to sustainable growth, and benefits broad segments of the population.

In contrast to the Gulf where, with the exception of state-run airlines and DP World, Dubai’s global port operator, the bulk of investment in portfolios managed by sovereign wealth funds, trophies or investment designed to enhance a country’s international prestige and soft power, major Asian nations like China and India have used investment to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, foster a substantial middle class, and create an industrial base.

To be sure, with small populations, Gulf states are more likely to ensure sustainability in services and oil and gas derivatives rather than in manufacturing and industry. Nonetheless, that too requires enabling policies and an education system that encourages critical thinking and the freedom to question, allow one’s mind to roam without fear of repercussion, and grants free, unfettered access to information – categories that are becoming increasingly rare in a part of the world in which freedoms are severely curtailed.

China’s $1 trillion, infrastructure-driven Belt and Road initiative may be the Asian exception that would come closest to some of the Gulf’s soft power investments. Yet, even so, the Belt and Road initiative, designed to alleviate domestic over capacity by state-owned companies that are not beholden to shareholders’ short-term demands and/or geopolitical gain, contributes to productive economic growth in the People’s Republic itself.

Asian nations, moreover, have been able to manage investors’ expectations in an environment of relative political stability. By contrast, Saudi Arabia damaged confidence in its ability to reform and diversify its oil-based economy when after repeated delays it suspended indefinitely plans to list five per cent of its national oil company, Saudi Arabian Oil Company or Aramco, in what would have been the world’s largest-ever initial public offering.

The Khashoggi crisis and the Aramco delay followed a series of political initiatives for which there was little equivalent in the rest of Asia. These included the Saudi-United Arab Emirates military campaign in Yemen causing the world’s worst post-World War Two humanitarian crisis; the 16-month-old diplomatic and economic embargo of Qatar by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt; the detention and failed effort to force Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri to resign; and the diplomatic Saudi spat with Canada in response to a tweet criticizing the kingdom’s human rights record. As a result, foreign direct investment in Saudi Arabia last year plunged to a 14-year low.

All of this is not to say that the rest of Asia does not have its own questionable policies such as Chinese claims in the South China Sea or the Pakistani-Indian feud, and questionable business practices such as China’s alleged industrial espionage. However, with the exception of China’s massive repression of Turkic Muslims in its north-western province of Xinjiang, none of these is likely to fundamentally undermine investor confidence, derail existing social and economic policies that have produced results or produce situations in which avoidance of reputational damage becomes a priority.

At the bottom line, China is no less autocratic than the Gulf states, while Hindu nationalism in India fits a global trend towards populism and illiberal democracy. Nevertheless, what differentiates much of Asia from the Gulf and accounts for its economic success are policies that ensure a relatively stable environment and are focused on social and economic enhancement rather than primarily on regime survival. That may be the lesson for Gulf rulers. 
&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Growing Western political and corporate reluctance to be associated with Saudi Arabia in the wake of the suspected killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi spotlights fundamentally different investment strategies and environments in the bulk of Asia and the oil-rich Gulf states, the continent’s most western flank.

Growing Western political and corporate reluctance to be associated with Saudi Arabia in the wake of the suspected killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi spotlights fundamentally different investment strategies and environments in the bulk of Asia and the oil-rich Gulf states, the continent’s most western flank. The Khashoggi crisis highlighted the fact that much of investment in the Gulf, irrespective of whether it is domestic, Western or Chinese, comes from financial, technology and other service industries, the arms industry or Gulf governments. It is focused on services, infrastructure or enhancing the state’s capacities rather than on manufacturing, industrial development, and the nurturing of an independent private sector. The crisis has put on display the risks Gulf governments run by adopting policies that significantly tarnish their international reputations. Technology, media, financial and other services industries, as well as various European ministers and the US Treasury Secretary, have cancelled, in the wake of Khashoggi’s disappearance and likely killing while visiting the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, their participation in Davos in the Desert, a high-profile investors’ conference in Riyadh later this month. By contrast, the military industry, with US President Donald J. Trump’s encouragement, has proven so far less worried about reputational damage. Sponsored by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is suspected of being responsible for Khashoggi’s likely murder, the conference was intended to attract investment in his Vision 2030 plan to reform and diversify the Saudi economy. In highlighting differences in investment strategies in the Middle East and the rest of Asia, the fallout of Khashoggi’s disappearance goes beyond the parameters of a single incident. It suggests that foreign investment must be embedded in broader social and economic policies as well as an environment that promises stability to ensure that it is productive, contributes to sustainable growth, and benefits broad segments of the population. In contrast to the Gulf where, with the exception of state-run airlines and DP World, Dubai’s global port operator, the bulk of investment in portfolios managed by sovereign wealth funds, trophies or investment designed to enhance a country’s international prestige and soft power, major Asian nations like China and India have used investment to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, foster a substantial middle class, and create an industrial base. To be sure, with small populations, Gulf states are more likely to ensure sustainability in services and oil and gas derivatives rather than in manufacturing and industry. Nonetheless, that too requires enabling policies and an education system that encourages critical thinking and the freedom to question, allow one’s mind to roam without fear of repercussion, and grants free, unfettered access to information – categories that are becoming increasingly rare in a part of the world in which freedoms are severely curtailed. China’s $1 trillion, infrastructure-driven Belt and Road initiative may be the Asian exception that would come closest to some of the Gulf’s soft power investments. Yet, even so, the Belt and Road initiative, designed to alleviate domestic over capacity by state-owned companies that are not beholden to shareholders’ short-term demands and/or geopolitical gain, contributes to productive economic growth in the People’s Republic itself. Asian nations, moreover, have been able to manage investors’ expectations in an environment of relative political stability. By contrast, Saudi Arabia damaged confidence in its ability to reform and diversify its oil-based economy when after repeated delays it suspended indefinitely plans to list five per cent of its national oil company, Saudi Arabian Oil Company or Aramco, in what would have been the world’s largest-ever initial public offering. The Khashoggi crisis and the Aramco delay followed a series of political initiatives for which there was little equivalent in the rest of Asia. These included the Saudi-United Arab Emirates military campaign in Yemen causing the world’s worst post-World War Two humanitarian crisis; the 16-month-old diplomatic and economic embargo of Qatar by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt; the detention and failed effort to force Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri to resign; and the diplomatic Saudi spat with Canada in response to a tweet criticizing the kingdom’s human rights record. As a result, foreign direct investment in Saudi Arabia last year plunged to a 14-year low. All of this is not to say that the rest of Asia does not have its own questionable policies such as Chinese claims in the South China Sea or the Pakistani-Indian feud, and questionable business practices such as China’s alleged industrial espionage. However, with the exception of China’s massive repression of Turkic Muslims in its north-western province of Xinjiang, none of these is likely to fundamentally undermine investor confidence, derail existing social and economic policies that have produced results or produce situations in which avoidance of reputational damage becomes a priority. At the bottom line, China is no less autocratic than the Gulf states, while Hindu nationalism in India fits a global trend towards populism and illiberal democracy. Nevertheless, what differentiates much of Asia from the Gulf and accounts for its economic success are policies that ensure a relatively stable environment and are focused on social and economic enhancement rather than primarily on regime survival. That may be the lesson for Gulf rulers. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Jamal Khashoggi crisis highlights why investment in Asia is more productive

With Turkish investigators asserting that they have found further evidence that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed when he visited the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul two weeks ago, Turkey appears to be leveraging the case to enhance its position as a leader of the Islamic World and reposition itself as a key US ally.

To enhance its geopolitical position vis a vis Saudi Arabia as well as Russia and Iran and potentially garner economic advantage at a time that it is struggling to reverse a financial downturn, Turkey has so far leaked assertions of evidence it says it has of Khashoggi’s killing rather than announced them officially.

In doing so, Turkey has forced Saudi Arabia to allow Turkish investigators accompanied by Saudi officials to enter the consulate and positioned President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as the kingdom’s saviour by engineering a situation that will allow the kingdom to craft a face-saving way out of the crisis.

Saudi Arabia is reportedly considering announcing that Khashoggi, a widely-acclaimed journalist critical of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman who went into self-exile because he feared arrest, was killed in either a rogue operation or an attempt gone awry to forcibly repatriate it him back to the kingdom.

US President Donald Trump offered the Turks and Saudis a helping hand by referring this week to the possibility of Khashoggi having been killed by rogues and dispatching Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Riyadh and Ankara.

Khashoggi, seeking to obtain proof of his divorce in the kingdom so that he could marry his Turkish fiancé, visited the consulate two weeks ago for the second time after having allegedly received assurances that he would be safe.

Turkey emerges as the crisis moves towards a situation in which an official version is that seeks to shield Prince Mohammed from being held responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance and likely murder with its international status significantly enhanced.

Turkish leverage is further boosted by the fact that Saudi Arabia -- its image in government, political and business circles significantly damaged by the crisis -- and the Trump administration that wants to ensure that the kingdom’s ruling family emerges from the crisis as unscathed as possible, are in Ankara’s debt.

As a result, the denouement of the Khashoggi crisis is likely to alter the dynamics in the long-standing competition between Turkey and Saudi Arabia for the leadership of the Islamic world.

It also strengthens Turkey’s position in its transactional alliance with Russia and Iran as they manoeuvre to end the war in Syria in a manner that cements Bashar al-Assad’s presidency while addressing Turkish concerns.

Turkey’s position in its rivalry with Saudi Arabia is likely to also benefit from the fact that whatever face-saving solution the kingdom adopts is likely to be flawed when tested by available facts and certain to be challenged by a host of critics, even if many will see Turkey as having facilitated a political solution rather than ensuring that the truth is established.

Already, Khashoggi’s family who was initially quoted by Saudi Arabia’s state-controlled media as backing Saudi denials of responsibility, insinuations that his fate was the product of a conspiracy by Qatar and/or Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood, and casting doubt on the integrity of the journalist’s Turkish fiancée, has called for “the establishment of an independent and impartial international commission to inquire into the circumstances of his death.”

Turkey and Saudi Arabia differ on multiple issues that divide the Muslim world. Turkey has vowed to help Iran circumvent Saudi-supported US sanctions imposed after Trump withdrew in May from the 2015 international agreement that curbed the Islamic republic’s nuclear agreement.

Turkey further backs Qatar in its dispute with a Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led alliance that has diplomatically and economically boycotted the Gulf state for the last 16 months. The credibility of the alliance’s allegation that Qatar supports terrorism and extremism has been dented by the growing conviction that Saudi Arabia, whether in a planned, rogue or repatriation effort gone wrong, was responsible for Khashoggi’s killing.

Khashoggi’s death, moreover, highlighted differing approaches towards the Brotherhood, one of the Middle East’s most persecuted, yet influential Islamist groupings. Saudi Arabia, alongside the UAE and Egypt, have designated the Brotherhood a terrorist organization.

Many brothers have sought refuge in Turkey with Erdogan empathetic and supportive of the group. A former brother, Khashoggi criticized Saudi repression of the group.

The Saudi-Turkish rivalry for leadership of the Muslim world was most evident in the two countries’ responses to Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and his as yet unpublished plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Turkey emerged as the leader of Islamic denunciation of Trump’s move of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognition of the city as Israel’s capital after Prince Mohammed tried to dampen opposition. Ultimately, King Salman was forced to step in a bid to clarify the kingdom’s position and counter Turkish moves.

No matter how Turkey decides to officially release whatever evidence it has, Saudi Arabia figures out how to respond and halt the haemorrhaging, and Pompeo holds talks with King Salman and Erdogan, Turkey is likely to emerge from the crisis strengthened despite its increasingly illiberal and increasingly authoritarian rule at home,

Turkey’s success is all the more remarkable given that it has neither Saudi Arabia’s financial muscle nor the mantle the kingdom adopts as the custodian of Islam’s two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina.

A successful political resolution of the Khashoggi crisis is likely to earn it the gratitude of the Trump administration, Saudi Arabia, and its other detractors like the UAE who support the kingdom even if it may help it to regain popularity in the Arab world lost as a result of its swing towards authoritarianism, alliance with Iran and Qatar, and support for Islamism.

One immediate Turkish victory is likely to be Saudi acquiesce to Erdogan’s demand that Saudi Arabia drop its support for Kurdish rebels in Syria that Ankara sees as terrorists – a move that would boost Turkey’s position the Turkish-Russian-Iranian jockeying for influence in a post-war Syria. Turkey is also likely to see Saudi Arabia support it economically.

Turkey may, however, be playing for higher stakes.

Turkey "wants to back Saudi Arabia to the wall. (It wants to) disparage the 'reformist' image that Saudi Arabia has been constructing in the West” in a bid to get the US to choose Ankara as its primary ally in the Middle East, said international relations scholar Serhat Guvenc.

Turkey’s relations in recent years have soured as a result of Turkish insistence that the US is harbouring a terrorist by refusing to extradite Fethullah Gulen, the preacher it accuses of having engineered the failed 2016 coup; detaining American nationals and US consulate employees on allegedly trumped-up charges, cosying up to Russia and purchasing its S-400 surface to air missile system, and aligning itself with Iran. Relations were further strained by US support for Syrian Kurds.

Trump, however, this week heralded a new era in US-Turkish relations after the release of unsubscribeAndrew Brunson, an evangelist preacher who was imprisoned in Turkey for two years on charges of espionage.

Guvenc argued that Turkey hopes that Saudi Arabia’s battered image will help it persuade Trump that Turkey rather than the kingdom is its strongest and most reliable ally alongside Israel in the Middle East.

Said journalist Ferhat Unlu: “Turkey knows how to manage diplomatic crises. Its strategy is to manage tensions to its advantage.” 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

With Turkish investigators asserting that they have found further evidence that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed when he visited the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul two weeks ago, Turkey appears to be leveraging the case to enhance its position as a leader of the Islamic World and reposition itself as a key US ally.

With Turkish investigators asserting that they have found further evidence that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed when he visited the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul two weeks ago, Turkey appears to be leveraging the case to enhance its position as a leader of the Islamic World and reposition itself as a key US ally. To enhance its geopolitical position vis a vis Saudi Arabia as well as Russia and Iran and potentially garner economic advantage at a time that it is struggling to reverse a financial downturn, Turkey has so far leaked assertions of evidence it says it has of Khashoggi’s killing rather than announced them officially. In doing so, Turkey has forced Saudi Arabia to allow Turkish investigators accompanied by Saudi officials to enter the consulate and positioned President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as the kingdom’s saviour by engineering a situation that will allow the kingdom to craft a face-saving way out of the crisis. Saudi Arabia is reportedly considering announcing that Khashoggi, a widely-acclaimed journalist critical of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman who went into self-exile because he feared arrest, was killed in either a rogue operation or an attempt gone awry to forcibly repatriate it him back to the kingdom. US President Donald Trump offered the Turks and Saudis a helping hand by referring this week to the possibility of Khashoggi having been killed by rogues and dispatching Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Riyadh and Ankara. Khashoggi, seeking to obtain proof of his divorce in the kingdom so that he could marry his Turkish fiancé, visited the consulate two weeks ago for the second time after having allegedly received assurances that he would be safe. Turkey emerges as the crisis moves towards a situation in which an official version is that seeks to shield Prince Mohammed from being held responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance and likely murder with its international status significantly enhanced. Turkish leverage is further boosted by the fact that Saudi Arabia -- its image in government, political and business circles significantly damaged by the crisis -- and the Trump administration that wants to ensure that the kingdom’s ruling family emerges from the crisis as unscathed as possible, are in Ankara’s debt. As a result, the denouement of the Khashoggi crisis is likely to alter the dynamics in the long-standing competition between Turkey and Saudi Arabia for the leadership of the Islamic world. It also strengthens Turkey’s position in its transactional alliance with Russia and Iran as they manoeuvre to end the war in Syria in a manner that cements Bashar al-Assad’s presidency while addressing Turkish concerns. Turkey’s position in its rivalry with Saudi Arabia is likely to also benefit from the fact that whatever face-saving solution the kingdom adopts is likely to be flawed when tested by available facts and certain to be challenged by a host of critics, even if many will see Turkey as having facilitated a political solution rather than ensuring that the truth is established. Already, Khashoggi’s family who was initially quoted by Saudi Arabia’s state-controlled media as backing Saudi denials of responsibility, insinuations that his fate was the product of a conspiracy by Qatar and/or Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood, and casting doubt on the integrity of the journalist’s Turkish fiancée, has called for “the establishment of an independent and impartial international commission to inquire into the circumstances of his death.” Turkey and Saudi Arabia differ on multiple issues that divide the Muslim world. Turkey has vowed to help Iran circumvent Saudi-supported US sanctions imposed after Trump withdrew in May from the 2015 international agreement that curbed the Islamic republic’s nuclear agreement. Turkey further backs Qatar in its dispute with a Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led alliance that has diplomatically and economically boycotted the Gulf state for the last 16 months. The credibility of the alliance’s allegation that Qatar supports terrorism and extremism has been dented by the growing conviction that Saudi Arabia, whether in a planned, rogue or repatriation effort gone wrong, was responsible for Khashoggi’s killing. Khashoggi’s death, moreover, highlighted differing approaches towards the Brotherhood, one of the Middle East’s most persecuted, yet influential Islamist groupings. Saudi Arabia, alongside the UAE and Egypt, have designated the Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Many brothers have sought refuge in Turkey with Erdogan empathetic and supportive of the group. A former brother, Khashoggi criticized Saudi repression of the group. The Saudi-Turkish rivalry for leadership of the Muslim world was most evident in the two countries’ responses to Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and his as yet unpublished plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Turkey emerged as the leader of Islamic denunciation of Trump’s move of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognition of the city as Israel’s capital after Prince Mohammed tried to dampen opposition. Ultimately, King Salman was forced to step in a bid to clarify the kingdom’s position and counter Turkish moves. No matter how Turkey decides to officially release whatever evidence it has, Saudi Arabia figures out how to respond and halt the haemorrhaging, and Pompeo holds talks with King Salman and Erdogan, Turkey is likely to emerge from the crisis strengthened despite its increasingly illiberal and increasingly authoritarian rule at home, Turkey’s success is all the more remarkable given that it has neither Saudi Arabia’s financial muscle nor the mantle the kingdom adopts as the custodian of Islam’s two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina. A successful political resolution of the Khashoggi crisis is likely to earn it the gratitude of the Trump administration, Saudi Arabia, and its other detractors like the UAE who support the kingdom even if it may help it to regain popularity in the Arab world lost as a result of its swing towards authoritarianism, alliance with Iran and Qatar, and support for Islamism. One immediate Turkish victory is likely to be Saudi acquiesce to Erdogan’s demand that Saudi Arabia drop its support for Kurdish rebels in Syria that Ankara sees as terrorists – a move that would boost Turkey’s position the Turkish-Russian-Iranian jockeying for influence in a post-war Syria. Turkey is also likely to see Saudi Arabia support it economically. Turkey may, however, be playing for higher stakes. Turkey "wants to back Saudi Arabia to the wall. (It wants to) disparage the 'reformist' image that Saudi Arabia has been constructing in the West” in a bid to get the US to choose Ankara as its primary ally in the Middle East, said international relations scholar Serhat Guvenc. Turkey’s relations in recent years have soured as a result of Turkish insistence that the US is harbouring a terrorist by refusing to extradite Fethullah Gulen, the preacher it accuses of having engineered the failed 2016 coup; detaining American nationals and US consulate employees on allegedly trumped-up charges, cosying up to Russia and purchasing its S-400 surface to air missile system, and aligning itself with Iran. Relations were further strained by US support for Syrian Kurds. Trump, however, this week heralded a new era in US-Turkish relations after the release of unsubscribeAndrew Brunson, an evangelist preacher who was imprisoned in Turkey for two years on charges of espionage. Guvenc argued that Turkey hopes that Saudi Arabia’s battered image will help it persuade Trump that Turkey rather than the kingdom is its strongest and most reliable ally alongside Israel in the Middle East. Said journalist Ferhat Unlu: “Turkey knows how to manage diplomatic crises. Its strategy is to manage tensions to its advantage.” (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Turkey plays Khashoggi crisis to its geopolitical advantage

A stalemate in efforts to determine what happened to Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi is threatening to escalate into a crisis that could usher in a new era in relations between the United States and some of its closest Arab allies as well as in the region’s energy politics.

In response to US President Donald Trump’s threat of “severe punishment,” if Saudi Arabia is proven to have been responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance while visiting the Kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul, Saudi Arabia is threatening to potentially upset the region’s energy and security architecture.

A tweet by Saudi Arabia’s Washington embassy thanking the United States for not jumping to conclusions did little to offset the words of an unnamed Saudi official quoted by the state-run news agency stressing &nbsp;the kingdom’s “total rejection of any threats and attempts to undermine it, whether through economic sanctions, political pressure or repeating false accusations.”

The official was referring to the Kingdom’s insistence that it was not responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance and assertion that it is confronting a conspiracy by Qatar and/or Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood.

“The Kingdom also affirms that if it is (targeted by) any action, it will respond with greater action,” the official said noting that Saudi Arabia “plays an effective and vital role in the world economy.”

Turki Aldhakhil, a close associate of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and general manager of the kingdom’s state-controlled Al Arabiya news network, claimed in an online article that Saudi leaders were discussing 30 ways of responding to possible US sanctions.

They allegedly included allowing oil prices to rise up to $ 200 per barrel, which according to Aldhakhil, would lead to “the death” of the US economy, pricing Saudi oil in Chinese yuan instead of dollars, an end to intelligence sharing, and a military alliance with Russia that would involve a Russian military base in the kingdom.

It remains unclear whether Aldhakhil was reflecting serious discussions among secretive Saudi leaders or whether his article was intended either as a scare tactic or a trial balloon. Aldakhil’s claim that a Saudi response to Western sanctions could entail a reconciliation with the Kingdom’s arch enemy, Iran, would make his assertion seem more like a geopolitical and economic bluff.

Meanwhile, in what appeared to be a coordinated response aimed at demonstrating that Saudi Arabia was not isolated, Oman, Bahrain, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt rushed to express solidarity with the kingdom. Like Turkey, Bahrain, Egypt and the UAE have a track record of suppressing independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Ironically, Turkey may be the Kingdom’s best friend in the Khashoggi crisis if its claims to have incontrovertible proof of what happened in the consulate prove to be true. Turkey has so far refrained from making that evidence public, giving Saudi Arabia the opportunity to come up with a credible explanation.

"Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan wants to give Saudis an exit out of Khashoggi case, hoping the Saudi king/crown prince will blame ‘rogue elements’ for the alleged murder, then throwing someone important under the bus. This would let Erdogan walk away looking good &amp; prevent rupture in Turkey-Saudi ties,” tweeted Turkey scholar Soner Cagaptay.

The Saudi news agency report and Aldakhil’s article suggest that Prince Mohammed believes that Saudi Arabia either retains the clout to impose its will on much of the international community or believes that it rather than its Western critics would emerge on top from any bruising confrontation.

Prince Mohammed no doubt is reinforced in his belief by rump’s reluctance to include an arms embargo in his concept of severe punishment. He may also feel that Western support for the Saudi-UAE-led war in Yemen and reluctance to credibly take the kingdom to task for its conduct of the war was an indication that he was free to do as he pleased.

Prince Mohammed may have been further strengthened in his belief by the initial course of events 28 years ago, the last time that the fate of a journalist was at the centre of a crisis between a Western power and an Arab country.

At the time, British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, similar to Trump’s inclination, refused to impose economic sanctions after Iraqi president Saddam Hussein ordered the arrest, torture and execution of Farhad Barzoft, a young London-based Iranian journalist who reported for The Observer.

Since declassified British government documents disclosed that Thatcher’s government did not want to jeopardise commercial relations despite its view of the Iraqi government as a “ruthless and disagreeable regime.”

The comparison between the Khashoggi crisis and the case of Barzoft goes beyond Western governments’ reluctance to jeopardise commercial relationships.

Barzoft was executed months before Hussein’s military invaded Kuwait prompting US-led military action that forced his troops to withdraw from the Gulf state, crippling economic sanctions, and ultimately the 2003 Gulf War that, no matter how ill-advised, led to the Iraqi leader’s downfall and ultimate execution.

Prince Mohammed’s ill-fated military intervention in Yemen, of which Khashoggi was critical in one of his last Washington Post columns, has tarnished the kingdom’s international prestige and sparked calls in the US Congress and European parliaments for an embargo on arms sales that have gained momentum with the disappearance of the Saudi journalist.

To be sure Saudi Arabia enjoys greater leverage than Iraq did in 1990. By the same token, 2018 is not 1973, the first and only time the kingdom ever wielded oil as a weapon against the United States. At the time, the US was dependent on Middle Eastern oil, today it is one of, if not the world’s largest producer.

More fundamentally, Prince Mohammed appears to show some of the traits Hussein put on display, including a seeming lack of understanding of the limits of power and best ways to wield it, a tendency towards impetuousness, a willingness to take risks and gamble without having a credible exit strategy, a refusal to tolerate any form of criticism, and a streak of ruthlessness.

"We're discovering what this 'new king' is all about, and it's getting worrisome. The dark side is getting darker," said David Ottaway, a journalist and scholar who has covered Saudi Arabia for decades.

Hussein was public and transparent about Barzoft’s fate even if his assertion that the journalist was a spy lacked credibility and the journalist’s confession and trial were a mockery of justice.

Prince Mohammed flatly denies any involvement in the disappearance of Khashoggi and appears to believe that he can bully himself out of the crisis in the absence of any evidence that the journalist left the Kingdom’s Istanbul consulate of his own volition.

&nbsp;Hussein miscalculated with his invasion of Kuwait shortly after getting away with the killing of Barzoft. Prince Mohammed too may well have miscalculated if the Kingdom is proven to be responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance.

Hussein’s reputation and international goodwill was irreparably damaged by his execution of Barzoft and invasion of Kuwait.

Khashoggi’s disappearance has dealt a body blow to Saudi Arabia’s prestige irrespective of whether the journalist emerges from the current crisis alive or dead.

King Salman and the Kingdom appear for now to be rallying the wagons around the crown prince.

At the same time, the king has stepped into the fray publicly for the first time by phoning Turkish president Erdogan to reaffirm Saudi cooperation with an investigation into Khashoggi’s fate.

It remains unclear whether that phone call will pave the way for Turkish investigators to enter the Istanbul consulate as well as the Saudi consul general’s home and whether they will be allowed to carry out forensics.

The longer the investigation into Khashoggi’s fate stalls, the more Saudi Arabia will come under pressure to put forth a credible explanation and the harder Western leaders will be pressed by public opinion and lawmakers to take credible action if Saudi Arabia is proven to be responsible.

A Saudi decision to act on its threats to rejigger its security arrangements and energy policy, even if overstated by Aldhakhil, in response to steps by Western nations to penalise the kingdom, &nbsp;could prove to have not only far-reaching international consequences but, in the final analysis, also equally momentous domestic ones.

“Looks like #Saudi royal family is coming together to protect the family business. Eventually, there will be internal reckoning with what transpired. Not now. Now is the time to save the family reign,” tweeted Middle East scholar Randa Slim.

Said former US State Department and White House official Elliott Abrams: “Jamal Khashoggi lost control of his fate when he entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Mohammed bin Salman must act quickly to regain control of his own.”&nbsp; 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

A stalemate in efforts to determine what happened to Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi is threatening to escalate into a crisis that could usher in a new era in relations between the United States and some of its closest Arab allies as well as in the region’s energy politics.

A stalemate in efforts to determine what happened to Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi is threatening to escalate into a crisis that could usher in a new era in relations between the United States and some of its closest Arab allies as well as in the region’s energy politics. In response to US President Donald Trump’s threat of “severe punishment,” if Saudi Arabia is proven to have been responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance while visiting the Kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul, Saudi Arabia is threatening to potentially upset the region’s energy and security architecture. A tweet by Saudi Arabia’s Washington embassy thanking the United States for not jumping to conclusions did little to offset the words of an unnamed Saudi official quoted by the state-run news agency stressing the kingdom’s “total rejection of any threats and attempts to undermine it, whether through economic sanctions, political pressure or repeating false accusations.” The official was referring to the Kingdom’s insistence that it was not responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance and assertion that it is confronting a conspiracy by Qatar and/or Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood. “The Kingdom also affirms that if it is (targeted by) any action, it will respond with greater action,” the official said noting that Saudi Arabia “plays an effective and vital role in the world economy.” Turki Aldhakhil, a close associate of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and general manager of the kingdom’s state-controlled Al Arabiya news network, claimed in an online article that Saudi leaders were discussing 30 ways of responding to possible US sanctions. They allegedly included allowing oil prices to rise up to $ 200 per barrel, which according to Aldhakhil, would lead to “the death” of the US economy, pricing Saudi oil in Chinese yuan instead of dollars, an end to intelligence sharing, and a military alliance with Russia that would involve a Russian military base in the kingdom. It remains unclear whether Aldhakhil was reflecting serious discussions among secretive Saudi leaders or whether his article was intended either as a scare tactic or a trial balloon. Aldakhil’s claim that a Saudi response to Western sanctions could entail a reconciliation with the Kingdom’s arch enemy, Iran, would make his assertion seem more like a geopolitical and economic bluff. Meanwhile, in what appeared to be a coordinated response aimed at demonstrating that Saudi Arabia was not isolated, Oman, Bahrain, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt rushed to express solidarity with the kingdom. Like Turkey, Bahrain, Egypt and the UAE have a track record of suppressing independent journalism and freedom of the press. Ironically, Turkey may be the Kingdom’s best friend in the Khashoggi crisis if its claims to have incontrovertible proof of what happened in the consulate prove to be true. Turkey has so far refrained from making that evidence public, giving Saudi Arabia the opportunity to come up with a credible explanation. "Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan wants to give Saudis an exit out of Khashoggi case, hoping the Saudi king/crown prince will blame ‘rogue elements’ for the alleged murder, then throwing someone important under the bus. This would let Erdogan walk away looking good & prevent rupture in Turkey-Saudi ties,” tweeted Turkey scholar Soner Cagaptay. The Saudi news agency report and Aldakhil’s article suggest that Prince Mohammed believes that Saudi Arabia either retains the clout to impose its will on much of the international community or believes that it rather than its Western critics would emerge on top from any bruising confrontation. Prince Mohammed no doubt is reinforced in his belief by rump’s reluctance to include an arms embargo in his concept of severe punishment. He may also feel that Western support for the Saudi-UAE-led war in Yemen and reluctance to credibly take the kingdom to task for its conduct of the war was an indication that he was free to do as he pleased. Prince Mohammed may have been further strengthened in his belief by the initial course of events 28 years ago, the last time that the fate of a journalist was at the centre of a crisis between a Western power and an Arab country. At the time, British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, similar to Trump’s inclination, refused to impose economic sanctions after Iraqi president Saddam Hussein ordered the arrest, torture and execution of Farhad Barzoft, a young London-based Iranian journalist who reported for The Observer. Since declassified British government documents disclosed that Thatcher’s government did not want to jeopardise commercial relations despite its view of the Iraqi government as a “ruthless and disagreeable regime.” The comparison between the Khashoggi crisis and the case of Barzoft goes beyond Western governments’ reluctance to jeopardise commercial relationships. Barzoft was executed months before Hussein’s military invaded Kuwait prompting US-led military action that forced his troops to withdraw from the Gulf state, crippling economic sanctions, and ultimately the 2003 Gulf War that, no matter how ill-advised, led to the Iraqi leader’s downfall and ultimate execution. Prince Mohammed’s ill-fated military intervention in Yemen, of which Khashoggi was critical in one of his last Washington Post columns, has tarnished the kingdom’s international prestige and sparked calls in the US Congress and European parliaments for an embargo on arms sales that have gained momentum with the disappearance of the Saudi journalist. To be sure Saudi Arabia enjoys greater leverage than Iraq did in 1990. By the same token, 2018 is not 1973, the first and only time the kingdom ever wielded oil as a weapon against the United States. At the time, the US was dependent on Middle Eastern oil, today it is one of, if not the world’s largest producer. More fundamentally, Prince Mohammed appears to show some of the traits Hussein put on display, including a seeming lack of understanding of the limits of power and best ways to wield it, a tendency towards impetuousness, a willingness to take risks and gamble without having a credible exit strategy, a refusal to tolerate any form of criticism, and a streak of ruthlessness. "We're discovering what this 'new king' is all about, and it's getting worrisome. The dark side is getting darker," said David Ottaway, a journalist and scholar who has covered Saudi Arabia for decades. Hussein was public and transparent about Barzoft’s fate even if his assertion that the journalist was a spy lacked credibility and the journalist’s confession and trial were a mockery of justice. Prince Mohammed flatly denies any involvement in the disappearance of Khashoggi and appears to believe that he can bully himself out of the crisis in the absence of any evidence that the journalist left the Kingdom’s Istanbul consulate of his own volition. Hussein miscalculated with his invasion of Kuwait shortly after getting away with the killing of Barzoft. Prince Mohammed too may well have miscalculated if the Kingdom is proven to be responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance. Hussein’s reputation and international goodwill was irreparably damaged by his execution of Barzoft and invasion of Kuwait. Khashoggi’s disappearance has dealt a body blow to Saudi Arabia’s prestige irrespective of whether the journalist emerges from the current crisis alive or dead. King Salman and the Kingdom appear for now to be rallying the wagons around the crown prince. At the same time, the king has stepped into the fray publicly for the first time by phoning Turkish president Erdogan to reaffirm Saudi cooperation with an investigation into Khashoggi’s fate. It remains unclear whether that phone call will pave the way for Turkish investigators to enter the Istanbul consulate as well as the Saudi consul general’s home and whether they will be allowed to carry out forensics. The longer the investigation into Khashoggi’s fate stalls, the more Saudi Arabia will come under pressure to put forth a credible explanation and the harder Western leaders will be pressed by public opinion and lawmakers to take credible action if Saudi Arabia is proven to be responsible. A Saudi decision to act on its threats to rejigger its security arrangements and energy policy, even if overstated by Aldhakhil, in response to steps by Western nations to penalise the kingdom, could prove to have not only far-reaching international consequences but, in the final analysis, also equally momentous domestic ones. “Looks like #Saudi royal family is coming together to protect the family business. Eventually, there will be internal reckoning with what transpired. Not now. Now is the time to save the family reign,” tweeted Middle East scholar Randa Slim. Said former US State Department and White House official Elliott Abrams: “Jamal Khashoggi lost control of his fate when he entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Mohammed bin Salman must act quickly to regain control of his own.” (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance deals a body blow to Saudi Arabia’s prestige

Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite being on opposite sides of Middle Eastern divides, are cooperating in Syria to enable youth and women to acquire skills that would either allow them to compete in the job market or turn them into entrepreneurs.

The Saudi-funded, Turkish-executed projects potentially highlight a newly found degree of pragmatism and fluidity among seemingly entrenched alliances in the Middle East that largely pitch Turkey, Iran and Qatar against Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Saudi Arabia and Turkey differ on some of the Middle East’s most important divides. Turkey backs Qatar in its 15-month-old dispute with a Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led alliance that is boycotting the Gulf state economically and diplomatically and is competing with Saudi Arabia, and even more so with its closest ally, the UAE, for influence in the Horn of Africa.

While Turkey and Saudi Arabia are closer in their approach towards Syria, Turkey hosts members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that has been banned in the kingdom and is at the centre of its conflict with Qatar. It also opposes US sanctioning of Iran that has been embraced by Saudi Arabia.

Turkey further has exploited Saudi reluctance to aggressively oppose US President Donald Trump’s pro-Israel policy to position itself as the leader of the Islamic world in supporting the Palestinians. Turkish officials have suggested that the UAE had funded a failed 2016 military coup.

The projects are but one indication of the seeming emergence of a degree of pragmatism on the part of parties on all sides of the Middle Eastern divide. Other indications include differences between Turkey, Russia and Iran over how to handle Idlib, the last rebel-held stronghold in Syria; Bahraini trial balloons suggesting a softening of the boycott of Qatar; and Turkish-German efforts to mend fences with one another.

The signs of flexibility are as fragile as the alliances themselves. They are being put to a test with the disappearance in Istanbul of prominent Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a critic of the kingdom’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who disappeared this week during a visit to the Saudi consulate.

Khashoggi, known for his close ties to the ruling family, went a year ago into self-exile in Washington, after being banned from publishing, which he feared was a prelude to arrest.

Neither Saudi Arabia nor Turkey has so far commented on Khashoggi’s disappearance. A Saudi Press Agency report said an unidentified Saudi national accused of having signed cheques that bounced had been deported to the kingdom on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by Interpol. The agency gave no further details.

While it is unknown whether the agency was referring to Khashoggi, many fear that he may have been kidnapped. It would not be the first time that Saudi Arabia has forcibly repatriated its critics.

A Saudi detention or nabbing of Khashoggi in Istanbul without at least tacit Turkish cooperation would embarrass Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and likely spark a further deterioration of Turkish-Saudi relations. If Turkey was complicit, it would bear testimony to increasing pragmatism.

Meanwhile, Saudi-Turkish cooperation in Syria goes beyond relief and development aid. It helps Turkey create a sphere of influence in areas of Syria near Turkey’s border that are controlled by Turkish troops and administered by Turkey.

In a bid to compliment Turkish hard power in Syria with soft power and counter Kurdish influence, Erdogan’s Religious Affairs Directorate or Diyanet has trained Syrian religious personnel, according to a 104-page report published by the directorate.

The report said that the directorate had spent a total of $34.1 million dollars in Syria on thing like repairing mosques, distributing Kurdish-language Qurans, and educating 11,250 students.

Journalist Amed Dicle said that Diyanet had recruited 5,686 teachers from the ranks of rebels opposed to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad whose curriculum emphasized Turkey’s synthesis between Islam and nationalism and included anti-Kurdish teachings. “Kurds are portrayed as atheists, and the PKK, YPG and other Kurdish fighters are infidels,” Dicle said, referring to the outlawed Kurdish Workers Party and its Syrian offshoot, the People’s Protection Units.

A Syrian imam told Al-Monitor, “We're getting paid by the Turkish government. We're grateful to them and we see that the local population here are happy to be under Turkish rule. For Turkey, religious and national allegiances are one and the same. But our interpretation of Islam may not always be the same. Turkey keeps Kurds under control and that's good for us. Plus, one day Syrians in Turkey may come and settle in these areas.”

Saudi cooperation with Turkey and its anti-Kurdish agenda in Syria has not prevented the kingdom from establishing ties to Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region that borders on Iran with the opening of a consulate in Erbil, initiation of Saudia flights from Jeddah to Erbil, and a visit by Saudi businessmen.

Bahrain reportedly hinted last month that the Gulf states boycotting Qatar may re-open airspace to flights bound from and to Doha. The continued closure has forced Qatar Airways to fly longer routes to circumvent Saudi, UAE and Bahraini airspace at considerable cost to the airline. The report was widely seen as a trial balloon.

Similarly, Erdogan travelled last week to Germany with which it has had strained relations in a bid to increase his options following a summit with Vladimir Putin and Hassan Rouhani, the presidents of Russia and Iran, in which he for now delayed a Syrian-Russian assault on Idlib that would have sent hundreds of thousands, if not millions fleeing towards the Turkish border.

The limitations of the notion, apparently shared by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Erdogan, that deep differences can easily be put aside to pragmatically focus on issues of common interest, a key pillar of Middle Eastern alliances, were on display with the European Parliament this week voting to withhold 70 million euros in pre-accession funding because Turkey had failed to reverse its moves towards authoritarianism.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite being on opposite sides of Middle Eastern divides, are cooperating in Syria to enable youth and women to acquire skills that would either allow them to compete in the job market or turn them into entrepreneurs.

Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite being on opposite sides of Middle Eastern divides, are cooperating in Syria to enable youth and women to acquire skills that would either allow them to compete in the job market or turn them into entrepreneurs. The Saudi-funded, Turkish-executed projects potentially highlight a newly found degree of pragmatism and fluidity among seemingly entrenched alliances in the Middle East that largely pitch Turkey, Iran and Qatar against Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia and Turkey differ on some of the Middle East’s most important divides. Turkey backs Qatar in its 15-month-old dispute with a Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led alliance that is boycotting the Gulf state economically and diplomatically and is competing with Saudi Arabia, and even more so with its closest ally, the UAE, for influence in the Horn of Africa. While Turkey and Saudi Arabia are closer in their approach towards Syria, Turkey hosts members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that has been banned in the kingdom and is at the centre of its conflict with Qatar. It also opposes US sanctioning of Iran that has been embraced by Saudi Arabia. Turkey further has exploited Saudi reluctance to aggressively oppose US President Donald Trump’s pro-Israel policy to position itself as the leader of the Islamic world in supporting the Palestinians. Turkish officials have suggested that the UAE had funded a failed 2016 military coup. The projects are but one indication of the seeming emergence of a degree of pragmatism on the part of parties on all sides of the Middle Eastern divide. Other indications include differences between Turkey, Russia and Iran over how to handle Idlib, the last rebel-held stronghold in Syria; Bahraini trial balloons suggesting a softening of the boycott of Qatar; and Turkish-German efforts to mend fences with one another. The signs of flexibility are as fragile as the alliances themselves. They are being put to a test with the disappearance in Istanbul of prominent Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a critic of the kingdom’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who disappeared this week during a visit to the Saudi consulate. Khashoggi, known for his close ties to the ruling family, went a year ago into self-exile in Washington, after being banned from publishing, which he feared was a prelude to arrest. Neither Saudi Arabia nor Turkey has so far commented on Khashoggi’s disappearance. A Saudi Press Agency report said an unidentified Saudi national accused of having signed cheques that bounced had been deported to the kingdom on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by Interpol. The agency gave no further details. While it is unknown whether the agency was referring to Khashoggi, many fear that he may have been kidnapped. It would not be the first time that Saudi Arabia has forcibly repatriated its critics. A Saudi detention or nabbing of Khashoggi in Istanbul without at least tacit Turkish cooperation would embarrass Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and likely spark a further deterioration of Turkish-Saudi relations. If Turkey was complicit, it would bear testimony to increasing pragmatism. Meanwhile, Saudi-Turkish cooperation in Syria goes beyond relief and development aid. It helps Turkey create a sphere of influence in areas of Syria near Turkey’s border that are controlled by Turkish troops and administered by Turkey. In a bid to compliment Turkish hard power in Syria with soft power and counter Kurdish influence, Erdogan’s Religious Affairs Directorate or Diyanet has trained Syrian religious personnel, according to a 104-page report published by the directorate. The report said that the directorate had spent a total of $34.1 million dollars in Syria on thing like repairing mosques, distributing Kurdish-language Qurans, and educating 11,250 students. Journalist Amed Dicle said that Diyanet had recruited 5,686 teachers from the ranks of rebels opposed to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad whose curriculum emphasized Turkey’s synthesis between Islam and nationalism and included anti-Kurdish teachings. “Kurds are portrayed as atheists, and the PKK, YPG and other Kurdish fighters are infidels,” Dicle said, referring to the outlawed Kurdish Workers Party and its Syrian offshoot, the People’s Protection Units. A Syrian imam told Al-Monitor, “We're getting paid by the Turkish government. We're grateful to them and we see that the local population here are happy to be under Turkish rule. For Turkey, religious and national allegiances are one and the same. But our interpretation of Islam may not always be the same. Turkey keeps Kurds under control and that's good for us. Plus, one day Syrians in Turkey may come and settle in these areas.” Saudi cooperation with Turkey and its anti-Kurdish agenda in Syria has not prevented the kingdom from establishing ties to Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region that borders on Iran with the opening of a consulate in Erbil, initiation of Saudia flights from Jeddah to Erbil, and a visit by Saudi businessmen. Bahrain reportedly hinted last month that the Gulf states boycotting Qatar may re-open airspace to flights bound from and to Doha. The continued closure has forced Qatar Airways to fly longer routes to circumvent Saudi, UAE and Bahraini airspace at considerable cost to the airline. The report was widely seen as a trial balloon. Similarly, Erdogan travelled last week to Germany with which it has had strained relations in a bid to increase his options following a summit with Vladimir Putin and Hassan Rouhani, the presidents of Russia and Iran, in which he for now delayed a Syrian-Russian assault on Idlib that would have sent hundreds of thousands, if not millions fleeing towards the Turkish border. The limitations of the notion, apparently shared by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Erdogan, that deep differences can easily be put aside to pragmatically focus on issues of common interest, a key pillar of Middle Eastern alliances, were on display with the European Parliament this week voting to withhold 70 million euros in pre-accession funding because Turkey had failed to reverse its moves towards authoritarianism. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Prominent journalist’s disappearance challenges fragile Middle Eastern pragmatism

In his effort to improve Saudi Arabia’s badly tarnished image and project the kingdom as embracing an unidentified form of moderate Islam, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has hinted that he envisions a conservative rather than an ultra-conservative society. But this is not one in which citizens are fully free to make personal, let alone political choices of their own. Prince Mohammed’s vision, although not spelled out in great detail, seemed evident in an interview with 60 Minutes on CBS News, his first with a Western television program, on the eve of a three-week trip that is taking him across the United States.

The trip is designed to cement relations with the Trump administration following the dismissal of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Prince Mohammed and his United Arab Emirates counterpart, Mohammed bin Zayed, viewed Tillerson as unenthusiastic about their hegemonic designs for a swath of land stretching across the Middle East from the Horn of Africa to South Asia, including the Saudi-Emirati-led boycott of Qatar.

The visit comes barely a month before President Donald Trump has to decide whether to pull the US out of the 2015 international agreement with Iran designed to curb the Islamic republic’s nuclear program. A withdrawal could lead to the agreement’s collapse and spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. “Saudi Arabia does not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible,” Prince Mohammed told CBS.

The prince’s trip is also intended to project the kingdom as a beacon of moderation - rather than a promoter of ultra-conservatism - and cutting-edge modernity led by a young reformist but autocratic king-in-waiting. 
Prince Mohammed and President Trump

In a meeting at the White House, Prince Mohammed and President Trump touted the economic benefits of the two countries’ relationship, with massive US arms sales and other deals, including nuclear sales that would involve reducing US safeguards by giving the kingdom the right to enrich uranium. Both leaders asserted that the deals would significantly boost employment in both Saudi Arabia and the United States.

Prince Mohammed is also scheduled to meet members of Congress, think tanks and academics, oil executives, businessmen and representatives of Silicon Valley’s high-tech industry and Hollywood.

Both Prince Mohammed and Trump need to demonstrate economic progress to boost or cement their popularity at home. The crown prince needs to show to Saudis that he is feted as a leader despite mounting international criticism of his conduct in the Yemen war, his domestic power and asset grab under the mum of an anti-corruption campaign, the kingdom’s long-standing political and social restrictions, and its four-decade-long global support for ultra-conservative Sunni Islam.

Beyond concern about the high civilian casualty rate in Yemen and the war having sparked one of the worst humanitarian crises of today, many fear that potentially destabilizing anti-Saudi sentiment in the ravaged country will persist long after the guns fall silent. Those fears are reinforced by contradictory Saudi measures. While on the one hand pledging billions of dollars in aid and allowing at least some relief to get into Yemen, Saudi Arabia has aggravated the crisis by expelling tens of thousands of Yemeni workers in recent months.

Prince Mohammed also needs to demonstrate that he can attract foreign investment despite the arbitrary nature of the arrest in November 2017 of hundreds of senior members of the ruling al-Saud family, prominent businessmen and high-ranking officials, and reports that at least some of them were abused and tortured during their detention.

Most of the detainees were released after surrendering control of assets and/or paying substantial amounts of money. The government said it expects to raise $100 billion from the asset grab. Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of the most prominent detainees and the kingdom’s most-high-profile businessman, who seemed to put up a fight during his detention, has since his release in January said that he would be investing in some of Prince Mohammed’s pet projects. 
Reform in Saudi Arabia

Prince Mohammed has bolstered his image by vowing to return Saudi Arabia to an unidentified form of moderate Islam forcing the country’s ultra-conservative religious establishment to endorse his reforms suggesting that the kingdom may halt its massive global funding of Sunni Muslim ultra-conservatism to counter Iran’s revolutionary zeal surrendering control of the Saudi-managed Great Mosque in Brussels granting women the right to drive, join the military and attend male sporting events and creating a modern entertainment sector.

Despite the boldness of his moves, the crown prince has sent mixed messages about how far he is prepared to go. Women and men mix at concerts and theater plays but are segregated in the three sport stadiums that have been declared open to women.

While the crown prince has been decisive in his power and asset grab, he has yet to say a clear word about lifting Saudi Arabia’s system of male guardianship that gives male relatives control of their lives. Similarly, there is no indication that gender segregation in restaurants and other public places will be lifted. Asked about the guardianship, Prince Mohammed evaded specifics. “Today, Saudi women still have not received their full rights. There are rights stipulated in Islam that they still don’t have. We have come a very long way and have a short way to go,” he said to CBS News.

Middle East scholar As’ad Abu Khalil, whose blog is named The Angry Arab News Service, posted a picture of Prince Mohammed meeting with President Trump, noting that there was not one woman on either side of the conference table.

Speaking Arabic despite having learned to speak English by watching movies, Prince Mohammed appeared in his CBS interview to defend allowing a mingling of the sexes in the workplace, while shying away from ultra-conservative Islam’s ban on a man meeting a woman unaccompanied by a male relative in non-professional or non-public settings. “We have extremists who forbid mixing between the two sexes and are unable to differentiate between a man and a woman alone together and their being together in a workplace,” Prince Mohammed said.

The crown prince conceded that women had the right to determine what to wear if their clothes were “decent, respectful clothing, like men.” He did not define what would constitute decent but insisted that it did not have to be a “black abaya or a black head cover.”

No doubt, Prince Mohammed’s social reforms and promised economic change provide him significant arrows in his multimillion-dollar PR blitz. That is getting him the support of the White House. “Getting a strong presidential endorsement of the crown prince's trip to the US. to encourage investment in Saudi Arabia, that, I think, could be something that could be done," said Anthony H Cordesman, the Arleigh A Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Translating that into real policy and dollars could, however, prove to be a harder sell.

This <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/middle_east_north_africa/mohammed-bin-salman-us-trip-gulf-news-saudi-arabia-07978/">article</a> was originally published in <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/">Fair Observer</a>.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp

Prince Mohammed’s social reforms and promised economic change in Saudi Arabia provide him significant arrows in his multimillion-dollar PR blitz.

In his effort to improve Saudi Arabia’s badly tarnished image and project the kingdom as embracing an unidentified form of moderate Islam, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has hinted that he envisions a conservative rather than an ultra-conservative society. But this is not one in which citizens are fully free to make personal, let alone political choices of their own. Prince Mohammed’s vision, although not spelled out in great detail, seemed evident in an interview with 60 Minutes on CBS News, his first with a Western television program, on the eve of a three-week trip that is taking him across the United States. The trip is designed to cement relations with the Trump administration following the dismissal of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Prince Mohammed and his United Arab Emirates counterpart, Mohammed bin Zayed, viewed Tillerson as unenthusiastic about their hegemonic designs for a swath of land stretching across the Middle East from the Horn of Africa to South Asia, including the Saudi-Emirati-led boycott of Qatar. The visit comes barely a month before President Donald Trump has to decide whether to pull the US out of the 2015 international agreement with Iran designed to curb the Islamic republic’s nuclear program. A withdrawal could lead to the agreement’s collapse and spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. “Saudi Arabia does not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible,” Prince Mohammed told CBS. The prince’s trip is also intended to project the kingdom as a beacon of moderation - rather than a promoter of ultra-conservatism - and cutting-edge modernity led by a young reformist but autocratic king-in-waiting. Prince Mohammed and President Trump In a meeting at the White House, Prince Mohammed and President Trump touted the economic benefits of the two countries’ relationship, with massive US arms sales and other deals, including nuclear sales that would involve reducing US safeguards by giving the kingdom the right to enrich uranium. Both leaders asserted that the deals would significantly boost employment in both Saudi Arabia and the United States. Prince Mohammed is also scheduled to meet members of Congress, think tanks and academics, oil executives, businessmen and representatives of Silicon Valley’s high-tech industry and Hollywood. Both Prince Mohammed and Trump need to demonstrate economic progress to boost or cement their popularity at home. The crown prince needs to show to Saudis that he is feted as a leader despite mounting international criticism of his conduct in the Yemen war, his domestic power and asset grab under the mum of an anti-corruption campaign, the kingdom’s long-standing political and social restrictions, and its four-decade-long global support for ultra-conservative Sunni Islam. Beyond concern about the high civilian casualty rate in Yemen and the war having sparked one of the worst humanitarian crises of today, many fear that potentially destabilizing anti-Saudi sentiment in the ravaged country will persist long after the guns fall silent. Those fears are reinforced by contradictory Saudi measures. While on the one hand pledging billions of dollars in aid and allowing at least some relief to get into Yemen, Saudi Arabia has aggravated the crisis by expelling tens of thousands of Yemeni workers in recent months. Prince Mohammed also needs to demonstrate that he can attract foreign investment despite the arbitrary nature of the arrest in November 2017 of hundreds of senior members of the ruling al-Saud family, prominent businessmen and high-ranking officials, and reports that at least some of them were abused and tortured during their detention. Most of the detainees were released after surrendering control of assets and/or paying substantial amounts of money. The government said it expects to raise $100 billion from the asset grab. Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of the most prominent detainees and the kingdom’s most-high-profile businessman, who seemed to put up a fight during his detention, has since his release in January said that he would be investing in some of Prince Mohammed’s pet projects. Reform in Saudi Arabia Prince Mohammed has bolstered his image by vowing to return Saudi Arabia to an unidentified form of moderate Islam forcing the country’s ultra-conservative religious establishment to endorse his reforms suggesting that the kingdom may halt its massive global funding of Sunni Muslim ultra-conservatism to counter Iran’s revolutionary zeal surrendering control of the Saudi-managed Great Mosque in Brussels granting women the right to drive, join the military and attend male sporting events and creating a modern entertainment sector. Despite the boldness of his moves, the crown prince has sent mixed messages about how far he is prepared to go. Women and men mix at concerts and theater plays but are segregated in the three sport stadiums that have been declared open to women. While the crown prince has been decisive in his power and asset grab, he has yet to say a clear word about lifting Saudi Arabia’s system of male guardianship that gives male relatives control of their lives. Similarly, there is no indication that gender segregation in restaurants and other public places will be lifted. Asked about the guardianship, Prince Mohammed evaded specifics. “Today, Saudi women still have not received their full rights. There are rights stipulated in Islam that they still don’t have. We have come a very long way and have a short way to go,” he said to CBS News. Middle East scholar As’ad Abu Khalil, whose blog is named The Angry Arab News Service, posted a picture of Prince Mohammed meeting with President Trump, noting that there was not one woman on either side of the conference table. Speaking Arabic despite having learned to speak English by watching movies, Prince Mohammed appeared in his CBS interview to defend allowing a mingling of the sexes in the workplace, while shying away from ultra-conservative Islam’s ban on a man meeting a woman unaccompanied by a male relative in non-professional or non-public settings. “We have extremists who forbid mixing between the two sexes and are unable to differentiate between a man and a woman alone together and their being together in a workplace,” Prince Mohammed said. The crown prince conceded that women had the right to determine what to wear if their clothes were “decent, respectful clothing, like men.” He did not define what would constitute decent but insisted that it did not have to be a “black abaya or a black head cover.” No doubt, Prince Mohammed’s social reforms and promised economic change provide him significant arrows in his multimillion-dollar PR blitz. That is getting him the support of the White House. “Getting a strong presidential endorsement of the crown prince's trip to the US. to encourage investment in Saudi Arabia, that, I think, could be something that could be done," said Anthony H Cordesman, the Arleigh A Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Translating that into real policy and dollars could, however, prove to be a harder sell. This article was originally published in Fair Observer. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: How far will crown prince Mohammed go?

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman may be seeking to revert his kingdom to an unspecified form of moderate Islam but erasing the impact of 40 years of global funding of ultra-conservative, intolerant strands of the faith is unlikely to be eradicated by decree.

Not only because ultra-conservatism has taken root in numerous Muslim countries and communities, but also because it has given opportunistic politicians a framework to pursue policies that appeal to bigoted and biased sentiments in bids to strengthen their grip on power. Nowhere is that more evident than in Asia, home to several of the Islamic world&#39;s most populous countries.

Examples of the fallout abound among recipients of Saudi largess. They include institutionalised discrimination in Pakistan against Ahmadis, a sect considered heretic by orthodox Muslims, as well as biased policies towards non-Muslims and Shiites in Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia.

Basic freedoms in Bangladesh are being officially and unofficially curtailed in various forms as a result of domestic struggles originally enabled by successful Saudi pressure to amend the country&#39;s constitution in 1975 to recognise Islam as its official religion. The amendment was a condition for Saudi recognition of the young republic and the promise of substantial financial support.

Reports that Prince Mohammed in a dramatic gesture to Shiites, who have been discriminated against for years in the kingdom and demonised by its religious and political leaders as part of Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s public affairs war with Iran, plans to visit the Shiite religious citadel of Najaf in Iraq is likely to do little to change things on the ground in Muslim majority nations in Asia.

Neither will his meetings with Christian religious luminaries in Egypt and elsewhere even if they demonstrate that Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islam&rsquo;s two most holy cities, is, under Prince Mohammed&rsquo;s guidance, embracing principles of inter-faith dialogue and religious tolerance.

Reporting on a visit to the ultra-conservative Indonesian region of Aceh, Islam scholar Kamaruzzaman Bustamam-Ahmad noted that &quot;supporters for anti-Shi&rsquo;ah in Aceh are Wahabism, an Islamic political party, a group of young Acehnese who finished their study in the Middle East....They play their role in urban areas. After the Tsunami (in 2004), many of pesantrens (religious seminaries) from Wahabism were built in Aceh. They received funding from &#39;outside&#39; Aceh.&quot;

Bangladeshi journalist Ahmedur Rashid Chowdhury, who fled his country after a failed assassination attempt by religious militants, recently sketched Bangladesh&#39;s migration from a nation founded with aspirations of &quot;economic, political and intellectual emancipation&quot; to one in which the &quot;will of the military and its leadership was key in shaping politics towards selfishness and subornation&rdquo; and &ldquo;political parties are willing to go to any length to hold on to power.&quot;

It was a process abetted by Saudi Arabia. Chowdhury noted that &quot;the healthy trend of democratic and progressive politics was never able to regain a footing in Bangladesh&quot; with freedom of speech and the press as one of its major casualties. Unlike human rights lawyer and writer Ikhtisad Ahmed, Chowdhury shied away from referring to the role of Saudi Arabia and Saudi-inspired ultra-conservatism in his country&rsquo;s political development.

One strand of ultra-conservatism, Salafism, that Saudi interior minister Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz wanted to elevate to an official Islamic school of thought shortly before his death in 2012, gained, according to&nbsp; Ahmed, currency under the coalition government in the first years of the 21st century formed by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and Jamaat-e-Islami, a controversial group that opposed the country&#39;s independence.

Like in Pakistan, of which Bangladesh was part until, 1971, the military as well as political parties maintained opportunistic ties to militants such as Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen and Harkat-ul-Jihad that were often as opposed to secularism as they were to Saudi-style monarchy.

As a result, Bangladesh, the world&rsquo;s fourth largest Muslim nation, is at the heart of a struggle between liberalism and ultra-conservatism that questions Saudi Arabia&#39;s legacy and is about reforms that go beyond anything envisioned by Prince Mohammed. It is a battle in which free-thinking, journalists, writers and intellectuals have paid a heavy price.

In the latest incident earlier this month, prominent scholar, award-winning science fiction author and outspoken critic of religious militants, Muhammed Zafar Iqbal was stabbed and seriously injured in a knife attack in the north-eastern town of Sylhet.

Iqbal was the latest victim of more than 30 machete attacks, shootouts, and bombings in Bangladesh in the past three years, including last year&#39;s assault on the Holy Artisan Bakery in Dhaka in which 22 hostages were killed.

The country&#39;s battle was fuelled by a 2010 Bangladesh Supreme Court decision to roll back the Saudi-inspired amendment of the constitution and restore secularism as its basic tenant as well as the execution of Jamaat-e-Islami leaders for war crimes during the 1971 Pakistani-Indian war that gave birth to Bangladesh.

In response, ultra-conservatives and militants demanded death for &quot;atheists and apostates&quot; who had demonstrated in favour of the death penalties, stricter anti-blasphemy legislation and a crackdown on alleged un-Islamic cultural practices.

To be sure, Saudi Arabia, a country that is itself in transition, is unlikely to be backing the ultra-conservatives and militants. Yet, their struggle and deep-seated polarisation in Bangladesh are offshoots of the kingdom&rsquo;s past ultra-conservative support and the creation of an environment in which politicians and state organs can opportunistically exploit religious sentiment.

Criticism of the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed&rsquo;s weak response to the violence, if not inaction, coupled with the battle for the soul of Bangladesh serves as evidence that reversing the fallout of four decades of Saudi promotion of ultra-conservatism as an anti-dote to Iranian revolutionary zeal will take time and often be volatile. The same is true for efforts to counter creeping ultra-conservatism in countries like Indonesia and Malaysia.

In fact, what the struggles in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia suggest is that today&#39;s culprits are not Saudi Arabia, even if it bears a responsibility, but politicians and/or national governments. Said Chowdhury: &quot;The failure to bring culprits to justice in many of the recent attacks in Bangladesh has &#39;been the deliberate goal of the government. It supports their ambition to continue holding on to power by silencing critics and pandering to the religious right&#39;.&quot;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the authors and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Reports that Prince Mohammed in a dramatic gesture to Shiites, plans to visit the Shiite religious citadel of Najaf in Iraq is likely to do little to change things on the ground in Muslim majority nations in Asia.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman may be seeking to revert his kingdom to an unspecified form of moderate Islam but erasing the impact of 40 years of global funding of ultra-conservative, intolerant strands of the faith is unlikely to be eradicated by decree. Not only because ultra-conservatism has taken root in numerous Muslim countries and communities, but also because it has given opportunistic politicians a framework to pursue policies that appeal to bigoted and biased sentiments in bids to strengthen their grip on power. Nowhere is that more evident than in Asia, home to several of the Islamic world's most populous countries. Examples of the fallout abound among recipients of Saudi largess. They include institutionalised discrimination in Pakistan against Ahmadis, a sect considered heretic by orthodox Muslims, as well as biased policies towards non-Muslims and Shiites in Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia. Basic freedoms in Bangladesh are being officially and unofficially curtailed in various forms as a result of domestic struggles originally enabled by successful Saudi pressure to amend the country's constitution in 1975 to recognise Islam as its official religion. The amendment was a condition for Saudi recognition of the young republic and the promise of substantial financial support. Reports that Prince Mohammed in a dramatic gesture to Shiites, who have been discriminated against for years in the kingdom and demonised by its religious and political leaders as part of Saudi Arabia’s public affairs war with Iran, plans to visit the Shiite religious citadel of Najaf in Iraq is likely to do little to change things on the ground in Muslim majority nations in Asia. Neither will his meetings with Christian religious luminaries in Egypt and elsewhere even if they demonstrate that Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islam’s two most holy cities, is, under Prince Mohammed’s guidance, embracing principles of inter-faith dialogue and religious tolerance. Reporting on a visit to the ultra-conservative Indonesian region of Aceh, Islam scholar Kamaruzzaman Bustamam-Ahmad noted that "supporters for anti-Shi’ah in Aceh are Wahabism, an Islamic political party, a group of young Acehnese who finished their study in the Middle East....They play their role in urban areas. After the Tsunami (in 2004), many of pesantrens (religious seminaries) from Wahabism were built in Aceh. They received funding from 'outside' Aceh." Bangladeshi journalist Ahmedur Rashid Chowdhury, who fled his country after a failed assassination attempt by religious militants, recently sketched Bangladesh's migration from a nation founded with aspirations of "economic, political and intellectual emancipation" to one in which the "will of the military and its leadership was key in shaping politics towards selfishness and subornation” and “political parties are willing to go to any length to hold on to power." It was a process abetted by Saudi Arabia. Chowdhury noted that "the healthy trend of democratic and progressive politics was never able to regain a footing in Bangladesh" with freedom of speech and the press as one of its major casualties. Unlike human rights lawyer and writer Ikhtisad Ahmed, Chowdhury shied away from referring to the role of Saudi Arabia and Saudi-inspired ultra-conservatism in his country’s political development. One strand of ultra-conservatism, Salafism, that Saudi interior minister Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz wanted to elevate to an official Islamic school of thought shortly before his death in 2012, gained, according to Ahmed, currency under the coalition government in the first years of the 21st century formed by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and Jamaat-e-Islami, a controversial group that opposed the country's independence. Like in Pakistan, of which Bangladesh was part until, 1971, the military as well as political parties maintained opportunistic ties to militants such as Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen and Harkat-ul-Jihad that were often as opposed to secularism as they were to Saudi-style monarchy. As a result, Bangladesh, the world’s fourth largest Muslim nation, is at the heart of a struggle between liberalism and ultra-conservatism that questions Saudi Arabia's legacy and is about reforms that go beyond anything envisioned by Prince Mohammed. It is a battle in which free-thinking, journalists, writers and intellectuals have paid a heavy price. In the latest incident earlier this month, prominent scholar, award-winning science fiction author and outspoken critic of religious militants, Muhammed Zafar Iqbal was stabbed and seriously injured in a knife attack in the north-eastern town of Sylhet. Iqbal was the latest victim of more than 30 machete attacks, shootouts, and bombings in Bangladesh in the past three years, including last year's assault on the Holy Artisan Bakery in Dhaka in which 22 hostages were killed. The country's battle was fuelled by a 2010 Bangladesh Supreme Court decision to roll back the Saudi-inspired amendment of the constitution and restore secularism as its basic tenant as well as the execution of Jamaat-e-Islami leaders for war crimes during the 1971 Pakistani-Indian war that gave birth to Bangladesh. In response, ultra-conservatives and militants demanded death for "atheists and apostates" who had demonstrated in favour of the death penalties, stricter anti-blasphemy legislation and a crackdown on alleged un-Islamic cultural practices. To be sure, Saudi Arabia, a country that is itself in transition, is unlikely to be backing the ultra-conservatives and militants. Yet, their struggle and deep-seated polarisation in Bangladesh are offshoots of the kingdom’s past ultra-conservative support and the creation of an environment in which politicians and state organs can opportunistically exploit religious sentiment. Criticism of the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed’s weak response to the violence, if not inaction, coupled with the battle for the soul of Bangladesh serves as evidence that reversing the fallout of four decades of Saudi promotion of ultra-conservatism as an anti-dote to Iranian revolutionary zeal will take time and often be volatile. The same is true for efforts to counter creeping ultra-conservatism in countries like Indonesia and Malaysia. In fact, what the struggles in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia suggest is that today's culprits are not Saudi Arabia, even if it bears a responsibility, but politicians and/or national governments. Said Chowdhury: "The failure to bring culprits to justice in many of the recent attacks in Bangladesh has 'been the deliberate goal of the government. It supports their ambition to continue holding on to power by silencing critics and pandering to the religious right'." (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the authors and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Saudi Prince Mohammed's religious moderation unlikely to change Asian realities

In his effort to improve Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s badly tarnished image and project the kingdom as embracing an unidentified form of moderate Islam, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has hinted that he envisions a conservative rather than an ultra-conservative society. But this is not one in which citizens are fully free to make personal, let alone political choices of their own. Prince Mohammed&rsquo;s vision, although not spelled out in great detail, seemed evident in an interview with 60 Minutes on CBS News, his first with a Western television program, on the eve of a three-week trip that is taking him across the United States.

The trip is designed to cement relations with the Trump administration following the dismissal of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Prince Mohammed and his United Arab Emirates counterpart, Mohammed bin Zayed, viewed Tillerson as unenthusiastic about their hegemonic designs for a swath of land stretching across the Middle East from the Horn of Africa to South Asia, including the Saudi-Emirati-led boycott of Qatar.

The visit comes barely a month before President Donald Trump has to decide whether to pull the US out of the 2015 international agreement with Iran designed to curb the Islamic republic&rsquo;s nuclear program. A withdrawal could lead to the agreement&rsquo;s collapse and spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. &ldquo;Saudi Arabia does not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible,&rdquo; Prince Mohammed told CBS.

The prince&rsquo;s trip is also intended to project the kingdom as a beacon of moderation - rather than a promoter of ultra-conservatism - and cutting-edge modernity led by a young reformist but autocratic king-in-waiting. 
Prince Mohammed and President Trump

In a meeting at the White House, Prince Mohammed and President Trump touted the economic benefits of the two countries&rsquo; relationship, with massive US arms sales and other deals, including nuclear sales that would involve reducing US safeguards by giving the kingdom the right to enrich uranium. Both leaders asserted that the deals would significantly boost employment in both Saudi Arabia and the United States.

Prince Mohammed is also scheduled to meet members of Congress, think tanks and academics, oil executives, businessmen and representatives of Silicon Valley&rsquo;s high-tech industry and Hollywood.

Both Prince Mohammed and Trump need to demonstrate economic progress to boost or cement their popularity at home. The crown prince needs to show to Saudis that he is feted as a leader despite mounting international criticism of his conduct in the Yemen war, his domestic power and asset grab under the mum of an anti-corruption campaign, the kingdom&rsquo;s long-standing political and social restrictions, and its four-decade-long global support for ultra-conservative Sunni Islam.

Beyond concern about the high civilian casualty rate in Yemen and the war having sparked one of the worst humanitarian crises of today, many fear that potentially destabilizing anti-Saudi sentiment in the ravaged country will persist long after the guns fall silent. Those fears are reinforced by contradictory Saudi measures. While on the one hand pledging billions of dollars in aid and allowing at least some relief to get into Yemen, Saudi Arabia has aggravated the crisis by expelling tens of thousands of Yemeni workers in recent months.

Prince Mohammed also needs to demonstrate that he can attract foreign investment despite the arbitrary nature of the arrest in November 2017 of hundreds of senior members of the ruling al-Saud family, prominent businessmen and high-ranking officials, and reports that at least some of them were abused and tortured during their detention.

Most of the detainees were released after surrendering control of assets and/or paying substantial amounts of money. The government said it expects to raise $100 billion from the asset grab. Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of the most prominent detainees and the kingdom&rsquo;s most-high-profile businessman, who seemed to put up a fight during his detention, has since his release in January said that he would be investing in some of Prince Mohammed&rsquo;s pet projects. 
Reform in Saudi Arabia

Prince Mohammed has bolstered his image by vowing to return Saudi Arabia to an unidentified form of moderate Islam; forcing the country&rsquo;s ultra-conservative religious establishment to endorse his reforms; suggesting that the kingdom may halt its massive global funding of Sunni Muslim ultra-conservatism to counter Iran&rsquo;s revolutionary zeal; surrendering control of the Saudi-managed Great Mosque in Brussels; granting women the right to drive, join the military and attend male sporting events; and creating a modern entertainment sector.

Despite the boldness of his moves, the crown prince has sent mixed messages about how far he is prepared to go. Women and men mix at concerts and theater plays but are segregated in the three sport stadiums that have been declared open to women.

While the crown prince has been decisive in his power and asset grab, he has yet to say a clear word about lifting Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s system of male guardianship that gives male relatives control of their lives. Similarly, there is no indication that gender segregation in restaurants and other public places will be lifted. Asked about the guardianship, Prince Mohammed evaded specifics. &ldquo;Today, Saudi women still have not received their full rights. There are rights stipulated in Islam that they still don&rsquo;t have. We have come a very long way and have a short way to go,&rdquo; he said to CBS News.

Middle East scholar As&rsquo;ad Abu Khalil, whose blog is named The Angry Arab News Service, posted a picture of Prince Mohammed meeting with President Trump, noting that there was not one woman on either side of the conference table.

Speaking Arabic despite having learned to speak English by watching movies, Prince Mohammed appeared in his CBS interview to defend allowing a mingling of the sexes in the workplace, while shying away from ultra-conservative Islam&rsquo;s ban on a man meeting a woman unaccompanied by a male relative in non-professional or non-public settings. &ldquo;We have extremists who forbid mixing between the two sexes and are unable to differentiate between a man and a woman alone together and their being together in a workplace,&rdquo; Prince Mohammed said.

The crown prince conceded that women had the right to determine what to wear if their clothes were &ldquo;decent, respectful clothing, like men.&rdquo; He did not define what would constitute decent but insisted that it did not have to be a &ldquo;black abaya or a black head cover.&rdquo;

No doubt, Prince Mohammed&rsquo;s social reforms and promised economic change provide him significant arrows in his multimillion-dollar PR blitz. That is getting him the support of the White House. &ldquo;Getting a strong presidential endorsement of the crown prince&#39;s trip to the US. to encourage investment in Saudi Arabia, that, I think, could be something that could be done,&quot; said Anthony H Cordesman, the Arleigh A Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Translating that into real policy and dollars could, however, prove to be a harder sell.

This <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/middle_east_north_africa/mohammed-bin-salman-us-trip-gulf-news-saudi-arabia-07978/">article</a> was originally published in <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/">Fair Observer</a>.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

In his effort to improve Saudi Arabia’s badly tarnished image and project the kingdom as embracing an unidentified form of moderate Islam, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has hinted that he envisions a conservative rather than an ultra-conservative society. But this is not one in which citizens are fully free to make personal, let alone political choices of their own. Prince Mohammed’s vision, although not spelled out in great detail, seemed evident in an interview with 60 Minutes on CBS News, his first with a Western television program, on the eve of a three-week trip that is taking him across the United States. The trip is designed to cement relations with the Trump administration following the dismissal of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Prince Mohammed and his United Arab Emirates counterpart, Mohammed bin Zayed, viewed Tillerson as unenthusiastic about their hegemonic designs for a swath of land stretching across the Middle East from the Horn of Africa to South Asia, including the Saudi-Emirati-led boycott of Qatar. The visit comes barely a month before President Donald Trump has to decide whether to pull the US out of the 2015 international agreement with Iran designed to curb the Islamic republic’s nuclear program. A withdrawal could lead to the agreement’s collapse and spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. “Saudi Arabia does not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible,” Prince Mohammed told CBS. The prince’s trip is also intended to project the kingdom as a beacon of moderation - rather than a promoter of ultra-conservatism - and cutting-edge modernity led by a young reformist but autocratic king-in-waiting. Prince Mohammed and President Trump In a meeting at the White House, Prince Mohammed and President Trump touted the economic benefits of the two countries’ relationship, with massive US arms sales and other deals, including nuclear sales that would involve reducing US safeguards by giving the kingdom the right to enrich uranium. Both leaders asserted that the deals would significantly boost employment in both Saudi Arabia and the United States. Prince Mohammed is also scheduled to meet members of Congress, think tanks and academics, oil executives, businessmen and representatives of Silicon Valley’s high-tech industry and Hollywood. Both Prince Mohammed and Trump need to demonstrate economic progress to boost or cement their popularity at home. The crown prince needs to show to Saudis that he is feted as a leader despite mounting international criticism of his conduct in the Yemen war, his domestic power and asset grab under the mum of an anti-corruption campaign, the kingdom’s long-standing political and social restrictions, and its four-decade-long global support for ultra-conservative Sunni Islam. Beyond concern about the high civilian casualty rate in Yemen and the war having sparked one of the worst humanitarian crises of today, many fear that potentially destabilizing anti-Saudi sentiment in the ravaged country will persist long after the guns fall silent. Those fears are reinforced by contradictory Saudi measures. While on the one hand pledging billions of dollars in aid and allowing at least some relief to get into Yemen, Saudi Arabia has aggravated the crisis by expelling tens of thousands of Yemeni workers in recent months. Prince Mohammed also needs to demonstrate that he can attract foreign investment despite the arbitrary nature of the arrest in November 2017 of hundreds of senior members of the ruling al-Saud family, prominent businessmen and high-ranking officials, and reports that at least some of them were abused and tortured during their detention. Most of the detainees were released after surrendering control of assets and/or paying substantial amounts of money. The government said it expects to raise $100 billion from the asset grab. Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of the most prominent detainees and the kingdom’s most-high-profile businessman, who seemed to put up a fight during his detention, has since his release in January said that he would be investing in some of Prince Mohammed’s pet projects. Reform in Saudi Arabia Prince Mohammed has bolstered his image by vowing to return Saudi Arabia to an unidentified form of moderate Islam; forcing the country’s ultra-conservative religious establishment to endorse his reforms; suggesting that the kingdom may halt its massive global funding of Sunni Muslim ultra-conservatism to counter Iran’s revolutionary zeal; surrendering control of the Saudi-managed Great Mosque in Brussels; granting women the right to drive, join the military and attend male sporting events; and creating a modern entertainment sector. Despite the boldness of his moves, the crown prince has sent mixed messages about how far he is prepared to go. Women and men mix at concerts and theater plays but are segregated in the three sport stadiums that have been declared open to women. While the crown prince has been decisive in his power and asset grab, he has yet to say a clear word about lifting Saudi Arabia’s system of male guardianship that gives male relatives control of their lives. Similarly, there is no indication that gender segregation in restaurants and other public places will be lifted. Asked about the guardianship, Prince Mohammed evaded specifics. “Today, Saudi women still have not received their full rights. There are rights stipulated in Islam that they still don’t have. We have come a very long way and have a short way to go,” he said to CBS News. Middle East scholar As’ad Abu Khalil, whose blog is named The Angry Arab News Service, posted a picture of Prince Mohammed meeting with President Trump, noting that there was not one woman on either side of the conference table. Speaking Arabic despite having learned to speak English by watching movies, Prince Mohammed appeared in his CBS interview to defend allowing a mingling of the sexes in the workplace, while shying away from ultra-conservative Islam’s ban on a man meeting a woman unaccompanied by a male relative in non-professional or non-public settings. “We have extremists who forbid mixing between the two sexes and are unable to differentiate between a man and a woman alone together and their being together in a workplace,” Prince Mohammed said. The crown prince conceded that women had the right to determine what to wear if their clothes were “decent, respectful clothing, like men.” He did not define what would constitute decent but insisted that it did not have to be a “black abaya or a black head cover.” No doubt, Prince Mohammed’s social reforms and promised economic change provide him significant arrows in his multimillion-dollar PR blitz. That is getting him the support of the White House. “Getting a strong presidential endorsement of the crown prince's trip to the US. to encourage investment in Saudi Arabia, that, I think, could be something that could be done," said Anthony H Cordesman, the Arleigh A Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Translating that into real policy and dollars could, however, prove to be a harder sell. This article was originally published in Fair Observer. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Likening Iran&#39;s leader to Adolf Hitler, Saudi Arabia&#39;s crown prince warned in a US television interview that if Tehran gets a nuclear weapon, his country will follow suit.

&quot;Saudi Arabia does not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible,&quot; Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said in an excerpt of the interview that aired Thursday on &quot;CBS This Morning.&quot;

The 32-year-old Prince Mohammed said he has referred to Iran&#39;s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as &quot;the new Hitler&quot; because &quot;he wants to expand.&quot;

&quot;He wants to create his own project in the Middle East, very much like Hitler who wanted to expand at the time,&quot; Prince Mohammed said.

&quot;Many countries around the world and in Europe did not realize how dangerous Hitler was until what happened, happened. I don&#39;t want to see the same events happening in the Middle East.&quot;

The interview is scheduled to run on CBS&#39;s &quot;60 Minutes&quot; show on Sunday, two days before the crown prince&#39;s scheduled White House meeting with US President Donald Trump.

His comments come amid concerns over nuclear proliferation in the Middle East and just days after the kingdom put an atomic energy program on a fast track.

Although intended to reduce Saudi Arabia&#39;s dependence on oil, analysts warn the capacity to produce atomic energy could open a pathway to nuclear development for military purposes.

A 2015 nuclear agreement has placed curbs on Iran&#39;s nuclear program, but Trump has expressed a desire to scrap it, making its future uncertain.

The Saudi cabinet says its nuclear program will be in &quot;full compliance with the principle of transparency&quot; and meet nuclear safety standards &quot;in accordance with an independent regulatory and supervisory framework.&quot;

The country has accelerated plans to build 16 nuclear reactors over the next two decades, according to officials and analysts, at a cost of around $80 billion.

Saudi Energy Minister Khaled al-Faleh said in October that the nuclear program would start by building two reactors, each producing between 1.2 and 1.6 gigawatts of electricity.

'Saudi Arabia does not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible,' Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said

Likening Iran's leader to Adolf Hitler, Saudi Arabia's crown prince warned in a US television interview that if Tehran gets a nuclear weapon, his country will follow suit. "Saudi Arabia does not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible," Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said in an excerpt of the interview that aired Thursday on "CBS This Morning." The 32-year-old Prince Mohammed said he has referred to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as "the new Hitler" because "he wants to expand." "He wants to create his own project in the Middle East, very much like Hitler who wanted to expand at the time," Prince Mohammed said. "Many countries around the world and in Europe did not realize how dangerous Hitler was until what happened, happened. I don't want to see the same events happening in the Middle East." The interview is scheduled to run on CBS's "60 Minutes" show on Sunday, two days before the crown prince's scheduled White House meeting with US President Donald Trump. His comments come amid concerns over nuclear proliferation in the Middle East and just days after the kingdom put an atomic energy program on a fast track. Although intended to reduce Saudi Arabia's dependence on oil, analysts warn the capacity to produce atomic energy could open a pathway to nuclear development for military purposes. A 2015 nuclear agreement has placed curbs on Iran's nuclear program, but Trump has expressed a desire to scrap it, making its future uncertain. The Saudi cabinet says its nuclear program will be in "full compliance with the principle of transparency" and meet nuclear safety standards "in accordance with an independent regulatory and supervisory framework." The country has accelerated plans to build 16 nuclear reactors over the next two decades, according to officials and analysts, at a cost of around $80 billion. Saudi Energy Minister Khaled al-Faleh said in October that the nuclear program would start by building two reactors, each producing between 1.2 and 1.6 gigawatts of electricity.

If Iran gets nuclear bomb, Saudi Arabia will follow suit: Crown Prince

Sports stadiums in Saudi Arabia will open their doors to women to attend football matches for the first time ever on Friday, the government has announced.

&quot;The first match that women will be allowed to watch will be Al-Ahli versus Al-Batin on Friday, January 12,&quot; the ministry of information said in a statement on Monday.

It said women would also be able to attend the second match on the following day and the third one on January 18.

Women from across the vast Gulf kingdom may be able to take advantage of this new freedom as the first match will be held in the capital Riyadh, the second in Jeddah on the Red Sea and the third in the eastern city of Dammam.

The kingdom, which has some of the world&#39;s tightest restrictions on women, has long barred women from sports arenas by strict rules on segregation of the sexes in public.

Under Saudi Arabia&#39;s existing guardianship system, a male family member, normally the father, husband or brother must grant permission for a woman&#39;s study, travel and a host of other activities.

But the conservative kingdom has in recent months eased some of its most notorious restrictions on women, including the lifting of a driving ban -- set to go into effect in June.

In September, hundreds of women were allowed to enter a sports stadium in Riyadh, used mostly for football matches, for the first time to mark Saudi Arabia&#39;s national day.

The easing of social controls comes as Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman looks to repackage the oil-rich nation as more moderate and welcoming.

The powerful crown princes&#39; Vision 2030 programme for a post-oil era stems partly from an economic motive to boost domestic spending on entertainment as the kingdom reels from an energy slump.

Saudis splurge billions of dollars annually on entertainment in the neighbouring tourist hubs of Bahrain and Dubai.

But as a part of the crown prince&#39;s reforms drive, Saudi Arabia announced in December it was lifting a decades-ban on cinemas with the first movie theatres expected to open in March.

&nbsp;

'The first match that women will be allowed to watch will be Al-Ahli versus Al-Batin on Friday, January 12," the ministry of information said in a statement on Monday

Sports stadiums in Saudi Arabia will open their doors to women to attend football matches for the first time ever on Friday, the government has announced. "The first match that women will be allowed to watch will be Al-Ahli versus Al-Batin on Friday, January 12," the ministry of information said in a statement on Monday. It said women would also be able to attend the second match on the following day and the third one on January 18. Women from across the vast Gulf kingdom may be able to take advantage of this new freedom as the first match will be held in the capital Riyadh, the second in Jeddah on the Red Sea and the third in the eastern city of Dammam. The kingdom, which has some of the world's tightest restrictions on women, has long barred women from sports arenas by strict rules on segregation of the sexes in public. Under Saudi Arabia's existing guardianship system, a male family member, normally the father, husband or brother must grant permission for a woman's study, travel and a host of other activities. But the conservative kingdom has in recent months eased some of its most notorious restrictions on women, including the lifting of a driving ban -- set to go into effect in June. In September, hundreds of women were allowed to enter a sports stadium in Riyadh, used mostly for football matches, for the first time to mark Saudi Arabia's national day. The easing of social controls comes as Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman looks to repackage the oil-rich nation as more moderate and welcoming. The powerful crown princes' Vision 2030 programme for a post-oil era stems partly from an economic motive to boost domestic spending on entertainment as the kingdom reels from an energy slump. Saudis splurge billions of dollars annually on entertainment in the neighbouring tourist hubs of Bahrain and Dubai. But as a part of the crown prince's reforms drive, Saudi Arabia announced in December it was lifting a decades-ban on cinemas with the first movie theatres expected to open in March.

This Friday, Saudi women to enter sports stadiums for first time

With princes not spared charges of corruption and women granted permission to start driving, Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s Vision 2030 is certainly displaying its credibility. The Saudi government has stated that women will be permitted to drive cars from June next year. At present, regulations regarding this are being worked upon.

<div class="ui-state-default">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The hard truth is that in most non-Arab countries, a stereotyped image of Saudi Arabia prevails.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The hard truth is that in most non-Arab countries, a stereotyped image of Saudi Arabia prevails.">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Interestingly, &#39;news&#39; of Saudi women being permitted to drive has been accorded substantial media coverage, more than most news items regarding the kingdom usually are. This isn&rsquo;t surprising. The hard truth is that in most non-Arab countries, a stereotyped image of Saudi Arabia prevails.

Yes, there is no denying that the trend in most parts of the world is to think of Saudi Arabia primarily as an oil country and a conservative Islamic country where Muslims periodically gather for pilgrimage. There is also the perception that women here are discriminated against. Besides, the spread of conflict in several Arab nations has enhanced the negative perception of linking Muslims with terrorism.

These factors apparently prompted Saudi King and Crown Prince to move ahead with some dynamic measures needed to change the opinion of others towards Saudi Arabia. If they had not come out with Vision 2030, in all probability the Kingdom would not have attracted much attention.

Careful analysis of this programme suggests that it was probably viewed as pertinent to prevent Saudi citizens from losing hope in coming years, to instil confidence in them about their promising future and also to derail prospects of regional chaos spilling into the Kingdom. After all, landmark, set for 2030, that is 17 years from now, carries promises for children as well as the youth of today. They include women, as laid out specifically in the Vision.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The Vision 2030 also plans to raise a percentage of Saudi women employment rate from 12 per cent to 40 per cent and increase their participation in the workforce from 22 per cent to 30 per cent.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The Vision 2030 also plans to raise a percentage of Saudi women employment rate from 12 per cent to 40 per cent and increase their participation in the workforce from 22 per cent to 30 per cent." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

A close analysis of Saudi women&rsquo;s status suggests that issue of their being permitted to drive is not the first or only step taken by the Saudi government for their progress. It may be recalled, in 1957, with the support of the then King&rsquo;s wife, private schools for girls were established in Jeddah. Though there were protests in certain areas, this movement continued and from the late 1970s, university education for women was paid greater attention.

The same drive is expected to be continued with greater dynamism through Vision 2030. Drawing attention to high literacy rate of Saudi women and their being engaged in development of country&rsquo;s society and economy, the Vision diligently states, &ldquo;With over 50 percent of our university graduates being female, we will continue to develop their talents, invest in their productive capabilities and enable them to strengthen their future and contribute to the development of our society and economy.&rdquo; The Vision also plans to raise a percentage of Saudi women employment rate from 12 per cent to 40 per cent and increase their participation in the workforce from 22 per cent to 30 per cent.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Slowly but definitely, the Kingdom has been taking strides to ensure progress of Saudi women and also change stereotyped image held about them as well as the country.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Slowly but definitely, the Kingdom has been taking strides to ensure progress of Saudi women and also change stereotyped image held about them as well as the country." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Slowly but definitely, the Kingdom has been taking strides to ensure progress of Saudi women and also change stereotyped image held about them as well as the country. Less than a decade ago, the first women to hold a cabinet post was Norah Al Faiz. She was appointed as deputy minister of education in charge of women&rsquo;s affairs in February 2009. The period was also marked by visits between Saudi Arabia and several countries, with delegations including women. When Saudi King visited India as the Republic Day Chief Guest (2006), the media delegation included women.

Vision 2030&rsquo;s agenda resting on three pillars, with first being religious and other two being economically as well as regionally oriented, was certainly not conceived and/or planned overnight. The steps being taken over past few decades, for instance, regarding the progress of women, are a testimony to this fact. Earlier this year, Vision 2030 led to Sarah Al Suhaini&rsquo;s appointment as chair of Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s stock exchange. A woman has been appointed to this position for the first time in this country.

Besides, Rania Mahmoud Nashar was appointed as chief executive of Samba Financial Group, one of the country&rsquo;s largest national banks and Latifa Al-Sabhan as a chief financial officer of Arab National Bank. Globally, only around four per cent, women chair boards and around 12 percent hold board seats.

The emphasis laid in Vision 2030 to create job opportunities for Saudi youth and ensure their qualifications to build a vibrant and ambitious nation is directed towards gaining their confidence. And this apparently is viewed as vital to maintain political stability in the country. Crisis elsewhere in the Arab world has been primarily linked with unemployment faced by youth there.

<div class="ui-state-default">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The ruling monarchy is well aware that at this stage it cannot afford to lose confidence of its youth.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The ruling monarchy is well aware that at this stage it cannot afford to lose confidence of its youth.">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The ruling monarchy is well aware that at this stage it cannot afford to lose the confidence of its youth. More than 50 percent of the Saudi population is below the age of 25 years. The Vision states, &ldquo;We will guarantee their skills are developed and properly deployed.&rdquo; A priority of Vision towards Saudi Arabia emerging as a &ldquo;global investment powerhouse&rdquo; and a &ldquo;regional leader,&rdquo; also guarantees citizens of employment opportunities in their own country.

The iron hand with which several Saudi princes and ministers have recently been arrested and/or dismissed on charges of corruption cannot be de-linked from Vision 2030. This sudden move may be viewed as yet another step to boost people&rsquo;s confidence in the &ldquo;ambitious&rdquo; Vision and that the country is &ldquo;effectively governed.&rdquo; The Vision states, &ldquo;We shall have zero tolerance for all levels of corruption, whether administrative or financial.&rdquo;

Overall, a greater thrust of Vision is on Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s economic drive, globally, regionally and nationally. There is an also economic angle behind Saudi women being permitted to drive. Drivers employed in Saudi Arabia form around 60 per cent of foreign domestic workers. The remittances from drivers that leaves Saudi Arabia annually is higher than four billion dollars.

When women actually start driving, it is expected to spell advantages for Saudi Arabia socially and economically. Also, it wouldn&rsquo;t be surprising to see global media paying attention to the country through a new lens, for a change, which is not totally tainted with a negative approach. Vision 2030 is thus directed not just towards the agenda outlined in it but also compel people across the world to change their stereotyped perceptions about Saudi Arabia!

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

A priority of Vision towards Saudi Arabia emerging as a ?global investment powerhouse? and a ?regional leader,? guarantees employment opportunities and basic rights

With princes not spared charges of corruption and women granted permission to start driving, Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 is certainly displaying its credibility. The Saudi government has stated that women will be permitted to drive cars from June next year. At present, regulations regarding this are being worked upon. The hard truth is that in most non-Arab countries, a stereotyped image of Saudi Arabia prevails. × Interestingly, 'news' of Saudi women being permitted to drive has been accorded substantial media coverage, more than most news items regarding the kingdom usually are. This isn’t surprising. The hard truth is that in most non-Arab countries, a stereotyped image of Saudi Arabia prevails. Yes, there is no denying that the trend in most parts of the world is to think of Saudi Arabia primarily as an oil country and a conservative Islamic country where Muslims periodically gather for pilgrimage. There is also the perception that women here are discriminated against. Besides, the spread of conflict in several Arab nations has enhanced the negative perception of linking Muslims with terrorism. These factors apparently prompted Saudi King and Crown Prince to move ahead with some dynamic measures needed to change the opinion of others towards Saudi Arabia. If they had not come out with Vision 2030, in all probability the Kingdom would not have attracted much attention. Careful analysis of this programme suggests that it was probably viewed as pertinent to prevent Saudi citizens from losing hope in coming years, to instil confidence in them about their promising future and also to derail prospects of regional chaos spilling into the Kingdom. After all, landmark, set for 2030, that is 17 years from now, carries promises for children as well as the youth of today. They include women, as laid out specifically in the Vision. The Vision 2030 also plans to raise a percentage of Saudi women employment rate from 12 per cent to 40 per cent and increase their participation in the workforce from 22 per cent to 30 per cent. × A close analysis of Saudi women’s status suggests that issue of their being permitted to drive is not the first or only step taken by the Saudi government for their progress. It may be recalled, in 1957, with the support of the then King’s wife, private schools for girls were established in Jeddah. Though there were protests in certain areas, this movement continued and from the late 1970s, university education for women was paid greater attention. The same drive is expected to be continued with greater dynamism through Vision 2030. Drawing attention to high literacy rate of Saudi women and their being engaged in development of country’s society and economy, the Vision diligently states, “With over 50 percent of our university graduates being female, we will continue to develop their talents, invest in their productive capabilities and enable them to strengthen their future and contribute to the development of our society and economy.” The Vision also plans to raise a percentage of Saudi women employment rate from 12 per cent to 40 per cent and increase their participation in the workforce from 22 per cent to 30 per cent. Slowly but definitely, the Kingdom has been taking strides to ensure progress of Saudi women and also change stereotyped image held about them as well as the country. × Slowly but definitely, the Kingdom has been taking strides to ensure progress of Saudi women and also change stereotyped image held about them as well as the country. Less than a decade ago, the first women to hold a cabinet post was Norah Al Faiz. She was appointed as deputy minister of education in charge of women’s affairs in February 2009. The period was also marked by visits between Saudi Arabia and several countries, with delegations including women. When Saudi King visited India as the Republic Day Chief Guest (2006), the media delegation included women. Vision 2030’s agenda resting on three pillars, with first being religious and other two being economically as well as regionally oriented, was certainly not conceived and/or planned overnight. The steps being taken over past few decades, for instance, regarding the progress of women, are a testimony to this fact. Earlier this year, Vision 2030 led to Sarah Al Suhaini’s appointment as chair of Saudi Arabia’s stock exchange. A woman has been appointed to this position for the first time in this country. Besides, Rania Mahmoud Nashar was appointed as chief executive of Samba Financial Group, one of the country’s largest national banks and Latifa Al-Sabhan as a chief financial officer of Arab National Bank. Globally, only around four per cent, women chair boards and around 12 percent hold board seats. The emphasis laid in Vision 2030 to create job opportunities for Saudi youth and ensure their qualifications to build a vibrant and ambitious nation is directed towards gaining their confidence. And this apparently is viewed as vital to maintain political stability in the country. Crisis elsewhere in the Arab world has been primarily linked with unemployment faced by youth there. The ruling monarchy is well aware that at this stage it cannot afford to lose confidence of its youth. × The ruling monarchy is well aware that at this stage it cannot afford to lose the confidence of its youth. More than 50 percent of the Saudi population is below the age of 25 years. The Vision states, “We will guarantee their skills are developed and properly deployed.” A priority of Vision towards Saudi Arabia emerging as a “global investment powerhouse” and a “regional leader,” also guarantees citizens of employment opportunities in their own country. The iron hand with which several Saudi princes and ministers have recently been arrested and/or dismissed on charges of corruption cannot be de-linked from Vision 2030. This sudden move may be viewed as yet another step to boost people’s confidence in the “ambitious” Vision and that the country is “effectively governed.” The Vision states, “We shall have zero tolerance for all levels of corruption, whether administrative or financial.” Overall, a greater thrust of Vision is on Saudi Arabia’s economic drive, globally, regionally and nationally. There is an also economic angle behind Saudi women being permitted to drive. Drivers employed in Saudi Arabia form around 60 per cent of foreign domestic workers. The remittances from drivers that leaves Saudi Arabia annually is higher than four billion dollars. When women actually start driving, it is expected to spell advantages for Saudi Arabia socially and economically. Also, it wouldn’t be surprising to see global media paying attention to the country through a new lens, for a change, which is not totally tainted with a negative approach. Vision 2030 is thus directed not just towards the agenda outlined in it but also compel people across the world to change their stereotyped perceptions about Saudi Arabia! (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: Vision 2030 embodies Saudi quest for modernity

crown-prince

Crown Prince, News on Crown Prince, stories on Crown Prince, articles on Crown Prince, Crown Prince stories at Wion, Crown Prince news, Crown Prince latest news