Our Saudi “Friends”

Opinion

In his speech in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on May 21, President Trump delivered three important messages to leaders of the world’s majority-Muslim countries: that the United States would cooperate with any country that joins in our “counter-extremism” campaign. Second — and much to the relief of the dictators, sheiks and kings in attendance — that the U.S. would no longer dictate western “values” to them. And third, that the president has cast our lot with the Saudis in their proxy wars against Iran. 

Just two days before the Riyadh speech, the Iranian people had elected Hassan Rouhani, a politician whom, in Iran, is deemed a “moderate.” Rouhani brokered the nuclear deal two years ago and, although I was a skeptic, he has so far kept Iran in compliance.

The American people should understand the importance of President Trump’s position on Iran. In different times, Rouhani’s election might have provided an opening to go beyond the nuclear deal to engage and address Iran’s destabilizing activities in the region. But with his embrace of the Saudis in his speech, the president pretty much ruled that out.

President Trump’s idea of creating an Arab/Muslim/western coalition “with the aim of stamping out extremism” seems designed to outsource the conflicts of the region to the locals: The U.S. will help, but the locals must provide the fighting forces. That approach fits well with Steve Bannon’s “America First” rallying cry, if the president’s own advisers can agree on that strategy. 

Also noteworthy was what the president omitted. His speech steered clear of criticizing the assembled leaders’ disinterest in democracy, human rights, gender equality and freedom, and basically announced a hands-off policy toward their internal affairs. His audience no doubt was pleased when the president said “America will not seek to impose our way of life on others.” This is a far cry from our traditional promotion of American-style governance. Kissinger would approve.

But the venue for the President’s new policy announcement was problematic. Many of the leaders he addressed see Saudi Arabia as a big part of the problem throughout the Muslim world. Many, if not most of them, are facing a fundamentalist threat that emanates directly from Saudi Arabia’s support for Wahhabi fanaticism. I’ll explain.

In the 18th Century, the leaders of the House of Saud — the forefathers of today’s Saudi royalty — united the two most powerful tribes of the desert by forming an alliance with Muhammed ibn ‘Abd al’Wahhab. The deal was that the Wahhabis would control religious and social affairs, and the Saudis would control economics and foreign policy.  That deal has continued ever since the Saud clan defeated their rivals in 1932 and consolidated their hold over the new Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Wahhabism as practiced in Saudi Arabia is a throwback to the Middle Ages: Religious police roam the streets and even the western-style shopping malls to ensure that women comply to rules of dress and behavior that is considered appropriate. Men are admonished and beaten for failing to come to prayers. Music and dancing are forbidden.  Women cannot drive or leave home without a male guardian. 

Some Saudi men support these medieval customs; some don’t. But no one dares protest. Away from cities that Westerners might be allowed to visit, the rules are strictly enforced, and severe punishments — floggings and amputations — are meted out. In 2015, Saudi Arabia beheaded 157 people. Many were tried without legal counsel.

By symbolically endorsing the Saudi king’s role as leader of the Sunni majority of the Muslim faith, President Trump has also implicitly endorsed tolerance of this most extreme form of the religion — one that openly preaches the destruction of Israel and the killing of non-believers through holy war (jihad). 

If Wahhabism were confined to Saudi Arabia, perhaps the president’s promise to refrain from interfering in the domestic affairs of our Muslim allies would make sense. But the Wahabbis have expanded their influence far beyond the Kingdom. Farah Pandith, former U.S. State Department special representative to Muslim communities, wrote in 2015 that “ … the Wahabbi influence was an insidious presence wherever I travelled, and it was funded by Saudi money for textbooks, media outlets, mosques, and the training of Imams.” 

Wahabbi imams have virtually taken over the religious schools of western Pakistan, the Sahel (a transition zone between the Sahara and Sudan region in Africa), and East Africa. Young boys are taught a fanatical ideology that one analyst called “the gateway drug to extremism.” Many Taliban fighters are trained in Pakistani schools, aka madrassa, financed by Saudi money.

By allying the U.S. on the side of the Saudis in their direct conflict with Iran, President Trump is closing off any hope of averting conflict with Tehran in Syria, as well as Yemen, Lebanon, Gaza and Libya. The opportunity to capitalize on Rouhani’s victory seems lost.

As the U.S. drifts inexorably toward deeper engagement in the Middle East and North Africa, one must ask what’s become of the president’s promise to scale back our commitments in wars that seem unwinnable. The U.S. administration’s internal struggle over foreign policy seems incoherent and deeply conflicted. Supporters and foes of the president alike are right to ask, “What is the strategy?”

Jack Segal is a retired senior US diplomat. He co-chairs with his wife, Karen, the International Affairs Forum (tciaf.com), which will present author and The New Yorker staff writer Dexter Filkins on June 15, 6pm at Milliken Auditorium, and Asia expert Dr. David Shambaugh on June 28, 5pm at the Hagerty Conference Center, both in Traverse City.

 

View On Our Website