Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Apparently "Arab States" means only Saudi Arabia's allies

This article's slant is really weird. Sure Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, and Kuwait all are concerned that a scandal that directly implicates the Saudi leadership in a murder might cause "instability." But those are hardly the only Arab States.

What about Lebanon, whose Prime Minister was kidnapped, forced to resign, and then took it all back as soon as he escaped, all because of one of MBS's prior crazy schemes? What about Qatar, the victim of MBS's impulsive blockade? What about Syria, whose government has allied by Iran in its civil war? Or Iraq, another government that is close to Iran? I guess Yemen is too war torn to ask for their opinion, but I suspect MBS's slaughter of Yemeni children doesn't make him too popular in that country. And how about Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, Tunisia, Sudan, Comoros, Oman, or Djibouti? The article doesn't say how most Arab League member-countries feel about the scandal. It only focuses on the ones that are particularly close to the current Saudi government.

Between Yemen, Qatar, Lebanon, imprisoning and shaking down most of the Saudi elite, saber rattling towards Iran, the bizarre Saudi campaign against Canada, and now its assassination of a journalist in Turkey, Saudi Arabia under MBS has been more of a force for instability than his removal would be. The only reason that an Arab State, or anyone else, would fear instability because MBS is actually being blamed for something he has done is if that State has already committed to the prince. It's not "instability" they fear, it is that they may have put all their bets on the wrong horse.