Mr. al-Maliki Goes to Washington

Much has been made of the recent Saudi tantrum -- renouncing a seat on the United Nations Security Council, publicly complaining about a lack of American leadership. It is the topic of today's lede unsigned editorial in the New York Times, "Allies in Revolt":

Saudi Arabia and Israel are deeply worried about the Obama administration’s decision to negotiate a nuclear deal with Iran — their mortal enemy. Saudi Arabia and Turkey are sore at President Obama’s refusal to become militarily involved in ousting President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, in particular his decision not to respond with military strikes to Mr. Assad’s use of chemical weapons. Mr. Obama instead chose a diplomatic deal under which Syria’s chemical weapons would be dismantled. 

The Saudis are also unhappy that Mr. Obama withdrew support for Hosni Mubarak, the deposed Egyptian president, and then worked with Mohamed Morsi, a Muslim Brotherhood member who was elected to replace Mr. Mubarak but was later thrown out.

Another source of Saudi and Israeli ire arrives in Washington D.C. today. Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki is leading a large delegation in search of Apache attack helicopters and other military aircraft. Iraq still has no air force. But what it does have is a state of war with Saudi-funded Al Qaeda affiliate Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, something that would seem to automatically qualify Iraq and its Prime Minister for the complete support of the United States since we have been in a declared war against Al Qaeda and its affiliates since 9/11.

But this isn't the case. Instead what one learns reading the paper today is that power brokers in the U.S. Senate are enraged at al-Maliki. Why? Because he is allowing Iranian overflights to Syria. This is from "Senators Warn Obama Before Iraq Leader’s Visit" by Michael Gordon and Eric Schmitt:

Earlier on Tuesday, two of the senators spoke angrily in separate interviews about Mr. Maliki’s failure to unify the competing factions in Iraq. “He’s got a lot of work to do in terms of pulling together diverse elements of his country,” said Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who heads the Armed Services Committee. “He’s not done a particularly good job of it.” 

Mr. Levin also criticized Mr. Maliki for acquiescing in, if not facilitating, Iran’s efforts to supply weapons to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, using flights through Iraqi airspace. “They’ve allowed overflights, Iranian planes, to supply Syria,” Mr. Levin said. 

Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, the senior Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, which is to meet with Mr. Maliki on Wednesday, was even more critical of the Iraqi leader. “What he’s done is create a situation where the population is more accepting of what Al Qaeda is doing there because of his lack of inclusiveness,” Mr. Corker said. 

The other senators who signed the letter were John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, both Republicans who have long taken a strong interest in Iraq; Robert Menendez, the New Jersey Democrat who is chairman of the Senator Foreign Relations Committee; and James M. Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma who is the ranking minority member of the Armed Services Committee.

Prime Minister al-Maliki has a sensible piece published today in the New York Times in which he explains what the civil war in Syria has wrought:

The war in Syria has become a magnet that attracts sectarian extremists and terrorists from various parts of the world and gathers them in our neighborhood, with many slipping across our all-too-porous borders. We do not want Syria or Iraq to become bases for Al Qaeda operations, and neither does the United States. 

While the world sees Syria as a humanitarian tragedy, we also see an immediate threat to the security of our own country. Al Qaeda is engaged in a renewed, concerted campaign to foment sectarian violence and drive a wedge between our people. We will not let that happen again. 

Because we do not want Syria to continue to attract violent extremists, much less cause a regional conflagration, our top priority is to end the bloodshed and achieve a negotiated settlement. The Iraqi government is serious about not allowing our own citizens to arm any side of the Syrian conflict. 

We are also committed to preventing the territory, the waterways and, yes, the airspace of our country from being used by any outside entity to fuel the conflict in Syria. But, with many better-armed neighbors and no air force or air defenses to speak of, our ability to enforce this policy is limited. This is one of many reasons we are urgently seeking to improve our air defense capabilities.

The United States Congress is Israeli and Saudi occupied territory. It is clear from the reaction to al-Maliki's visit that the Saudis and Israelis are reluctant to have Uncle Sam provide air power to the Iraqis.

Twelve years after 9/11 it should be clear by now who the enemies of peace are -- the Saudis and Israelis. Al Qaeda does not flourish without support from Saudi Arabia. Recently Al Qaeda was declared all but defunct. Then suddenly it burst to life out of its ashes when the Gulf monarchies decided to take out the Baathists in Syria. As for the Israelis, they profit from a region at war with itself. It distracts attention from Palestine. Informed people often ask the question, "Why doesn't Al Qaeda ever attack Israel?"

The decision the Obama administration makes on whether to provide Apache helicopters to Iraq will provide an indication how real the rift with Saudi Arabia and Israel is. For peace and a much needed shift in paradigm in the Middle East let's hope that the rift is wide and deep.