What is interesting about today's frontpage story, "Jihadist Groups Gain in Turmoil Across Middle East," by Robert Worth and Eric Schmitt, a decent sketch of the growing Al Qaeda hot spots in Yemen, southern Libya, the Sinai Peninsula and Syria, is the almost total absence of any explanation of the role of Saudi Arabia. Worth and Schmitt frame the Qaeda renascence in terms of a realignment of the Obama administration's relationship with the Baathist government of Bashar al-Assad:
“We need to start talking to the Assad regime again” about counterterrorism and other issues of shared concern, said Ryan C. Crocker, a veteran diplomat who has served in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. “It will have to be done very, very quietly. But bad as Assad is, he is not as bad as the jihadis who would take over in his absence.”
It is not clear whether or when the White House would be willing to make such an abrupt shift in approach after years of supporting the Syrian opposition and calling for Mr. Assad’s ouster. It would certainly require delicate negotiations with Middle Eastern allies who were early and eager supporters of Syrian rebel groups, notably Saudi Arabia.The role of the House of Saud in the explosive turmoil in the Middle East is given greater mention in a story this morning by Rick Gladstone, "Syria Crisis Is Worsening, U.N. Relief Official Says":
Mr. Jaafari [Syrian ambassador to the United Nations] also had harsh words for Saudi Arabia, long accused by his government of financing, recruiting and arming Sunni jihadist militants linked to Al Qaeda that are waging war in Syria. He said “thousands of Saudi fighters” had been killed in Syria and that the government had taken 300 Saudis prisoner. Saudi diplomats did not return telephone calls for comment.
“Somebody should hold the Saudis responsible for what they are doing,” Mr. Jaafari said.
In Lebanon, Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, the militant Shiite group that is fighting on Mr. Assad’s side in Syria, accused Saudi Arabia directly for the first time on Tuesday of involvement in the deadly double bombing at the Iranian Embassy in Beirut last month. Mr. Nasrallah, on the Lebanese television channel OTV, said Saudi intelligence had collaborated with Qaeda-linked militants to carry out the attack, which was a direct challenge to Iran, Saudi Arabia’s regional rival for power.
But Mr. Nasrallah also pushed with new vigor for a political solution in Syria. He praised the signs of reconciliation between Iran and the United States as having averted regional war.The assassination of senior Hezbollah leader Hassan Laqees is more proof (though Hezbollah is blaming Israel) of Saudi-fueled escalation of sectarian conflict.
The end game? Region-wide destabilization that keeps U.S. military forces fully engaged in the Middle East and the ballyhooed "pivot to Asia" on the drawing board for the foreseeable future.
Here's the last paragraph of the Worth and Schmitt story on the flowering of Al Qaeda groups:
“Whether they are dismayed by the way things played out in Egypt or by the growth of Al Qaeda in Syria, the worm has turned in the Middle East in the minds of American foreign policy makers,” said William McCants, an expert on jihadist movements and a former senior adviser at the State Department. “It seems we are back to counterterrorism as a guiding focus for American policy.”How successful Obama will be in staying out of the Middle East briar patch is a tough question to answer. His agreement with Russian on Syria's chemical weapons and the nascent deal with Iran on its nuclear program have been spectacular successes given the outsize influence of the Saudis and Israelis on U.S. foreign policy. In our pay-to-play system, Congress is pretty much Saudi and Israeli occupied territory.
That's why keeping on an eye on events in Syria is so important. How Obama treads there -- whether a meaningful Geneva II deal is reached -- will point the way forward in terms of the Greater Middle East.
No comments:
Post a Comment