Is there any plausible scenario in which the United States does not get involved in the current Saudi/Iran imbroglio and just treat it like a Ravens/Patriots game and root for injuries?
—–Update—–
I honestly don’t know. I’ve been out and about most of the day, but just doing a quick scan of news reports, I know the State Department has weighed in. So far that’s just a recognition that the Saudi’s execution of Sheikh al-Nimr could further enflame sectarian strife, which is true. Reporting also shows that Saudi Arabia has cut diplomatic ties with Iran. From the US perspective we have partnership obligations with the Saudis and almost no real relationship with the Iranians. And given that we’re in the middle of a presidential primary and our domestic politics has never moved beyond the binary that the Iranians are the evildoers who wronged us in 1979 with the taking of US Embassy Tehran and holding of our personnel as hostages and we’re the good guys, I don’t think there’s a lot of diplomatic room to maneuver. This is even further the case because the Saudis are very good diplomatically in DC. Their current Foreign Minister, Adel al-Jubair, was the long time Saudi diplomatic fixer in DC. And he’s a real unique individual as he’s not one of the Saudi princes, so his appointment was met with a bit of surprise.
As I wrote in the comments yesterday, I think that the Saudis were pretty sure what was going to happen if they executed Sheikh al-Nimr and that was part of the reason they did it. King Salman has been very aggressive since he assumed the throne last year and this was really done for, I think, three reasons:
1) Internal messaging. As I’ve written here before the Saudis adhere to a type of Islam that they prefer to call Salafism (fundamentalism), everyone else often calls Wahhabism or Wahhabiya after its founder Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, but that is properly referred to as tawheed – the radical unity of the Deity. This is the same theology and doctrine as the Islamic State and it identifies Shi’a as not being apostates who are to be offered the chance to correct their practice of Islam, but rather a type of unbeliever to be violently suppressed wherever found. This execution was intended to message to Saudis, who are adherents of tawheed (its the only recognized/official version of Islam in the Kingdom as according to tawheed theology itself it is the only real version of Islamic belief/doctrine), that challenges to tawheed will be taken seriously and that the Shi’a will not be protected if Islamic State decides to move across the Iraqi border into the eastern Saudi provinces that are home to Saudi’s Shi’a.
2) External messaging to the Islamic State. It was also intended to message to the Islamic State folks that the Saudis are actually enforcing tawheed and are therefore not apostates that need to be dealt with (read overthrown). And that the Saudis can deal with their own Shi’a, thank you very much.
3) External messaging to Iran, and to Shi’a Muslims, that the Saudi’s will deal with the Shi’a as it sees fit. And that the Iranians cannot protect Shi’a Muslims no matter what it says.
Other than the normal human rights condemnations, I’m not sure that there is much that the US can do here. Nor is there much that I think we will do. The Saudis execute a lot of people, we routinely condemn this, but we’re not suddenly going to break diplomatic ties or stop doing MIL-MIL partnerships over one specific execution; especially since Sheikh al-Nimr wasn’t an American national. Moreover, this was one Shi’a cleric – not to dismiss that a man lost his life on contested charges. As long as the Saudi authorities don’t start rounding Shi’a and Shi’a clerics and tribal leaders up on various pretenses, this should subside after a bit.
All of this said, my guess is that there will be some very quiet, and hopefully, subtle diplomacy between the US and Saudi and the US and Iran (through the limited ties we have with them) to try to keep this from escalating. Both Saudi Arabia and Iran have been playing a very dangerous game over the last decade, and especially the last four or five years, throughout the Middle East. It has gone from regional cold war to proxy war for regional hegemony. If this gets out of hand and boils over into an actual hot war where the various Middle Eastern states have to take sides, then its going to be worse than anything we’ve seen yet. A lot of these countries militaries are good for internal security and if they’re partnering with the US or NATO on exercises and limited missions, but they don’t have a track record for actually fighting wars. A regional sectarian Sunni-Shi’a war for regional hegemony, where part of the mission of the Sunni challenger is not just to achieve hegemony, but to spread tawheed as the true (Sunni) Islam, will be very, very ugly. This will be a holy war wrapped into an interstate war (think the Thirty Years War). The religious aspect will change the nature of the warfare and we’ll likely see militaries in the region do things we didn’t think they would do otherwise. And there will be little way for the US and NATO to not be involved.
I know none of this is particularly satisfying, but what I’m actually hoping to see is that plans for a normal Haj for Shi’a Muslims continue as they do every year. If the Supreme Religious Authority in Qom issues a ruling (fatwa) that (Twelver) Shi’a should not attend Haj this year as its not safe, so they have a limited exemption from the religious duty, or if the Shi’a in Lebanon, Iraq, and the Gulf States, as well as Iran chose to boycott, that’ll be interesting. The former – a formal declaration against going and exempting the Faithful – would make things worse in a formal sense. An unofficial boycott – voting with one’s wallet – would hurt Saudi financially and in terms of reputation and might help to get them to ease up a bit. Since it is in both Iran’s and Saudis interests to have Iranians and Shi’a from other states make Haj, my guess is that this, like what had previously seemed like unresolvable issues between The Kingdom and the Islamic Republic, will be resolved and everyone will move on.
Corner Stone
My name’s not Adam, but where exactly could we insert ourselves without inserting ourselves inside ourselves?
schrodinger's cat
No.
RandomMonster
The calculation will be that it’s important not to appear to be taking sides. And what possible good outcome could result from taking any action? And what kind of action would that be?
I would flip the question on its head — is there a plausible scenario in which we want to insert ourselves into a no-win situation?
Schlemazel
I WISH! But, sadly, no. We have to jump in on the side of the family Saud because . . . reasons.
redshirt
You mean like a Ravens/Steelers game?
Ravens = Iran, Steelers = Arabia here.
Zinsky
When you make a deal with the Devil, all it gets you is halfway to Hell…
Heliopause
The US is already involved, they’ve been arming the psychopaths in Riyadh for years, including a certain Nobel Peace Prize winner. In fact, this is essentially a proxy war between the US and Iran already.
ruemara
Elect me and I’ll happily fiddle while they burn.
Some Guy
we could ask Russia and Iran to target more carefully, giving them better tactical support in their battle against Saudi forces on the ground in Syria, though they seem to be doing pretty well without our aid.
Suzanne
We just need to shout ONE-TWO-THREE-NOT-IT really loudly.
The scenario is only plausible if we can somehow keep a warmonger out of the White House.
beltane
This is OT regarding Iran/SA, but I’m expecting bad things at the upcoming Trump rally in VT this week. A lot of young people I know ( an undoubtedly lots more I don’t know) have tickets and plan on protesting. Many of them are of the dudebro persuasion and can’t be relied on to protest in a smart way. I liked it better when we were ignored by the Klown Kar.
Some Guy
@Heliopause:
well, we haven’t allowed the House of Saud to buy Advanced Beheading Weapons, so there are some weapons systems we just won’t export. The missiles and ammo for their F-15s they have been using against the people of Yemen aren’t gonna re-supply themselves, so those will be OK, but absolutely, positively No Advanced Beheading Weapons will be exported to the monarchy.
Doug R
Public distancing, private back channel furiously calling to broker a deal.
goblue72
Given the complete no-win scenario, I am cautiously optimistic that even the usual warhawks and Democratic Establishment centrists will be forced to keep relatively quiet.
Best possible outcome is we sit on the sidelines munching popcorn and let them beat each other into the sand. Maybe make a few shekels selling arms to both sides. Heck, a few exploded up oil fields taking Iran and Saudi oil production capacity offline for awhile boosting US domestic shale production wouldn’t hurt either.
schrodinger's cat
Iran has fought a long war with Iraq. Saudi Arabia has usually outsourced its fighting to others. I would bet on Iran in an all out war. BTW can someone explain why Saudi Arabia should be considered an ally?
dogwood
I do want to thank Adam for his post on the Bundy bunch last night. From what I can tell it’s not getting much attention even in the liberal blogosphere. Don’t know about network or cable. I think we’ve reached a point where an event isn’t newsworthy until Donald Trump has weighed in on Twitter.
redshirt
I also have a question for Adam: What happened to Lilith?
Brachiator
@Heliopause:
Sorry, but no. The Saudis opposed the US Iran nuclear deal, for example, but attacked Yemen with US approval.
Shit gets complicated. But this conflict between the Saudis and Iran is potentially incredibly destabilizing. Iranian anger over the Saudi actions is escalating. The US may be drawn in no matter what it tries to do to avoid becoming involved, especially if the stability of the Saudi regime is threatened.
redshirt
@schrodinger’s cat: Because they take our money, buy our weapons, allow us to base troops there (sometimes), and will nominally follow the US line in the region.
Corner Stone
@schrodinger’s cat:
Iran is a major producer of NatGas, KSA of crude. I would bet on KSA.
Brachiator
@schrodinger’s cat:
Oil.
ETA: And what redshirt said.
Pogonip
No.
(I’m not Adam, but that’s an easy question.)
Amir Khalid
@redshirt:
I heard that Lilith was running a fair a few years ago.
John Revolta
Saudis have been keeping oil prices down, why I’m still not sure, but pissing them off by not backing them up here could turn things around- and a big spike in gas prices right before the election could suck hard for the Democrats.
(Although I’m half convinced that this was already the plan.)
Ruckus
It’s hard to see that the country that raised the bar on mid east warfare as high as we did is in any way the answer to fixing the situation.
So what we do how?
Weapons/training? That sure seems to be ineffective if recent history is any indication.
Nothing? Not sure nothing is the answer, as a good portion of the problem is us.
I believe it was AS who said we need to come up with a reasonable US policy for the rest of the world, something besides waving our collective dicks in their general direction. Then see if and how much of the rest of the world might actually agree with us and then we might be able to find an equitable solution that has a chance of working.
But that does sound rather adult like so I’m thinking somewhere about 1/2 of our population would think it sucks and we should just nuke them all and let pasta sort it out.
Corner Stone
@John Revolta:
They have been killing Russia’s economy (and therefore keeping them a regional hegemony) and trying their best (and succeeding!) in killing off the USA’s fracking/shale oil recovery/natural energy initiatives.
It’s not a mystery.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I just can’t wait for tomorrow’s Andrea Mitchell show, so John McCain will tell us which country we need to invade because Obama let the Saudis behead a guy McCain had never heard of before yesterday.
redshirt
OT, but check out this awesome review for Tom’s book:
http://gizmodo.com/the-discovery-of-the-solar-system-included-some-dead-en-1750790670
J R in WV
@dogwood:
It (The Bundy takeover of the bird sanctuary) is the top story on Google News, which is my primary source for news outside the blogs I follow.
It’s the number two story on the NY Times site as well. Well, the top story on Google is also on the Bundy take over by the NY Times.
NobodySpecial
@Corner Stone: Don’t forget hurting Iran at the same time.
redshirt
OT, but check out this awesome review for Tom’s book:
FYWP
reality-based (the original, not the troll)
@dogwood:
oh, my 92-yr old mom is a CNN devotee, so its the background soundtrack to my life – and they just did 20 minutes on it. “Domestic terrorists or people with a legitimate grievance?” – that kind of hoo-hah
Corner Stone
@NobodySpecial: Oh, sorry. I thought that was understood as part of the Not-Quite-Hot-War-Yet going on between them.
Although, TBH, our multi-party sanctions during recent years have caused as much or more damage to Iran as the deflated crude prices.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@reality-based (the original, not the troll): Good. Fucking. God.
p.a.
@Some Guy: absolutely, positively No Advanced Beheading Weapons will be exported to the monarchy.
No worries. When it comes to haircuts, our petroleaginous pals are old school.
John Revolta
@Corner Stone:
Yeah, it all started back around the time when Putin was being such a PITA, I remember wondering if in ten or twenty years we’d find out that Obama and the Sauds had been cooking something up.
Brachiator
@reality-based (the original, not the troll):
Isn’t Festivus over? All grievances should have been aired by now.
reality-based (the original, not the troll)
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
well, the CNN person didn’t put it like that – but one of the talking heads they had one went to great lengths explaining their “frustration” with the federal govt.
GregB
The amount of weaponry the Saudi’s have bought from the US is pretty astounding. That alone is enough make them darlings of much of the military industrial establishment. Plus the oil.
Though a clear minded person, not one clouded with dollar signs, would realize that the House of Saud is more treacherous than the Lannister’s from Game of Thrones. It is from their mosques that Wahabi fanatics have been born and bread.
It wasn’t 15 Iranian’s that attacked America on 9/11.
Follow the money.
p.a.
@Brachiator: Now it’s on to feats of strength.
Iowa Old Lady
@beltane: Let us know how that goes. Trump’s supporters don’t take well to protesters.
On the plane and at in-laws this week, I read Axelrod’s BELIEVER. I’m about halfway through and he’s talking about the 2008 primary season. It’s sad because apparently they believed they could change not just policy but politics and now we’ve devolved further to Trump.
schrodinger's cat
@GregB: Also, Pakistan went from being somewhat moderate to cray cray after infusion of Saudi cash into General Zia’s regime.
raven
@p.a.: Feats don’t fail me now!
schrodinger's cat
@Brachiator: @redshirt: Rhetorical question was rhetorical but thanks for the answer.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
All of them, Katie.
Bobby D
@John Revolta:
Saudis are keeping oil down because their cost of production is lower than the US shale producers, and their plan is to make that US (and other places) shale production non-profitable, thus shutting it down, and thereby raising the price of oil again. They are succeeding, as new shale drilling has virtually ceased, and production is just now starting to drop off. Shale wells have a short lifespan compared to conventional fields. So once you stop putting new wells into production, the fall off in supply is fairly quick (seems like a long time to consumers, but we’re seeing overall shale production declines inside of a year’s time)
Redshift
@dogwood: It’s pretty much all that’s being talked about by all of the politically involved people in my twitter feed.
Davebo
@John Revolta: Actually America has been keeping oil prices down.
OPEC refused to reduce production in their last meeting because it wouldn’t have made much of a difference in the price of oil anyway.
Luckily shale play wells have incredibly short lifespans verses conventional wells and nobody is going to frack new wells at $38 a barrel so it’s just a matter of time till oil is back over $60 and all is right with the world again.
At least that’s what I’m hoping!
Davebo
@Bobby D: You read my mind!
Redshift
@Bobby D:
How long does it take to start new ones? Seems like that may be a new limiting factor on the rise in oil prices.
goblue72
George Washington got it right the first time –
Davebo
@Redshift: That would depend mostly on how long it takes from now for the price to go up back to profitable levels.
Remember when the shale boom really got rolling oil was at or over $100.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@dogwood: Most of the MSM only covers things that have video with some sort of action. The ex-Marine [sic] guy’s “goodbye” video in his truck apparently doesn’t count.
They may have trouble getting people out there to cover it, also too.
It not blowing up on cable news may be a good thing. We’ll see…
Cheers,
Scott.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Brachiator: There’s also that Carter Doctrine complication.
If the Ghawar Oil Field is threatened, things could get very dicey very quickly.
:-(
I hope Kerry is burning up the phone lines right now. But the Saudi’s seem to have moved into “honey badger” mode and it may be very difficult to talk them down. Iran has little interest (though some in the Republican Guards and other conservative elements are likely chomping at the bit) in having the world come down hard on them just as they’re climbing out of the sanctions pit.
Obama deserves his Nobel Peace Prize if he can keep this from blowing up, and a second if he can somehow create an atmosphere where conflicts like these don’t risk destroying the region.
Cheers,
Scott.
Mark B
@Redshift: The only thing I can think of is that the equipment that you use to get oil from shale is expensive and difficult to maintain, and they’re trying to keep the cost low enough so that the available equipment is mothballed and it will take a lot of time and money to fire it back up. But that probably wouldn’t take that long if prices recovered enough.
Doug R
@schrodinger’s cat: …and the Taliban is a Pakistan export.
raven
CNN law enforcement analyst Art Roderick said over the weekend that armed protesters who took over a federal building in Oregon were not being treated harshly like Black Lives Matter protesters and Muslims would be because they were “not looting anything.”
Bobby D
@Davebo:
What Dave said, also depends on the shale formation itself. The cost of production varies, with some being profitable (they claim, anyway) down to ~$30/bbl. Those North Dakota boomtown “man villages” are drying up, and a friend of mine who is a long haul trucker for a living has left. He is based out of Boise, ID but spent the last few years driving up there for the pay and hours he could get. They don’t really have pipelines in place up there for most fields, so they are literally driving it out with big-rigs to either processing/collection points or rail-loading facilities
Baud
@raven: Obama is so divisive.
John Revolta
@Bobby D: I get the part about keeping shale production down, and frankly, yay.
@Davebo: I heard that it was KSA acting pretty much on their own, and telling the rest of OPEC tough shit if they didn’t like it. But how does
work into it?
Doug R
Iran’s got oil coming online soon. Are the Sauds trying to set them off so they can’t sell on the open market?
Ruckus
@raven:
Strange how some people can make a living being racist assholes.
Adam L Silverman
I’ve just updated the post with my answer to John based on my initial impressions of what has gone on so far with this.
Please feel free to tell me just how wrong I am (I love you all, don’t ever change!).
Baud
@Adam L Silverman:
Thanks for your contribution.
Doug R
@John Revolta: Yup. Tar sands is even dirtier, especially carbon footprint wise.
debbie
@Bobby D:
Sean Hannity was very busy telling his listeners they could make big bucks in North Dakota. A fair number of listeners called in and said they were dumping their old lives and heading up there. Hannity must have been making commissions on them. Poor guys.
pea
as long as obama has veto power, no.
as soon as a republican becomes president (via the kochs, adleson, gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisment)
duck and cover.
John Revolta
@raven: Ahahahaha. I guess he means that, well, the Bundys aren’t playing that damned hippety-hop music the whole time.
pea
@Zinsky:
deals with the devil sideswipe one all the way to hell.
debbie
@Adam L Silverman:
Nothing good can come from your reason #2. Take away the beheadings, and SA signaling to IS is like the GOP flashing a thumbs up to the Tea Party when they first came into being.
Corner Stone
@Adam in Update:
Such as what?
Baud
@Adam L Silverman:
@Baud:
I should have added a ? in the event you’re but in an snarky mood.
Davebo
@John Revolta:
We are producing more oil than ever before. More than Saudi Arabia, more than Russia.
pea
wouldn’t it be interesting if, for one moment, all the countries in the world dealt with their own shit instead of deflecting their shit onto the rest of the world?
wouldn’t it be nice if, for one moment, people who are only interested in having a place to live, raising their families, seeing their children educated,
didn’t also have to defend themselves against
ROBBER BARONS AND CARPETBAGGERS AND WAR MONGERS?
racism, misogyny, elitist…
why does america give billions of dollars to saudia arabian billionaires for defense?
cognitive dissonance is going to put me in a coma.
Davebo
@Bobby D: I doubt there’s ever been as big a “boom to bust” as what has happened in North Dakota but when prices rise they’ll still have everything in place to crank it up again (including those man camps).
But IMO, there’s no way in hell any shale play is turning a profit at $30 unless you just ignore the cost of drilling the wells in which case I guess you could say it’s profitable at $18.
There are a lot of small producers sitting on significant cash and they’ll milk the holes they have but I think they’d want to see not only higher prices, but sustained higher prices before they dump any of it into significant new shale exploration.
jl
@debbie: I’ve seen others include Reason #2 in reports, and I agree with you that it seems pointless. WTF does Daesh care for some stupid signals of this or that? Seems pointless.
Except, thought just occurred to me that it might not be pointless if aimed at cooling the jets of some of Saudi Arabia’s own fundamentalists who might be tempted to go over to Daesh. Those people might be the real intended audience. That seems more realistic, though I doubt it would be effective on everyone who is tempted to work for Daesh in Saudi Arabia.
If we have a GOP administration, I can imagine them enthusiastically jumping into a mess between Sunni and Shia because of some confused gibberish and blind politically testosteronal impulses. The US did under St. Reagan (the real one, not the Zombie Godhead Reagan) in the early 80s in the Iran-Iraq war, didn’t it? Of course, would be a real total mess now that the GOP neocon geniuses so effectively spread Iranian/Shia influence to Iraq with their idiotic Iraq invasion. But, hey, always a bigger disaster waiting for neocon genius to bring to life. That is progress!
pea
@raven:
i assume this post is sarcastic.
debbie
@jl:
At this point (and I’m also including Israel and Netanyahu’s differentiation between Jewish terrorism and Palestinian terrorism), I don’t think the Middle East will never be resolved.
jl
Sorry, I didn’t notice Adam Silverman’s request for constructive criticism from BJ commentariate. OK.
Yeesh, America has to LEAD. We need to face everyone down and tell them what to do, with resolve! If they don’t do what’s right, carpet bomb. Silverman, you are weak. What a LOSER!
And, hey, I didn’t even watch the last two GOP debates, and look at that analysis I just pumped out. Great stuff.
jl
@pea: Old white fools get to say all sorts of racist crap on TV, for some reason. I guess CNN has decided to up the ante on humiliating itself as the alternative Fox News with much lower ratings and crappier production values in the new year.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Davebo: And oil is a commodity that doesn’t respond as one might expect to “supply and demand”, also too. TheOilDrum used to cover issues like this pretty well. Prof. Goose:
An issue with the shale boom is that lots of that stuff was paid for with loans, and the banksters want to be paid no matter what the price of oil is. So, even if the price is falling, there’s pressure to keep pumping as some money coming in is better than no money coming in.
The bottom line is that only a small excess in the supply of oil can cause a huge fall in price. And since lots of full tankers are sitting around waiting for the price to rise, and since China’s economy is slowing, and winter has been mild, and Iran’s oil is coming onto the market soon, and so forth, there’s little prospect of the price rising in 2016. Unless something is done to blow up the market, of course…
While KSA has the lowest oil pumping costs in the world, their economy depends on oil for their national budget. They just had a ~ $100B deficit last year and had to raise their gas prices by 40% (IIRC). They have a mountain of dollar reserves, but even mountains get worn down if things go pear shaped….
Cheers,
Scott.
Roger Moore
It seems to me that Iran may have miscalculated by targeting the Saudi embassy. In addition to being an attack on diplomacy in general, it’s also going to stir up bad memories for countries like the US whose Iranian embassies have been violated in the past. It could be a real impediment to any kind of peaceful resolution.
schrodinger's cat
As if there is not enough shit going on in the world, I just found out from BBC that the Indian airbase in Pathankot was attacked by gunmen last night.
Adam L Silverman
@Corner Stone: A lot of folks I know that have done DOD assignments in a lot of the Middle East countries refers to their militaries as demonstration militaries or militaries that are really more like national police forces or enforcers for whoever is in power. If an overtly religious war breaks out, I’m not sure that those assessments will remain accurate. People are often willing to do things in support of their core beliefs that they’re not willing to do otherwise.
pea
@Some Guy:
@jl: @jl:
the GOP has been usurped by evangelical Christians whose sole purpose is expediating the
Rapture, converting Jews to Christianity, and bringing forth the Apocalypse.
Bring on the nukes, jeebus will protect ted cruz, huckabee, santorum, vitter, jindal, michelle bachman,,et al…
and Trump will make a deal allowing him to date his daughter…
Adam L Silverman
@debbie: Its the dirty secret that Saudi Arabia doesn’t want discussed: that its theology/doctrine is the same as Islamic State and that it has been surreptitiously supporting the Islamic extremists in Syria or meddling in Yemen.The Saudis are masters of using soft power and power other than military power. And this includes using and leveraging their religious power too.
Adam L Silverman
@Baud: You’re welcome. I’m happy to speculate, which I’ve done. But before that I wanted to make it clear that I’m not really sure what’s going to happen.
Adam L Silverman
@Baud: Got it – no worries.
Davebo
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: Sadly you are probably right about the prospects of significant price increases in 2016.
Good news for America but crappy news for me. And even if it went up to $75 tomorrow it would take at least six months, probably more, for those of us who depend on the industry to see a significant uptick in business.
Maybe I should switch to health care! It’s recession proof and the second biggest industry in this city behind energy.
schrodinger's cat
@Adam L Silverman: Is this such a secret? There was an op-ed in NYT that said pretty much the same thing that SA and Daesh are peas in a pod, that they believe the same things. Yet they are treated very differently by the DC establishment.
Corner Stone
@Davebo:
I’ve seen studies that say $80 per BBL and I’ve seen them at $60. I have yet to see any report that claims profitability below the $60 level. If they exist I would be interested in seeing them.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@pea: It’s my understanding that the US doesn’t “give” KSA stuff. We sell it to them.
Why do we sell it to them? Because they have mountains of petrodollars coming in due to the high price of oil. If those dollars left the US and didn’t come back, it would cause big problems for the US economy. It has been the policy of the US to try to sell stuff to KSA since the 1970s. Since they have a small population, it seems that we decided that the main thing we could sell them was expensive weapons systems…
As the Wikipedia article above points out, there were lots of sudden distortions in the world economy as a result of the 1973 oil crisis. We’re still living with that.
Yet another reason why we should get the economy off of oil ASAP.
Cheers,
Scott.
Adam L Silverman
@Roger Moore: I don’t think that was planned/approved. From the reporting I’ve seen, both the religious authorities and the civil government that runs in front as the facade have condemned the action and a number of arrests have been made. I think the Iranians have learned their lesson about protecting embassies. My guess is that no one reckoned that anyone would be stupid enough to try to attack the Saudi Embassy.
Adam L Silverman
@schrodinger’s cat: Saudi works to keep it as a secret that everyone knows but treat as a secret anyway.
Corner Stone
@Adam L Silverman: I get that you’re circumspectly trying to say it would be like the worst parts of the Bible but they’ll pretty much just slaughter anyone not of their faith or sect, right?
Adam L Silverman
@redshirt: If you needed to know, you already would.
Steeplejack (phone)
Shouldn’t the post title be “Updated with an Answer from Adam”?
Adam L Silverman
@Corner Stone: I would expect that it would be a lot like the Iran-Iraq war. The only real strategist from these countries, with significant combat experience, is Iranian General Soleimani from the Quds Force.
Chet Murthy
@Adam L Silverman: Adam, wow, thank you for the enlightenment. I always find your posts worthwhile reading and look for them.
Mandalay
@raven: Art Roderick was the dog killer at Ruby Ridge:
That fucker should go crawl under a rock. And so should CNN for giving him air time.
Roger Moore
@Adam L Silverman:
Intentional or not- and the denials could be nothing but a smokescreen and the arrests a chance to go after domestic enemies- the attack on the embassy is going to make matters much worse.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Adam L Silverman: looks to me as if the Saudis are acting more aggressively than the Iranians
jl
@Adam L Silverman: That was pretty ghastly. I’ve read really nasty cheerleading articles about how nasty written back in the day by the neocon braintrust about the great victories of indiscriminate slaughter waged by the mighty forces of the glorious Saddam’s intrepid Iraqi forces.
But, what kind of mess would that be with Iraq split open like a ripe melon dropped from a roof onto the driveway between Sunni and Shia, with Shia in nominal leadership in Baghdad. Wouldn’t the western front of that horror quickly spread to Syria, and if we are unlucky to Lebanon and Jordan?
Edit: and when can we start Shock and Awe carpet bombing. That will be good part when the Good Guys with Guns win. I forgot to ask about that.
Edit2: forgot to thank you for your enlightening post. But how come you give no analysis of Cruz’ We Win They Lose strategic plan? I think that would be a great strategy. If only Obama were not so weak.
redshirt
@jl: Yes, but if we have to go Shock and Awe, think of CNN’s ratings!
And cruise missiles don;t make themselves. Those are jobs.
TOP123
Adam, I can’t tell you how much I get from your posts; thank you. I’m unclear on one point, and I’d love it if you could clarify a little. I’ve noticed in the past, and very clearly here, that you use ‘tawhid’ in a specific and narrow way; it has been my understanding that tawhid, radical unity of the divinity, is one baseline tenet of Islam recognized as non-negotiable by all Muslim schools and movements. Certainly Abd al-Wahhab, but also Abduh and Shariati, and most mainstream Muslims past and present.
I am not coming at this as a Muslim, and my academic study of Islam and the Islamic(ate) world didn’t go beyond undergrad, some twenty years ago, so I could be way off; could you clarify why you use the term the way you do, and, if you’re feeling really generous, maybe provide some reading suggestions to show how the use of the concept may have evolved in the last decades?
rikyrah
thanks for the question and answer
Ultraviolet Thunder
I’ll probably be in Oregon tomorrow. Or if my colleague doesn’t find his passport (idiot!) I’ll be in San Luis Potosi MX.
One of those.
If it’s Oregon I’ll grab a local paper and see if there’s anything interesting.
Mike J
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
Vanilla ISIS.
sm*t cl*de
Shouldn’t “personality deterioration from mid-stage Alzheimers” be on the list?
Ultraviolet Thunder
@Mike J:
Second place.
“YallQaeda” is still the neologism of the year.
gene108
@schrodinger’s cat:
Indian consulate in Northern Afghanistan was also attacked.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
well done
a local reporter’s twitter page if anyones interested
https://twitter.com/amandapeacher
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Ultraviolet Thunder: I agree with that, but I’d put “Infantada” in second.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): and Yokel Haram should be mentioned
Ultraviolet Thunder
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
Vanilla ISIS has the additional appeal of referencing another white faux badass. So I’m voting that #2.
schrodinger's cat
@gene108: Has anyone claimed responsibility?
kc
The site “upgrade” is really not working for me on mobile.
burnspbesq
@Bobby D:
And that’s a bad thing? Nice try, but I’ve seen photos of Alberta, and anything that shuts down shale exploitation is absolutely and unequivocally Pareto-superior to anything that involves continuing shale exploitation
Villago Delenda Est
@reality-based (the original, not the troll): Their “frustration” is they’re not getting their way, in total contradiction to what the actual evidence is.
These people are not sane.
Roger Moore
@burnspbesq:
Tar sands are not the same thing as shale production. They’re both environmentally controversial but the problems with them are totally different. Shale production these days means fracking, which has problems with fracking fluids and how they are disposed of, but that’s something that can at least theoretically be taken care of. It’s a totally different situation from tar sands, which involve strip mining and all the destruction that entails.
catclub
@RandomMonster: In other words, lots of GOP candidates will demand we do something stupid, and Obama will say no to all that.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Thanks for the pointer.
Cheers,
Scott.
mainmata
I’m coming into this discussion late given the huge number of comments. I’ve worked a lot in the Middle East, mainly Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan. I would never work in Saudi as the state is reprehensible even though individual Saudis (almost all not living there) can be really nice people. Arabs (except Egyptians) tend to be tribal and inclined towards patriarchal-oriented conflict. Islam has done nothing to attenuate this tendency since it was born of that culture. So unless the Arab world moves toward a secular culture (only Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon have tried this in the 1960s) then we have more of the same conflict into the future. The difference with the Thirty Years War is the hugely greater armaments involved that could really destroy the region and rik much greater destruction.
Bobby D
@burnspbesq:
I’m not sure why you are addressing me as if I said it was a “bad thing”. I neither said, nor implied that. Just relating what I know about the industry and state of that industry from personal friends that work in it, and my own investments in it. Save your vitriol for someone who deserves it, lest I break out the lawyer jokes.
Ah, what the hell?
Q: What do you call it when a bus full of “Esq” go over a cliff? A: A good start.
Q: How do you keep a lawyer from drowning in the toilet? A: Take your foot off his head.
mainmata
@srv: For once, I have to half sympathize with one of your opinions but there really is no alternative to the welfare state of the KSA, certainly not from the Shi’a minority. Not until oil gets really cheap and unimportant; not happening for a long time.
Corner Stone
@mainmata:
With the price of crude we should be seeing gas prices at the pump much closer to $1.00 than we are. The “stickiness” that is going on in CONUS is bullshit.
mainmata
@schrodinger’s cat: There’s no question that Iran would win the war with the KSA since the latter is a joke of a state totally reliant on foreign workers and whose military, though improved, is much smaller than Persia’s and Persia has a far larger population than KSA. But I don’t think a direct conflict will happen.
Corner Stone
@mainmata:
If one thinks we will not absolutely use total regional air superiority to pound Iran into sand in defense of KSA that someone is crazy.
Would it be ugly AF? Yes, indeed. But we are not even in the realm of possibilities that allows Iran to whup KSA.
Adam L Silverman
@TOP123: You are correct that this is an undergirding theological/doctrinal concept for all Muslims. The difference with what Abd al-Wahhab preached is a much more radical understanding of the concept. Anything, and I do mean anything, that takes away from that unity or potentially gets in the way of an adherents acceptance of it, is an innovation. So tombs, monuments, even overly ornate mosques were for Abd al-Wahhab and are for his spiritual descendants something that interferes with tawheed. Moreover, one either accepts tawheed as explained by Abd al-Wahhab or one is an apostate and must be given the chance to convert to this correct way or if one chooses not to, eliminated. Also the category of unbelievers is expanded and their is no option for them: they are to be brutally suppressed. So, for instance, Shi’a are to be killed wherever they are found.
J R in WV
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet:
From the statistics I have looked up as the price of oil on the commodity markets dropped, the Saudis break even cost of producing oil is not low at all. And they aren’t nearly the lowest cost producer either.
Their oil fields have been producing for decades. To produce oil, they need to pump something down into the formations, either water or natural gas. Water is cheaper, but causes more problems on the production side. Gas doesn’t cause as many problems in production, but costs more to inject.
I will confess that I have seen wildly varying estimates of the cost of production in the Saudi oil fields, varying from about $90/bbl to over $100/bbl. People have wondered for years when Saudi production will begin to drop, with no way for the Saudis to drive it back up, as they begin to deplete their fields past stimulating production with injection wells.
We won’t know when that happens until we see the market being to make adjustments we can’t understand without assuming that the Saudi fields are nearly done. I don’t know what the Saudis will do when they run out of oil… they may well try to steal other oil fields from other Arabic states. They don’t have morals in the sense we understand morality. They are a feudal state in the sense our forefathers were feudal 1200 years ago, after all, and political science and economics don’t have any experience with such states.
TOP123
@Adam L Silverman: thank you; particularly for highlighting the idea that difference of opinion on the specific interpretation of the concept putting one outside the community of Muslims entirely and leading to such harsh sanction.
(Ed. for clarity)
J R in WV
Here’s a list of top producers and their estimated break even prices of oil production, as provided by a web site specializing in statistical date ( http://knoema.com/ ):
I don’t know how accurate these numbers are. I’ve seen Saudi production costs as low as $15 or so, which seems too low to me. I live in an old oil and gas patch and have looked up these numbers for years, whatever that is worth.
1 Venezuela 149.90
2 Nigeria 141.70
3 Iran 136.00
4 Bahrain 134.40
5 Ecuador 122.00
6 Algeria 119.00
7 Iraq 116.00
8 Russia 113.90
9 Libya 111.00
10 Oman 106.50
11 Angola 94.00
12 Saudi Arabia 93.10
13 UAE 82.70
14 Kuwait 68.30
15 Qatar 60.50
Anyone with better sources should post their data for us to fuss about.
catclub
@J R in WV:
Typo? So they are losing money on every barrel they pump at $80/bbl? I am not seeing it.
Corner Stone
@J R in WV: KSA doesn’t have $90+ BBL to be profitable.
The Republic, Blah Blah Blah...
Apart from politics, and oil, and money, a situation like this is perhaps the best example I could offer as to why an official, state-sanctioned religion is a BAD idea…
It’s a BAD idea in the Mideast and it’s just as bad an idea in this country…
Prescott Cactus
@TOP123:
I’ll second that !
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@J R in WV: I think the estimates of break-even prices are mostly guesswork, but that’s all we have to go on. 24/7 WallStreet (from November):
Yes, KSA is believed to have a huge “water cut” in their fields these days, but nobody really knows (as they sensibly treat that number as something like a state secret). The world sorta crosses its fingers and hopes that Saudi Aramco knows what they’re doing so that they don’t destroy Ghawar earlier than its ideal death date, but nobody knows.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Corner Stone: I think there’s been confusion in the press between the “break even” cost to produce the oil, and “the price that a country needs to balance its budget”. KSA can pump oil for cheap, but supposedly needs $106/bbl to balance its 2015 budget. Perhaps that’s what J R is thinking of.
Cheers,
Scott.
Corner Stone
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: C’mon. They are undercutting several producing countries because they can. They don’t need $100+ to make their society go. That’s silly.
“Still the world’s leading crude-oil producer”
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Corner Stone: That’s the answer to a different question – whether they can do what they’re doing (of course they can).
The Guardian:
The 2015 deficit was just announced at $98B according to the NYTimes from 12/29. They’re doing projections based on an average of $45/bbl oil in 2016. Also according to that NYTimes story, their foreign reserves of cash will be gone in 5 years at the current rate.
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
Prescott Cactus
@TOP123:
I’ll
secondfourth that !Adam L Silverman
@TOP123: The best thing you can do is google David Commins’ The Wahhabit Mission in Saudi Arabia”. I know David. He’s a professor at Dickinson College in Carlisle and a was a student of Juan Cole’s. His book on the development of Abd-al Wahhab’s doctrinal/theological system and of Saudi Arabia is extensive and excellent. You will not be disappointed. I thought I knew this stuff, but a great deal of what I relearned and/or now understand about it is as a result of his excellent scholarship.
Anoniminous
test and is test