Saleh the Indespensable

Dictator in Chief Saleh after 32 years in power in Yemen certainly knows how to shoot himself in the foot.  There can be no doubt that his second about-face, refusing to sign the deal brokered by the UAE, Saudi Arabia, United States and the EU in which he would step down, did not improve anyone’s mood in Abu Dhabi, Riyadh, Washington, London or Brussels – not to mention the opposition on the streets.  But, then, arranging for his armed supporters to surround the foreign delegation resulting in the UAE ambassador to fly home in a rage was monumentally stupid.

What is it about these petty little rulers who believe that their position is an entitlement?  This is like Africa – Uganda, Zimbabwe and Cote d”Ivoire come immediately to mind.  In the case of Yemen, Saleh is now saying that if he steps down then al Qaeda will fill his shoes.  Does he think his powerful friends are blind?  Yemen has several tribal conflicts going on some of which al Qaeda finds advantageous to promote.  However, estimates are that there are about 300 al Qaeda operatives in the country out of a population of 23 million.  That’s hardly a takeover threshold and the number of supporters he ordered out into the streets yesterday could easily handle the miserable gang of terrorists hiding out in the mountains.

Just as the GCC under Saudi command entered Bahrain to crush the (quite legitimate) rebellion in that kingdom, perhaps they can balance the scales and just remove Saleh now that he has shown that he is incapable of rational behavior and is a destabilizing influence in the region.

Yemen on the Brink

Yemen’s political crisis is rapidly escalating. President Ali Abdullah Saleh continues to resist stepping down at a defiant press conference today. But the tone has changed and he is probably severely weakened by defections


The question of what happens in Yemen now that Brig. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar, Saleh’s half-brother, has defected to the opposition lies in the hands of the Saudi’s. Mohsen is commander the northwestern military zone, has significant influence in Yemen’s old guard and has deployed an armored formation to protect the protester. His armor is surrounding the presidential palace, where Republican Guard units under the command of Saleh’s son, Ahmed, have taken up defensive positions. This could get very messy, quickly and much depends on whether the Saudi’s support Saleh (who has requested their help) is firm or if they decide to throw him under the bus. I’m betting that the Saudi’s will find a way for Saleh to depart the political stage.

The Saudi’s will have enormous leverage to form a new government. From a political standpoint, general Mohsen might not be the Saudi’s first choice, despite his conservative credentials. He was instrumental in defeating the far more secular south during the civil war, something that pleased the Saudi’s, but as a conservative Islamist might not follow Riyadh’s lead. However, he and his tribe have strong ties to some members of the Saudi royal family. So does Saleh.

This is not Bahrain – with an easy land bridge to cross – so sending troops to Saana, if that is the decision in Riyadh, is likely not an option. Furthermore, the army is split, has tribal loyalties and should not be compared to the Egyptian military. The Saudi’s need to tread carefully since a bad outcome would destabilize the southern border – and stability is what Riyadh is all about.

Failed Revolutions - Bahrain and Libya

This is the view from my window as I sit here in quiet Qatar next door to Bahrain; speculation is rampant on what will happen next in Bahrain – important from a Saudi, US, Iranian and European foreign policy and geo-political perspective – and Libya (not so important except, perhaps, to Europe). While two weeks ago the predictions for Libya were that the regime would fall, those were clearly premature as it struck back with efficient force from a loyal army and put the rebellion on its heels with astonishing rapidity. Today, the last stronghold before Benghazi has been taken and Qaddafi has vowed to crush the rebels, whom he characterized last night as traitors and several forms of vermin. Read bloodbath. The collapse of the rebellion will not be pretty.


A resolution has been tabled in the UN to impose a no-fly zone. That will do nothing to change the momentum on the ground. It didn’t in Kosovo until NATO began to target ground units and the capital, Belgrade and time is vanishing for the rebel government as Europe – divided as ever – freezes in its tracks. Despite the Lieberman-McCain tired, old song of unilateral US intervention whether it is a good idea or not, that sort of adventure has not worked out so well. It would be profoundly stupid for the US to intervene. Perhaps if the US sent a neo-con/neo-Nazi tea-bagger delegation to Tripoli it could convince Qaddafi to stop or else be subject to a massive hissy fit of tired, old white men.

But then there is Europe. French recognition (as well as the Arab League’s) of the rebel government may come back to haunt it. Will France have the nerve to go it alone? Will they risk a terror campaign in France by Libya? What were they thinking at the time they recognized the rebellion as the legitimate government? Was there even a plan for the next steps – or even a first step? The problem with all the hand wringing in Europe over the fate of the rebels is that they are prepared to do nothing unless the US handles it, which will get no credit and all the blame. Germany doesn’t even like the idea of a no-fly zone – an expected reaction from a nation that has become a little too fat and comfortable at the expense of its fellow EU members. But Libya is ultimately a European issue – as I have said before. Strategically it is meaningless to US interests and the blow-back from even a scintilla of US for intervention with what it has remaining available in military assets will be huge. For the US, assisting Egypt is far a key to any Middle East strategy, including the job of reigning in a vengeful Qaddafi & Son.

If Europe does nothing in time or at all (par for the course – just look at the Balkans) then Qadaffi’s tanks will roll into Benghazi and rout the rebellion. Even if they put down their arms, Qaddafi is not the forgiving type and his Western educated MBA son has shown his true colors. If there is a bloodbath, what will Europe and the US do about it? Because at that point it is likely that all will remain of the rebel opposition will be an underground movement. Not exactly the type of internal support needed if NATO chose to attack. Of course, Qaddafi or an over-zealous officer could take the disastrous step (for Qaddafi) of launching a missile at a European ship or, more to the point, a US warship. We all know what would follow and the question of a no-fly zone or Qaddafi military victory over the rebels would evaporate. Highly improbable, but not impossible.

There are so many variables regarding actions to be taken regarding Libya – including variables that no one has thought about – that the consequences of even imposing a no-fly zone are unknown and make no mistake that a no-fly zone is the equivalent of a declaration of war – for which Europe has no stomach.

Bahrain. No one should be surprised at Saudi intervention. Unfortunately for the Shiite majority, this is not about Bahrain or democracy. It is about Iran. It is about control of the Arabian Gulf (it is not called the Persian Gulf here). It is about destabilization on the Arabian Peninsula and Iranian dominance in the region. It is about oil and gas. The legitimate grievances of Shiites in Bahrain are, for the Saudi’s, completely irrelevant at this point. It is likely that some reforms will take place sometime in the future, but not until Saudi Arabia is assured that any Iranian plan has been derailed. So what will happen next?

As of today, the police in Bahrain are dispersing demonstrations and some violence with two killed has taken place. Films of a few protesters attacking police are being used by Saudi Arabia to show that the demonstrations are not peaceful. The government of the ruling minority Sunni has offered to hold talks but the two opposition Shiite groups are divided – one wanting to talk but fearful it will be labeled a pawn of the regime and the other not willing to negotiate until its demands for reform in the government (including the reduction of the ruling family to figurehead status) is met. With Saudi military intervention, it is unlikely that the second Shiite group will prevail – thereby flushing any hopes by Tehran for toppling the government. For the Shiites, the use of tanks, helicopters and live ammunition against them will be effective as will the 3 month state of emergency. But not forever.

Iran could intervene directly like the Saudi’s. Similar to an attack on a US or NATO ship off the Libyan coast, the result would be catastrophic for Iran as the US fleet is sitting in its backyard. Although a remote possibility, if it were to occur, then the Iranian coast would become a very dangerous place to be – for the Iranians. The excuse would be handed to the US to cripple Iranian sea and shore defense military capabilities and who knows what else. Oil prices would head to $200 and the economic ripple effects would likely be severe. Internally, the clerical dictatorship would become worse and Iranian strategy in the region, which has so far worked remarkably well, would be in shambles. Improbable? Yes. Impossible? No.

Iran could also create a diversion – either with Israel through Hezbollah or in Iraq. Neither of those scenarios is good for Iran as it is not clear that Hezbollah wants another confrontation with Israel at this time which would involve, by default, Syria, which itself wants control of Lebanon. Action by Iran in Iraq would stop – if not reverse – the US withdrawal. Neither diversion would do anything to help its plans for dominance of the region in general or for Bahrain in particular and both are unlikely; but they remain possibilities and an idea of how to deal with them needs to be considered.

The point is that trying to predict the future in Bahrain and Libya is pretty much just a guess as the remote possibilities or even events of which we are not even considering could take place. Prediction in these scenarios is impossible and intervention in Libya by NATO or any one or more European countries, not to mention the US which would be the case with NATO, simply multiplies the possible resulting scenarios.

Trouble in Saudi Arabia

Protests in the Shia populated area of eastern Saudi Arabia - where most of the oil is - aimed at reforming the governing system to a constitutional monarchy may spread this Friday despite the handouts of money and jobs to the tune of $37 billion plus 15% increase in wages by the House of Saud and King Abdullah. Shia's make up about 10 - 15% of the population.

The government has and probably will increase the use of force.  After all, they recently told Bahrain that if the Shia revolt is not crushed by the current government, the Saudi's would do it for them.  What will happen on March 11 is anyone's guess.  However,  the House of Saudi's reactions to demands for reform in the past have been poor. Which is why the situation is now becoming serious and big financial gesures will not work.  They are not listening - it is not a matter of money. The whole system needs to change - availablility of jobs, quality healthcare, economic marginalization, and political reform.

Saudi Authorties Arrest Israeli Vulture

Image via Wikipedia

This is funny, in an eyebrow raising sort of way.  Someone needs to take some Xanax.

Iran Follow-Up Saudi Build-up

Speaking of Iran and the concerns of Saudi Arabia - the US withdrawal from Iraq has shaken the Saudi's.  As I mentioned, it is not the nuclear threat that Iran may pose - it is the conventional.  In the previous post, I neglected to mention this.

Iran Again

The chattering classes in Washington and Europe have been quiet of late regarding Iran, particularly in light of the withdrawal of US combat troops from Iraq - save for the 50,000 or so that remain.  But in light of the new sanctions imposed, what is being planned in response to the continued intransigence of the Iranian government? Frankly, anyone outside the White House, Pentagon and CIA who says they know, doesn't. 

The US foreign policy of force first, talking later, has produced a profound imbalance in the Middle East. Bush dismantled Iraq - the only power capable of presenting a problem to Tehran. The hand wringing over potential Iranian nuclear capability and the threat to Israel remains in full view and is dutifully reported by a compliant media, particularly in the US.  That is not the problem.

The media conveniently forgets that Iran has a significant, well trained military force capable of stirring the pot in the region. The country that is most concerned is not Israel. It is Saudi Arabia. And it is about oil.  Iran's trump card is not nuclear, it is messing about in the Persian Gulf.  So, aside from the fact that even a nuclear armed Iran would not pose a threat to the US, disrupting oil supplies would. 

Let's assume that Iran could produce a nuclear weapon next Saturday.  If an attack were launched to destroy all its nuclear facilities, and succeeded (far from a certainty) - so what?  The loss would be annoying for Iran, but still would leave it capable of disrupting oil flows, destabilizing Iraq completely and interfering with activities of NATO in Afghanistan.  This is not a nice scenario and which is why I dismiss all the talk about bombing Iran and taking out its nuclear facilities. 

Sanctions are ineffective and bombing would collapse the economies of the world as oil vanished  from the Persian Gulf.  Time to find a different way to get the attention of Tehran in a way that makes it reconsider its policies.

Iranian Sensitivities

Image via Wikipedia

Iran finally noticed that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Emirates etc., refer to that body of water dividing them from Iran as the Arabian Gulf. Now they are retaliating.

The BBC reports that the Iranian Transport Minister, Hamid Behbahani, has given foreign airlines 15 days to change the name to Persian Gulf on their in flight monitors.

BBC also reports the the good minister is under threat of impeachment for incompetence. Timing is everything.

Failed Plane Bombing - War in Yemen

The growing clamour from the usual suspects in the US to insert itself somehow into the Yemen as a result of the failed attack on the Delta plane over Detroit is very reminiscent of previous cries by the same cast of characters to invade Iraq and bomb Iran. Before succumbing to the mendacious arguments put forward by some of the dumbest members of the legislative community (I'm talking about you Hoekstra), a little bit of fact checking is in order.

First - Republicans (again I'm talking to you Hoekstra, and you Bachmann, and you Boehner)voted against appropriating the necessary funds for airport security which included explosive detection devises. And shame on you BBC, CNN et al for not reporting that and on the Obama administration for not shoving it in their collective faces. Oh. It was the Bush administration that released (presumably for lack of evidence) two Yemenis who were the alleged plotters behind this attempted bombing. So Cheney - STFU.

Second - The BBC revealed today that the CIA knew about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 23-year-old (wealthy brat) Nigerian and failed to talk to anyone about it - thereby allowing his visa for the US to continue. No comment.
Third - Joe Lieberman (R-CT) said on Fox News Sunday that the US should launch a pre-emtive war against Yemen - quoting an anonymous administration source. Does this sound familiar? Yemen, Senator, has not attacked the US and, in fact, is cooperating with a key US ally in the region - Saudi Arabia - to disrupt and destroy what is known as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Who does he want the US to pre-emtively attack?

The call for the US to significantly increase its presence in the conflict, which is partly a civil war, all as a result of a failed attack by a lone, pathetic rich kid from Nigeria, of whom the US was warned by his father, is bordering on the insane. However, it may be too late as CNN reported today that although there has been no deal on a US Special Forces helicopter-borne assault that puts boots on the ground, that the US would like the Yeminis to develop that capacity.

That Yemen is a mess, politically and economically is clear. It has been fighting an indigenous al Houthi insurgency in the north for years and a growing secessionist movement in the south. The al Houthi are the proxy now for Iran in its regional competition with Saudi Arabia and are not connected with al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) whose stated goal has been the overthrow of the Saudi government. The Saudi's can and have crushed al Houthi incursions on Saudi territory and have even launched effective airstrikes against their mountain strongholds in Yemen.

AQAP is the combination of the now destroyed Saudi al Qaeda group and its Yemeni counterpart. The group has been singularly ineffective in doing anything and has now lost its leadership as a result of a succession of air/ground attacks. AQAP is hardly the type of threat requiring any more attention from the US than is already being given. Politically, however, the US administration may not have a choice as the media and Republicans press for "action" and pre-emptive war.

The Lieberman crowd need to dial down the hysterics. Yemen is a fragile state posing absolutely no threat to the US or anyone else. The government can only push the jihadists so far without running into trouble with the various tribes in the area and it's own security units (sound familiar?) The government has to fight an al-Houthi insurgency and a secessionist movement in the south. Disintegration is a word that comes to mind. But, the prospect of another failed state in the region (Somalia is the other) does not appear to concern the neo-con element that is palpably tingling with anticipation for another war. Yemen is on the edge of the failed state slope and insertion of more US forces would push it over that edge.

The reality, Senator Lieberman, is that this matter is much more complex than you are leading people who watch Fox to believe. Furthermore, the US does not need to escalate any more than it already has, to wit:

December 17: Mohammed Saleh Mohammed Ali al-Kazemi, a senior leader of AQAP, and dozens of other AQAP militants, were killed in an air strike in the southern province of Abyan. The U.S. Navy carried out the strike. The strike was accompanied by coordinated ground raids by Yemeni forces to prevent escape. The use of US naval assets is already a dramatic escalation by the US.

December 24: A Yemeni assault on AQAP was backed by US air assets resulting in 30 killed, including the cleric Anwar al-Aulaqi, Nasser al-Wuhayshi (al-Qaeda's regional leader) and his deputy, Said Ali al-Shihri. The cleric, by the way, had contact with three of the 9/11 hijackers and also exchanged e-mails with Maj. Nidal M. Hasan, killed 13 fellow soldiers at Fort Hood.

The bomber was trained and supplied in Yemen by AQAP. That much he has admitted. So what? His mentor in Yemen is probably dead. What is it about AQAP that has the media blasting headlines and demands for a pre-emptive war against the country that is, after all, fighting AQAP? For the US to go after AQAP any more than it currently is doing risks a full scale meltdown of the current government. That is an unpleasant prospect. US policy should be to coordinate and support, as it is doing, the Saudi and Yemeni government efforts, not make this a US war.

AQAP began in Saudi Arabia with the express purpose of destabilizing the regime. It was destroyed and kicked south. Now it is isolated, surrounded, under assault and incapable of producing any serious threat to anyone as it is gradually worn down and its leadership killed. The desire for a grand fireworks display to assuage Lieberman's and Hoekstra's delusions of manhood is both foolish and counterproductive.