I listened to Obama’s speech last week on CNN here in Doha. While not agreeing with all of it, it was a well-reasoned statement of intent and limitations of actions for US foreign policy. Something that was located in some black hole when Bush was in power. It spoke to working with allies and rule of law – not the go-it-alone crap spewed by the neo-cons and religious right allies for eight horrendous years, stupendous human cost and which broke the financial stability of the US.
The Republican and Donald Trump response was predictable as well as displaying, yet again, their leadership’s gross, criminal ignorance. Some examples:
Michelle Bachmann. What more can be said of her deep level of dumb? Does she even know where Libya is without some ten-year old telling her? This is what she said:
“I have been very reluctant to see the United States to go into Libya. For one thing, we haven’t identified yet who the opposition even is to Qaddafi. We don’t know if this is led by Hamas, Hezbollah, or possibly al Qaeda of North Africa. Are we really better off, are United States, our interests better off, if let’s say Al-Qaeda of North Africa now runs Libya?”
As Juan Cole has pointed out, Hamas is a Palestinian organization with no affiliates or subsidiary groups. Al Qaeda of North Africa is a joke. Hezbollah is Shiite – there are none in North Africa. None, Michelle, are involved in Libya. They either have no interest or would not be welcome. Please, Michelle, STFU, go crawl under a rock and let adults run things.
Donald Trump. Donald. Stick to real estate and co-authoring self-improvement business books. Because you know nothing about international affairs and it shows. His claim that Iran might be involved is so incredible that it ignores Iranian political reality. Aside from being Shiite they condemned the no-fly zone and foreign interference. They are likely more concerned about Bahrain (Shiite majority) and Yemen (in the backyard of their enemy Saudi Arabia) but they have no dog in the Libyan fight. They are not on the side of the rebels.
The less said about the other Republican leaders, including that tired old white man, John McCain, and their concept of how US foreign policy should be conducted in general and in Libya in particular, the better. Last year, because of lies and bigotry as well as the petulant 2 year olds' on the American left, many Americans voted these morons into power and are now paying the price - and there is a price. One can only hope that the protests against the new Republican leadership in Wisconsin spread throughout the country, getting them out of positions of power sooner rather than later. It is frightening and a threat to the world that these pandering idiots will likely take power and continue the US decent into banana republic status.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
The Trees of Kabul
This is a guest post by a long-time friend, Philip Clark who is based in Kabul - I will be in Uganda for a week - so no posting.
Kabul, 27 March – On 7 March I watched Gen. Petraeus – whom I had just met and to whom I’d immediately made a joke – and Ambassador Eikenberry plant trees in a Kabul park during a snow storm. The show was heavy and very welcomed but it apparently was the last of the Kabul season, and, almost at once, the weather changed.
Day by day, we could see the snow diminish from nearby Television Hill, a former Taliban holdout where the local stations now have their towers. The grass – that which hadn’t been crushed to straw underfoot – turned immediately green. The scattered rose bushes sprouted leaves. Within two weeks, I spotted two dandelions and a daffodil in full bloom. From our car, we could see a cluster of cherry trees, safely sheltered behind a wall, in riotous pink flower. During the tree planting, municipal workers had shivered in their tunics – green for park workers, orange for sanitation crews -- but now we were in shirtsleeves as we dashed between the AID and State compounds.
The farther, higher peaks still are resplendent in their white coatings, glowing in the sun, and that’s good. Late-melting snow will provide water for irrigation over a longer stretch of the growing season than rain, not all at once, when much would be wasted or, even worse, cause flooding. Now the concern is the sudden switch from winter to spring will foment early thunderstorms. Thunderstorms can bring hail, which could destroy just-sprouted crops, when they are most vulnerable. Like farmers everywhere, Afghans have plenty to worry about, even without deliberate Taliban bombings and accidental NATO strikes.
The tree planting was a joint effort of USAID and the International Security Assistance Force the military coalition here. USAID is doing the bigger part but both the general and the ambassador made speeches, as did the mayor of Kabul and several Afghan government ministers.
My joke came when Gen. Petraeus arrived at his seat in the front row. We were in the second. He introduced himself first to the deputy director of the Office of Democracy and Governance – my bailiwick – Maria Barron, then to the chief and deputy of our implementing partner behind the tree project. (Implementing partners are the firms that actually do our work. We publish “request for proposals” for projects, then let contracts to implement them.) All three had identified themselves with the project, and Maria specifically said she was from AID but when Petraeus came to me, and I did the same, besides greeting me, as he had the others, he thanked me for buying the trees. Maybe he realized the implementers were hired guns, but why not thank Maria? Unconscious sexism, perhaps? I didn’t know, of course, but when he spoke to me, I replied, “General, I did it only because Maria told me to.” Petraeus was unfazed.
From the hill-top park, we had a nearly magnificent view of Kabul and the surrounding mountains. The panorama was diminished by cloud cover and mist but was still impressive. Unlike so much of our work, the tree-planting project provided instant gratification. We could see thousands of saplings ready to plant. The result of our investment was obvious. What will become of Afghan democracy, of women’s education and civil rights, of the Taliban and war lords remains to be seen but right now we could see a park full of trees because of us.
The dignitaries had been expected to plant a tree or two each but they threw themselves into the task with gusto. Perhaps they, too, enjoyed seeing an unambiguous, concrete result. As traditional musicians wandered from sapling to sapling, serenading each one, the ambassador, the general, the mayor and Afghan ministers planted tree after tree, while photographers – amateur and professional paparazzi -- swarmed around them, stampeding from each tree to get shots of the big shots wielding shovels. We had an official embassy photographer and television crews. The assistant mayor for technology recorded the event on his iPad, and dozens of embassy and city employees snapped pictures with their cell phones. It was fun, and that’s probably something neither the ambassador nor the general gets to say here very often.
Kabul, 27 March – On 7 March I watched Gen. Petraeus – whom I had just met and to whom I’d immediately made a joke – and Ambassador Eikenberry plant trees in a Kabul park during a snow storm. The show was heavy and very welcomed but it apparently was the last of the Kabul season, and, almost at once, the weather changed.
Day by day, we could see the snow diminish from nearby Television Hill, a former Taliban holdout where the local stations now have their towers. The grass – that which hadn’t been crushed to straw underfoot – turned immediately green. The scattered rose bushes sprouted leaves. Within two weeks, I spotted two dandelions and a daffodil in full bloom. From our car, we could see a cluster of cherry trees, safely sheltered behind a wall, in riotous pink flower. During the tree planting, municipal workers had shivered in their tunics – green for park workers, orange for sanitation crews -- but now we were in shirtsleeves as we dashed between the AID and State compounds.
The farther, higher peaks still are resplendent in their white coatings, glowing in the sun, and that’s good. Late-melting snow will provide water for irrigation over a longer stretch of the growing season than rain, not all at once, when much would be wasted or, even worse, cause flooding. Now the concern is the sudden switch from winter to spring will foment early thunderstorms. Thunderstorms can bring hail, which could destroy just-sprouted crops, when they are most vulnerable. Like farmers everywhere, Afghans have plenty to worry about, even without deliberate Taliban bombings and accidental NATO strikes.
The tree planting was a joint effort of USAID and the International Security Assistance Force the military coalition here. USAID is doing the bigger part but both the general and the ambassador made speeches, as did the mayor of Kabul and several Afghan government ministers.
My joke came when Gen. Petraeus arrived at his seat in the front row. We were in the second. He introduced himself first to the deputy director of the Office of Democracy and Governance – my bailiwick – Maria Barron, then to the chief and deputy of our implementing partner behind the tree project. (Implementing partners are the firms that actually do our work. We publish “request for proposals” for projects, then let contracts to implement them.) All three had identified themselves with the project, and Maria specifically said she was from AID but when Petraeus came to me, and I did the same, besides greeting me, as he had the others, he thanked me for buying the trees. Maybe he realized the implementers were hired guns, but why not thank Maria? Unconscious sexism, perhaps? I didn’t know, of course, but when he spoke to me, I replied, “General, I did it only because Maria told me to.” Petraeus was unfazed.
From the hill-top park, we had a nearly magnificent view of Kabul and the surrounding mountains. The panorama was diminished by cloud cover and mist but was still impressive. Unlike so much of our work, the tree-planting project provided instant gratification. We could see thousands of saplings ready to plant. The result of our investment was obvious. What will become of Afghan democracy, of women’s education and civil rights, of the Taliban and war lords remains to be seen but right now we could see a park full of trees because of us.
The dignitaries had been expected to plant a tree or two each but they threw themselves into the task with gusto. Perhaps they, too, enjoyed seeing an unambiguous, concrete result. As traditional musicians wandered from sapling to sapling, serenading each one, the ambassador, the general, the mayor and Afghan ministers planted tree after tree, while photographers – amateur and professional paparazzi -- swarmed around them, stampeding from each tree to get shots of the big shots wielding shovels. We had an official embassy photographer and television crews. The assistant mayor for technology recorded the event on his iPad, and dozens of embassy and city employees snapped pictures with their cell phones. It was fun, and that’s probably something neither the ambassador nor the general gets to say here very often.
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Germany - Stupidity has Consequences
Just how useless and irrelevant to NATO and the European idea can Germany become? Apparently quite useless.
Deutsche-Presse reported last week that because NATO is taking over the UN mandated no-fly zone over Libya, and that NATO naval forces will patrol the coast as part of the arms embargo, Germany has withdrawn its ships from NATO command because it may be forced to fire a gun. If they are not going to use their military when requested, why don’t they just get rid of it? That would be the logical conclusion and would certainly save the German public significantly in the budget.
I know that Merkel is facing some tough elections – but this is just profoundly stupid on the part of Germany and reveals how rapidly useless they are to NATO or to their place in the West. Even the Green Party has criticized the move. What is more astounding is that Foreign Minister Westerwelle had wanted to vote against UN Security Council Resolution 1973 before Chancellor Merkel managed to convince him that an abstention was a better idea.
German politicians have been remarkably arrogant and not a little obtuse during the past year or two – from their muscle flexing over Greece to the extent suggesting that some Greek islands could be sold to pay for the economic mess and being as unhelpful as conceivably possible regarding the financial crises in the EU to slobbering over Russia and simultaneously irritating Poland and the Baltics. They want to run the EU in their (or Merkel's) image. This latest bit of arrogance should remind Poland, France, Spain and Italy just how contemptuous their neighbor can be of anything proposed by someone else.
To the extent that Sarkozy needs an election lift, comparing French initiatives in foreign affairs to those of the eternally cringing Germans can’t hurt his chances. It also indicates that perhaps other EU members take a hard look at German export centric policy and its foreign policy to the extent it affects its neighbors.
Deutsche-Presse reported last week that because NATO is taking over the UN mandated no-fly zone over Libya, and that NATO naval forces will patrol the coast as part of the arms embargo, Germany has withdrawn its ships from NATO command because it may be forced to fire a gun. If they are not going to use their military when requested, why don’t they just get rid of it? That would be the logical conclusion and would certainly save the German public significantly in the budget.
I know that Merkel is facing some tough elections – but this is just profoundly stupid on the part of Germany and reveals how rapidly useless they are to NATO or to their place in the West. Even the Green Party has criticized the move. What is more astounding is that Foreign Minister Westerwelle had wanted to vote against UN Security Council Resolution 1973 before Chancellor Merkel managed to convince him that an abstention was a better idea.
German politicians have been remarkably arrogant and not a little obtuse during the past year or two – from their muscle flexing over Greece to the extent suggesting that some Greek islands could be sold to pay for the economic mess and being as unhelpful as conceivably possible regarding the financial crises in the EU to slobbering over Russia and simultaneously irritating Poland and the Baltics. They want to run the EU in their (or Merkel's) image. This latest bit of arrogance should remind Poland, France, Spain and Italy just how contemptuous their neighbor can be of anything proposed by someone else.
To the extent that Sarkozy needs an election lift, comparing French initiatives in foreign affairs to those of the eternally cringing Germans can’t hurt his chances. It also indicates that perhaps other EU members take a hard look at German export centric policy and its foreign policy to the extent it affects its neighbors.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
European Coalition Cracking?
Europe is showing the cracks over the UNSC no-fly zone implementation as the US withdraws from its “leadership” position. Despite the hysterical, and in the case of Dennis Kucinich in the US, downright stupid, comments from US critics of the UNSC mission, the US has performed its stated policy perfectly and will vanish from the news as it has fired its last cruise missile. Now comes the interesting part in Europe.
France wants to continue to lead the charge in Libya and really is aiming to remove Qaddafi, one way or another. It does not want NATO involved as the operational structure of NATO would restrict French military activities – which are bent on regime change. Although a NATO lead would provide significant organizational assets, it would be a political mistake as that would make this purely a Western intervention despite the Security Council resolution. Italy wants NATO because it knows this will slow the regime change meme and result in a stalemate so it could continue to deal with Qaddafi. No one has asked how Qatari or other Arab forces would operate under NATO, whether wise or not, or if they would even agree to that arrangement.
So the maneuvering begins. Germany, as ever, is showing its inability to take part in anything with a combat role – making it more useless to NATO than ever except for base facilities. The German government will be suitably shocked at Qaddafi’s staged atrocities (something al Jazeera has already revealed as fake but credulity - deliberate or not - in some quarters rules). Like Italy, but for different reasons, it would support the lead role for NATO - if for nothing else than putting the brakes on France. As yet, it is unclear what positions Norway, Canada and the Arab League have on who should control the campaign, although in the case of the latter, getting rid of Qaddafi is high on the “to do” list.
Although I think that delivering the command and control to NATO is a bad idea on any number of levels, the decision of who will run the continuing campaign will be decided in a week or so – hopefully giving the French additional time to complete their agenda. If they are unable to take out the regime, and with the Libyan armor and artillery pretty much decimated, the regime will likely revert to an insurgency campaign involving urban terror campaigns and exhibits, when possible, of Western atrocities suitably staged with moveable military bodies dressed as civilians. This would mean a long haul campaign for which many (but not all) Europeans have never had any stomach and which will require a different approach.
Fortunately, very, very soon, the US will be out of the picture. Then little, if anything will be covered in the US because limited activities of logistical support to its allies is not exciting or controversial – unless critics on the left and right feel that support to US allies is not in its foreign policy interests. President Obama’s policy will have worked and other events will receive more play. Faux News can then go back to covering those nasty union people and any other pet anti-democratic project Murdoch and the Koch brothers have on their minds while CNN (in the US, not Europe or Asia) will simply get bored and go back to its normal useless news coverage of the latest flower shows. I suggest that people start viewing al Jazeera for continuing coverage if they so desire.
France wants to continue to lead the charge in Libya and really is aiming to remove Qaddafi, one way or another. It does not want NATO involved as the operational structure of NATO would restrict French military activities – which are bent on regime change. Although a NATO lead would provide significant organizational assets, it would be a political mistake as that would make this purely a Western intervention despite the Security Council resolution. Italy wants NATO because it knows this will slow the regime change meme and result in a stalemate so it could continue to deal with Qaddafi. No one has asked how Qatari or other Arab forces would operate under NATO, whether wise or not, or if they would even agree to that arrangement.
So the maneuvering begins. Germany, as ever, is showing its inability to take part in anything with a combat role – making it more useless to NATO than ever except for base facilities. The German government will be suitably shocked at Qaddafi’s staged atrocities (something al Jazeera has already revealed as fake but credulity - deliberate or not - in some quarters rules). Like Italy, but for different reasons, it would support the lead role for NATO - if for nothing else than putting the brakes on France. As yet, it is unclear what positions Norway, Canada and the Arab League have on who should control the campaign, although in the case of the latter, getting rid of Qaddafi is high on the “to do” list.
Although I think that delivering the command and control to NATO is a bad idea on any number of levels, the decision of who will run the continuing campaign will be decided in a week or so – hopefully giving the French additional time to complete their agenda. If they are unable to take out the regime, and with the Libyan armor and artillery pretty much decimated, the regime will likely revert to an insurgency campaign involving urban terror campaigns and exhibits, when possible, of Western atrocities suitably staged with moveable military bodies dressed as civilians. This would mean a long haul campaign for which many (but not all) Europeans have never had any stomach and which will require a different approach.
Fortunately, very, very soon, the US will be out of the picture. Then little, if anything will be covered in the US because limited activities of logistical support to its allies is not exciting or controversial – unless critics on the left and right feel that support to US allies is not in its foreign policy interests. President Obama’s policy will have worked and other events will receive more play. Faux News can then go back to covering those nasty union people and any other pet anti-democratic project Murdoch and the Koch brothers have on their minds while CNN (in the US, not Europe or Asia) will simply get bored and go back to its normal useless news coverage of the latest flower shows. I suggest that people start viewing al Jazeera for continuing coverage if they so desire.
US Republicans, Galactic Stupidity, Dangerous Future
If anyone needed more evidence of how the US will decline in power and influence (not a bad thing, actually) need only to look at the caliber of intellect in positions of power within the Republican party – which, sadly to say, will sooner or later be in control again. Some opinions of the galactically stupid:
First batter, Representative Alan West (Fl): "But let me close by saying this. The world is going to hell. And I don't know any other way to say it. When you look at what's happening in Libya, I don't care what anyone says; you can't win away from 30,000 feet. I've been on the battle field before. I don't know why we're shooting $567,000 a piece Tomahawk cruise missiles into Libya. You know, back two or three weeks ago, we could have taken care of this situation if we had done the exact same thing that Ronald Reagan did back in the early 80's to Muammar Gaddafi, when he dropped the bomb in his back yard. Muammar Gaddafi didn't say a word for the next 30 years."
I won’t go into his military record – abusing prisoners for a start. But, what is he talking about? Reagan launched targeted attacks in response to a terrorist bombing by Libya. I remember the targeting camera film back in 1986 – it shifted from the tent where Qadaffi was sleeping (later confirmed) to the immediate adjacent building. We missed because he changed his location. He did not stay quiet. Lockerbie was two years later (among other things). Strike one.
Second batter, Representative Steven King (NY): "We think that a sovereign nation should have no border incursions. If we have a border incursion, and it's someone who is lined up next to someone else, lined up next to someone else, and they're carrying weapons and uniforms, that's called an invasion. Whether they're wearing uniforms or carrying weapons, or whether they're coming across in orderly ranks, or whether they're coming across at a rate of perhaps as many as 11,000 a night — and that's some data that came before the House Immigration Committee under sworn testimony — you take the annual illegal border crossings and you divide it by 365, and some of that data, under oath, calculates out to be 11,000 illegal border crossings in a 24-hour period, a lot of that taking place at night. When you think of 11,000 a night, and so I ask the question, what was the size of Santa Ana's army? About half that. That, Mr. Speaker, is the magnitude of the illegal border crossings that we're seeing."
Santa Ana’s army was a force of about 4,000 – invading a rebel held territory of Mexico. The same as Mexican immigrants “invading” ? How many – 11 thousand a night??? Illegal immigration (total – not just Mexican) is actually about 500,000 a year. Old , tired and stupid white men – largely Republican – want to run foreign policy for the US and will in the future. Strike 2.
Third batter, Mike Huckabee (presidential wannabe in Israel February): He said that the Israeli established policy - the idea of Israel giving land to Palestinians in exchange for peace is an "unrealistic, unworkable, and unreachable goal." “There are vast amounts of territory that are in the hands of Muslims, in the hands of Arabs. Maybe the international community can come together and accommodate.”
So – move them all to Muslim countries. Transfer them, like rabbi Meir Kahane wanted (even he was banned from serving in the Knesset because of his racism). Mike wants a population transfer and even forcible deportation of all Arabs from Israel, including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. But then none of the Geneva Conventions or international law make a difference to Republicans. Strike three.
The problem is that a substantial number of Americans go along with or believe all the above. Banana Republic anyone?
First batter, Representative Alan West (Fl): "But let me close by saying this. The world is going to hell. And I don't know any other way to say it. When you look at what's happening in Libya, I don't care what anyone says; you can't win away from 30,000 feet. I've been on the battle field before. I don't know why we're shooting $567,000 a piece Tomahawk cruise missiles into Libya. You know, back two or three weeks ago, we could have taken care of this situation if we had done the exact same thing that Ronald Reagan did back in the early 80's to Muammar Gaddafi, when he dropped the bomb in his back yard. Muammar Gaddafi didn't say a word for the next 30 years."
I won’t go into his military record – abusing prisoners for a start. But, what is he talking about? Reagan launched targeted attacks in response to a terrorist bombing by Libya. I remember the targeting camera film back in 1986 – it shifted from the tent where Qadaffi was sleeping (later confirmed) to the immediate adjacent building. We missed because he changed his location. He did not stay quiet. Lockerbie was two years later (among other things). Strike one.
Second batter, Representative Steven King (NY): "We think that a sovereign nation should have no border incursions. If we have a border incursion, and it's someone who is lined up next to someone else, lined up next to someone else, and they're carrying weapons and uniforms, that's called an invasion. Whether they're wearing uniforms or carrying weapons, or whether they're coming across in orderly ranks, or whether they're coming across at a rate of perhaps as many as 11,000 a night — and that's some data that came before the House Immigration Committee under sworn testimony — you take the annual illegal border crossings and you divide it by 365, and some of that data, under oath, calculates out to be 11,000 illegal border crossings in a 24-hour period, a lot of that taking place at night. When you think of 11,000 a night, and so I ask the question, what was the size of Santa Ana's army? About half that. That, Mr. Speaker, is the magnitude of the illegal border crossings that we're seeing."
Santa Ana’s army was a force of about 4,000 – invading a rebel held territory of Mexico. The same as Mexican immigrants “invading” ? How many – 11 thousand a night??? Illegal immigration (total – not just Mexican) is actually about 500,000 a year. Old , tired and stupid white men – largely Republican – want to run foreign policy for the US and will in the future. Strike 2.
Third batter, Mike Huckabee (presidential wannabe in Israel February): He said that the Israeli established policy - the idea of Israel giving land to Palestinians in exchange for peace is an "unrealistic, unworkable, and unreachable goal." “There are vast amounts of territory that are in the hands of Muslims, in the hands of Arabs. Maybe the international community can come together and accommodate.”
So – move them all to Muslim countries. Transfer them, like rabbi Meir Kahane wanted (even he was banned from serving in the Knesset because of his racism). Mike wants a population transfer and even forcible deportation of all Arabs from Israel, including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. But then none of the Geneva Conventions or international law make a difference to Republicans. Strike three.
The problem is that a substantial number of Americans go along with or believe all the above. Banana Republic anyone?
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.
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.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Discussion Rules
I find this extremely useful – and something that should be the basis of comments on blogs (particularly the comments that appear on Washington Note which are mostly inane, illogical and break the first three rules in this chart all of the time).
H/T to zenpundit for this:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)