[identity profile] malasadas.livejournal.com posting in [community profile] talkpolitics
By now, most of you have heard at least something about the administration announcing it had broken up an alleged plot by elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to assassinate the the Saudia Arabian ambassador to the USA in Washington, D.C. Iran has, of course, denied the allegations in their entirety and denounced the United States for even bringing the matter up.

To some, reasonably impartial observers, the alleged plot does not add up. While Iran and Saudi Arabia are intense rivals vying for regional dominance and while Iran has carried out assassination plots overseas before, the current operation, allegedly tied to the Qud's Force in the Revolutionary Guard is bizarrely amateur. The conspiracy involved payment of a Mexican drug cartel in the amount of 1.5 million to travel to D.C. and murder the Saudi official, preferably at a restaurant where the bomb might have the added effect of killing prominent Washingtonians. It is notable that skeptics of the plot are not limited to Iranians and their proxies, but a principle in the Chertoff Group and and academic experts on Iran. Iranian analyst Meir Javedanfar suggests the possibility that the plot was set in motion by a faction within Iran hoping to damage Khamenei enough to oust him from power.



As mentioned before, Iran and Saudi Arabia are both jockeying for position in the Middle East, hoping to emerge as the dominant force. Saudia Arabia has de facto control of both Bahrain and Yemen, and Iran has great influence with Iraq's Shia majority and with the government in Syria. However, Iran's relationship with Syria is not precisely going very well for them as most of the rest of the Gulf and Arab states have been roundly condemning Bashar Al-Assad's violent crackdown on protesters there. While it is unclear how this plot would benefit Iran or its Qud's Force, it is not beyond plausibility that Iran would benefit first from knocking down the Saudi government a peg. It seems odd for Iran to bring America directly into its rivalry with Saudi Arabia, no Iranian leader has lost a bid for consolidating power by highlighting American behavior or by portraying other regional rivals as puppets of America.

But to make it extraordinarily complicated, Saudi Arabia has lost nothing with this plot and now gets to trumpet Iran as a bad actor to the rest of the region and the world community at large. America, for our part, has been stalled on moving world action against Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions, and this plot gives added arguments for America to our allies about the need to further isolate the Iranian regime.

So -- given the swirling mess of bizarre allegations and competing interests inside and outside of Iran, where do people think this power play in the Gulf is likely to go?

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 15:02 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
I'd give it to Iran if only because Iran has shown it knows how to use its military where the Saudis can shoot their own civilians but can't fight a war. Neither of them have much in the way of subtlety and the big winner of this fight is Israel which can play off the two against each other and knows the USA will step in if things get too serious so as not to risk our ally at war with one of our enemies.

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:10 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
Since when was Saudi Arabia an enemy?

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:12 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com
The Saudi monarchy is our BFF. The Saudi people... not so much.

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:37 (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:17 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Since the House of Saud signed its alliance with FDR's Administrations. They want the USA's weapons and money to safeguard their autocracy but that does not mean it's anything more than that the regime and various US Administrations share mutual enemies. There's a certain irony in that almost all examples used to justify the need for the GWOT come from our longest-standing ally in the region.....

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:18 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
You're not making any sense.

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:24 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Let me try again: the Saudis are our "ally" in the region because the benefits for the autocracy and for US Administrations are enough that the dynasty is indeed our great friend there. The dynasty, however, rules in a fashion that helps prop up the very movements we oppose in the Middle East. A lot of the examples taken to show the "dangers" of Islamism refer to the variant in Saudi Arabia, a regime which encourages them and is our ally. Thus the regime is both our ally and our enemy at the same time, and we emphasize different facets of that relationship whenever convenient.

Realpolitik in practice, whatever the rhetoric that surrounds it. Does that make my point clearer?

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:37 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com
Make a Lego model, that would make it CRYSTAL clear ;)

(no subject)

Date: 14/10/11 00:10 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Both directly in propping up the Wahhabites and indirectly by being a neo-Medieval bunch-a assclowns.

(no subject)

Date: 14/10/11 00:42 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] notmrgarrison.livejournal.com
Are they propping them up, or being careful not to piss them off too much?

(no subject)

Date: 14/10/11 01:03 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Propping them up. Wahhabism is the official regal ideology. Think snake-handling Christianity meets Taiping Tanguo. The Islamists don't like those Wahhabists or the dynasty too much.

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:37 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fizzyland.livejournal.com
Well, Saudi Arabia is a human rights shithole that sits in the top 10 of any list of bad countries. We've made an alliance of convenience with them for access to oil but otherwise, they're the wife-beating child abuser that gets invited to the family reunion anyway.

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:39 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com
Yeah, that woman who organized the driver protest was sentenced to ten lashes in public. Egads.

(no subject)

Date: 13/10/11 16:55 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-rukh.livejournal.com
It actually does add up. First, people have to remember that Iran is not a single unified entity. Something like this is straight out of Al Q and other radical groups playbook. They profit if they can drive a wedge between Iran and other groups, especially if those groups are common enemies to rally against. I.e. the US, Israel, and Osama's old favorite, Saudi Arabia. If they can make Iran enemies of their enemies they can get more support.
From: [identity profile] sophia-sadek.livejournal.com
The irony of this incident is that when we compare Iran and Saudi Arabia, the latter comes out on the short end of the stick with regard to both human rights and terrorism. Since oil is being pumped from one place and not the other, it earns the upside of the propaganda spotlight.
From: [identity profile] sophia-sadek.livejournal.com
Those are reserves. How much Iranian crude does the US import compared to Saudi crude?

OMFG

Date: 13/10/11 19:22 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] foreverbeach.livejournal.com
Your country is about to start another war...

Re: OMFG

Date: 14/10/11 03:36 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com
i hope not! Iran don't play! or so i'm told

(no subject)

Date: 14/10/11 03:33 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com
why do CLOUDS OF DUST perpetually hover over Mexico? I just don't get it...

Credits & Style Info

Talk Politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods

DAILY QUOTE:
"The NATO charter clearly says that any attack on a NATO member shall be treated, by all members, as an attack against all. So that means that, if we attack Greenland, we'll be obligated to go to war against ... ourselves! Gee, that's scary. You really don't want to go to war with the United States. They're insane!"

March 2026

M T W T F S S
       1
2345 678
910 1112 1314 15
1617 1819 202122
2324 2526 272829
3031