Philip wrote:In other words,the Saudis want India "inside" their tent pissing out,rather than "outside" pissing in.Shashi Tharoor was partly right about Saudi interlocution being of use to India.He failed to mention that Saudi interlocution also helps Pak,its brother in the Islamic fold handsomely through the offer of "fool's gold" to the good doctor,now become a gold digger!
tharoor forgets that "middleman" is also the synonym for interlocutor. Knowledge of the english language is not his father's personal property.
India is already smelling of "piss", with saudi and paki waving it about all over the region.
The pakis provide the nuclear umbrella to the saudis. They in turn provide much free oil to the porkis. The saudis are not going to give this up come what may.
They have a dual threat from iran and israel, depending on which branch of the ROP, shia or sunni, gets its knickers in a twist first.
http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdis ... 00809.html
It is becoming clear that the first 21st century clash of civilisations – if there is to be one – will not pit Christians against Muslims but one branch of Islam against another. In yet another escalation of the Middle East crisis sparked by the disastrous American-led occupation of Iraq, The Business has learnt that, in response to Shia Iran’s ambitions to possess a nuclear arsenal, Sunni Saudi Arabia has plans to create a nuclear capability of its own. In a development that risks turning the Middle East into a nuclear powder keg, Western and Middle Eastern sources have told this magazine that, if and when it is clear that Iran has the bomb (or is close to it), the Saudis will respond by buying one from Pakistan, a fellow Sunni state. They would also likely purchase Pakistani ballistic missiles to replace the Chinese ones they bought in the 1980s. Everything is already in place for this to happen.
By buying a nuclear arsenal off the shelf from Pakistan, the Saudis would instantly acquire a deterrent without the hindrances that accompany developing one from scratch. It would wrongfoot any countermove: the country would be in the nuclear club before any effort to prevent it could be mounted. The Saudis would then likely embark on fully developing their own nuclear weapons facilities. They have already announced plans to develop a civilian nuclear energy programme, despite being the world’s largest oil producer sitting on the globe’s biggest reserves.
Saudi Arabia is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. If it wished to stay within the letter of its obligations Riyadh could demure from acquiring the weapons itself and instead invite Pakistan to station nuclear weapons in the Kingdom. But, considering the volatile nature of the situation in the Middle East, especially following Iran’s emergence as the Gulf region’s first nuclear power, the Saudis will likely opt for direct command and control of any deterrent. Indeed, the current Saudi posture already marks a shift away from the late King Fahd’s strategy of countering any Iranian bomb with an explicit American guarantee that Saudi Arabia fell under the US nuclear umbrella. Riyadh fears that Washington no longer provides a credible guarantee.
All this accentuates the strategic logic of Saudi Arabia purchasing the bomb. At a stroke, the Saudis would have undercut the nationalist and religious appeal of Iran’s bomb. They would also be challenging Tehran to an arms race in which it could not afford to compete. But a Middle East with a nuclear Iran and Saudi Arabia vying for supremacy would be an intolerably dangerous and unstable place, especially when the Israeli dimension is added. The old cold-war nuclear certainties of deterrence and mutually-assured destruction are less than reassuring in a region where ancient hatreds and religious fervour are so strong. Iran’s President Ahmadinejad, let us note, prayed openly for the apocalypse at the UN General Assembly.
Iraq could easily turn into the battlefield for a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, with disastrous consequences for global oil supplies and the world economy. Such a conflict would involve countries that produce 13.4m barrels of oil a day – 20% of world oil production – and have 43% of the world’s proven oil reserves. The result would be a price of oil far above $100 a barrel and a deep economic shock for the rest of the world, triggering chaos and crisis from China to Chile.