Saudi Arabia and its impact on Indian security

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 21 Sep 2012 03:37

Older news from this Jan:
Saudi Arabia, China Sign Nuclear Cooperation Pact

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 05 Feb 2013 10:14

Saudi Youth Question Traditional Approach to Islam

On March 30, 2012, a little-noticed but remarkable document from young Saudis was posted online.

Beneath its cumbersome title — “Statement of Saudi Youth Regarding the Guarantee of Freedoms and Ethics of Diversity” — it challenged a central tenet of the kingdom’s ultraconservative religious establishment: That it has the right to impose its strict interpretation of Islam on all Saudis.

“No one can claim monopoly of truth or righteousness in the name of Islamic law (Shariah),” declared the statement, many of whose 2,600 signatories were in their 20s. “We are young citizens who seek to create a … community that follows the example of the prophet, peace be upon him, under pluralism of thought … [and] we reject this patriarchal guardianship which forbids us from practicing our God-given right to think and explore for ourselves, as we can listen and judge.”
The statement underscored the religious ferment brewing in the kingdom, especially among young people. Official religious orthodoxy has ruptured, religious attitudes are more fluid and diverse, and there is greater questioning of long-held assumptions.

Young Saudis overwhelmingly want the kingdom’s commitment to Islam to remain firm and in their personal lives they remain devout, observant followers of their faith.

But increasingly, they demonstrate less willingness to accept their religious heritage without re-examination, as their parents did. They are more willing to question a fatwa or ignore it; some are daring to openly discuss taboo subjects like atheism. Increasingly too, they favor a religious practice that is more voluntary, less enforced by the state, and more respectful of differences among Muslims.

A 28-year-old from Asir studying for his doctorate abroad declared in an interview: “I do not trust Saudi [religious] scholars. Ones from Kuwait and Egypt are more open-minded, they are telling the truth. Ours are not telling the truth. They lost their credibility.”

Disillusioned with official sheikhs, young Saudis are searching elsewhere, even abroad, for spiritual guidance. Two of the most popular religious figures among young Saudis do not hold official positions. Like most Saudi clerics they are accessible on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, as well as their own websites.

Salman Al Audah is a long-time critic of the government and his praise of the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt brought sanctions from the Saudi government: He was banned from traveling abroad and his popular television show was canceled. By contrast, Mohammed Al Arifi, a professor at Riyadh’s King Saud University, supports the government unreservedly. Sometimes called the “Tom Cruise of Wahhabism” because Saudi women regard him as handsome, he is less scholarly than Al Audah, using an earthy humor to attract a youthful audience.

Some young Saudis are going even further in a search for new ways to interpret Islam. For the past three years, a small group has met outside the kingdom in neighboring states to discuss such matters at an annual conference called Ennahda ["Renaissance"] Forum.

“We want to talk about how to change. ... So we created a forum to just talk and share ideas with a high ceiling of freedom of speech,” said Mustafa Al Hasan, 36, an assistant professor of Qur’anic exegesis at King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals in Dhahran and one of the Forum’s organizers.

In an interview, Al Hasan said that between the annual conference people are meeting in small, informal discussion groups that don’t follow any particular sheikh, which he called a new development in the kingdom’s religious landscape. Participants are mainly 18 to 30 years old, he added, and insist on one thing: no violence.
“They don’t trust the old form of Islam, the old clerics,” Al Hasan said. “They are against the old and not yet to the new. They are thinking.”

These trends are likely to grow for several reasons, including easy access to the Internet and exposure to other cultures during study overseas. Some ultraconservative clerics, fearful that young Saudis are straying from the Wahhabi tradition, have strenuously objected to the government’s overseas education program, which currently supports 145,000 Saudi students in 30 countries, about half of them in the United States.

Young Saudis also are being affected by the intensified debate about Islam’s role in public life sparked by the Arab Awakening and the new preeminence of Islamist political parties, particularly in Egypt. They of course come to this debate from a different starting place than their Tunisian or Egyptian peers, who reached adulthood under secular-oriented states. For Saudis, the dilemma is not so much Islam’s leading role in governance and public life — which most are not challenging — but rather the enforced dominance of one sect, that is, Wahhabism.

Young blood, population boom, and a love of speed from the nation that produced the best horses and horsemen!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=367679746664104

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Feb 2013 02:03

X-post to put things in proper prespective.

Role of Bandar in Kargil and before....

Jhujar wrote:http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9 ... -of-Kargil
The unsung hero of Kargil ( Paki perspective)

The prime minister’s arrival in Washington was shrouded in mystery. The first reports of the visit came to the Pakistan Embassy not from our foreign office but the State Department. Everyone was caught unawares. Hurried meetings were called, confidential internal memos dug up, and briefs developed to be able to lay down all the necessary ground work for the emergency high-octane meeting. Nawaz Sharif arrived on July 3 at Andrews Airbase and was received by Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, the Saudi Ambassador to the US, and then taken for intense briefings.By the time Nawaz Sharif touched down in Washington to defuse the situation, the entire world had descended on us in the Pakistan Embassy with Pakistan being criticised heavily, both in the print and the electronic media. In this backdrop, Nawaz Sharif battled his way up – pleading with the world to give diplomacy a chance.Saudi intervention on Nawaz Sharif’s SOS call made this possible. And the man who could work this miracle was Prince Bandar Bin Sultan.He staunchly supported the idea of forging close relations with Pakistan and China and believed that Pakistan was under-utilising its potential. He once asked former interim Prime Minister Moeen Qureshi: “I don’t understand why Pakistan is always afraid of Indian chicken”. He made China deliver intermediate range nuclear-warhead capable missiles despite strong opposition from CIA and the Department of State. During the Iran-Contra scandal, he bankrolled the whole affair.

Sharif never doubted a military take over. While the agreement was being documented, his anxiety was also mounting: “They will get me Mr President,” he whispered. Clinton quipped: “Yours is a rogue army. Keep them under civilian oversight”. Nawaz retorted: “It is not the army. It is (a) few dirty eggs. They will meddle to cover up the Kargil debacle”. And three months later, the military struck. The coup was inevitable. The ‘Dirty Four’ were afraid of a Kargil investigation and a possible court martial. Washington accepted it as a ‘fait accompli’.Gen Musharraf had the last laugh. In order to stay in power he hacked everything – faked the referendum, rigged the elections, pushed us into a war we never deserved, destroyed district administrations, packed the superior judiciary with cronies and finally left behind an NRO-tainted accidental leadership. Nawaz Sharif arranged an honourable exit from Kargil but missed the gallows by inches. Gen Shahid Aziz deserves respect for telling the truth – which is always in short supply in our country. If we still have a few good men in the army, they just need to wake up and come out with the truth.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 21 Feb 2013 02:28

So KSA was behind getting US escape route for Pakis.

Another aspect is Saudi interest in China. Looks like KSA/GCC wants to build Asian oil/gas pipeline network. For that Iran has to go away or has to be disintegrated. Afghanistan, Pakistan, PoK etc all are part of this.

P.S: So difficult to find a right map that show India for what it is.

If India wants to have a future, it has to get PoK back, one way or the other.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 16 Mar 2013 03:04

The photos Saudi Arabia doesn't want seen – and proof Islam's most holy relics are being demolished in Mecca

The authorities in Saudi Arabia have begun dismantling some of the oldest sections of Islam’s most important mosque as part of a highly controversial multi-billion expansion.

Photographs obtained by The Independent reveal how workers with drills and mechanical diggers have started demolishing some Ottoman and Abbasid sections on the eastern side of the Masjid al-Haram in Mecca.

The building, which is also known as the Grand Mosque, is the holiest site in Islam because it contains the Kaaba – the point to which all Muslims face when praying. The columns are the last remaining sections of the mosque which date back more than a few hundred years and form the inner perimeter on the outskirts of the white marble floor surrounding the Kaaba.

akashganga · Post by **akashganga** » 16 Mar 2013 03:29

My 2 cents on KSA.

KSA is the leader of islamic world. They have one point agenda. To promote growth of muslims every where in all countries by whatever means possible with eventual conversion of all people to islamism. All their policies and relationship with other countries are geared towards this single agenda. They use countries like Pakistan and Afganisthan as their pawns in their goals. They use petro wealth to gain access to kafir countries such as US, UK, and India.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 16 Mar 2013 03:54

The Economics of Saudi Pilgrimages
By: Najla Rashid Translated from Al-Hayat (Pan Arab)
Posted on: November 9 2012

Expert sources have estimated the revenues of Hajj and Umrah (pilgrimages to Mecca) this year at over 62 billion riyals ($16.5 billion), a 10% increase compared to last year. They noted that the Hajj revenues represent 3% of the Saudi GDP, and that the number of visitors to the kingdom for the purpose of performing Hajj and Umrah this year reached nearly 12 million.

The whole MRCA program can be paid off with revenues from one Hajj season.

pushkar.bhat · Post by **pushkar.bhat** » 22 Oct 2013 21:30

Riyadh to 'shift away from US' over Syria and Iran, Saudi spy chief says

The implications of this news could be huge for global geopolitics if this is true.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 22 Oct 2013 21:36

after the oil is gone, the only revenues al saud will have is the haj fees...

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 22 Oct 2013 23:38

Lalmohan wrote:after the oil is gone, the only revenues al saud will have is the haj fees...

Dont be so hopeful, it will be one legged stool. There might be additional revenue coming from multiple Hira, Amira Mandis , full of imported stuff from converted lands.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 23 Oct 2013 01:02

the west will take its revenge - have no fear of that

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 24 Oct 2013 15:43

Published on Oct 23
BY David Ignatius
The U.S.-Saudi crackup reaches a dramatic tipping point: Washington Post

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 24 Oct 2013 16:04

^^^ the only other option al-saud has for its security needs now is China

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 24 Oct 2013 16:10

^^ Won't be surprised if Pakis sandwich themselves in the middle - uninvited as usual.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 24 Oct 2013 16:11

well, they will be sharia-compliant useful idiots, good for manpower and grunt work

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 24 Oct 2013 16:15

from a very high level view - the leader of the ummah at the crest of its oil power and having subverted 2 superpowers - now wants/needs to entangle the third superpower in a death spiral. this is the time to make a bid for global khilafat - whilst the oil is still worth something. i am sure the thought is circulating in various heads during houbara hunts and dune bashing trips into the rub-al-khali

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Oct 2013 11:10

PratikDas wrote:The whole MRCA program can be paid off with revenues from one Hajj season.

That was why the Saudi King hurriedly called himself as 'The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques' and pre-empt any claim by its rightful owner of Al Hijaz, the Hashemites.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 26 Oct 2013 20:23

If US and Saudi are headed for a split, then it will also mean that Anglo support for the Sunni World will greatly diminish. This opens up a lot of possibilities for those who care for Indic Interests.

By the way Shiite world(including Alawites) has shown a lot of spunk and ruthlessness in dealing with both Sunnis and their Anglo protectors. They are less than 15% of the islamic world but have forced Anglos to switch sides. Looks like Anglos have come to conclusion that Sunnis are more about bravado than real substance.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 26 Oct 2013 20:38

Sunnis and Anglos are running jihadi battles in other countries. The most of sound bytes seem to be about that and nothing more. In Europe there are now anti immigration rhetoric along with rise of the Christian right. So even in the most civilized atmosphere in Europe these people are at loggerheads with their own politics.

akashganga · Post by **akashganga** » 26 Oct 2013 23:45

vishvak wrote:Sunnis and Anglos are running jihadi battles in other countries. The most of sound bytes seem to be about that and nothing more. In Europe there are now anti immigration rhetoric along with rise of the Christian right. So even in the most civilized atmosphere in Europe these people are at loggerheads with their own politics.

There is a soft war going on between islamic jehadists and christian crusaders all over the world not just in the middle east. This soft war is masked by political correctness, but behind the mask there is a very real war going on to preserve and promote islamism and christianism. Both these abrahamic relgions are just faiths which grew by suppressing and eliminating other faiths and spiritual traditions. Both these faiths in their pure form cannot stand reason and do not represent the truth. Only indic/dharmic traditions which evolved over 10000 years and was not started by a single individual can stand reason and emphasize truth over mere faith. My 2 cents.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 27 Oct 2013 01:03

vishvak wrote:Sunnis and Anglos are running jihadi battles in other countries. The most of sound bytes seem to be about that and nothing more. In Europe there are now anti immigration rhetoric along with rise of the Christian right. So even in the most civilized atmosphere in Europe these people are at loggerheads with their own politics.

But Anglo Govts still think that they can control and use Sunni islamists to further their geopolitical agendas. This is where Perception of Anglo Governments wrt islam is completely opposite to what their citizens have.

IMO, also while in the process of controlling the sunnis, Anglos themselves became controlled. Saudi and Egyptian influence on US and UK is well known. Infact US is still paying Jiziya to countries like Pakistan and Egypt.

But it looks like that finally the spectre of supporting Al Qaeda related terrorist factions like Al Nusra was too much for even US and they decided that they did not have stomach for it.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 27 Oct 2013 01:16

This news of divorce between Saudis and US due to later's inaction on Syria and Iran also has the potential to demolish a very old myth. That it was Israeli lobby in US which was pushing for a hard line on Iran and Syria. Now it turns out that more than any Israeli lobby, it was Saudis who were provoking US against Iran and Syria. So much for the unity of Islam.

Sunnis and Shiites hate each other and will never come together.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 27 Oct 2013 01:20

so some "bandits" raided the iranian side of baluchistan earlier today and killed 14 iranian border guards. iran has just hanged 16 "bandits" who were being held in jail in the same province. it is expected that the bandits are sunni rebels

firm action - one way or the other

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Oct 2013 01:25

X-Post...

I read the article with interest. He is partially right that India efforts strategic turning the other cheek and mercantile game theory moves have turned futile. The economic growth which would pay for the mercantile moves had stalled.

The parts where he is wrong is the reading of the Middle East.
Currently Sunni world has two storms building up in KSA and the GCC and TSP.
Both have their origins in the Khomeini revolution of Iran which had three strands/waves.

- First is the historical Persian resurgence. Even Saddam while being hanged said "beware of the Persians!"
- Second is the revival of Shia power with a twist. Revival is now spurred by the ayatollahs and not by rulers. Hence its like harking back to the early days of Islam.
- Third is a Western republican idea of end of monarchies. KR ended monarchy in Iran and brought them in line with the end of Ottoman Caliphs their traditional rivals for four centuries.

KSA and GCC seeing the threat from Persio-Shia revival interfered in Syria and failed. Failure has its consequences and they are wary of the blow back. It could lead to overthrow and the a civil war to claim Hejaz. If one thinks this is far fetched, recall the 1979s siege of the Mecca mosque. Even if they survive all these, the third wave could sweep the monarchy out. In a way the historic ghost of Ali has come back in the fields of Syria. Earlier Syria ended Ali's caliphate and consolidated Sunni power. This time Shia Syria rolled back the Sunni attacks and could overwhelm Arab monarchies.

All these are coming while US is wanting a different way out in Middle East and is reaching out as Chinmay Gharkhan noted in Ind Exp.

As for TSP the rising storm is between JuD aka sarkari terrorists and TTP the Pashtun terrorists.
And role of TSPA is doubtful as they will swing towards the winning jihadis.

If one looks at the picture of a crest fallen Badmash and Ombaba patting him it harks back to the 1999 visit and its aftermath three months later.
I think MBK is wrong and is viewing through the red colored glasses. He needs to have Indian interests and see what India should do to get ahead.

My simple thing would be stay the course and ensure there is no chance or opening for new EICs.

While MMS got the brush off in NYC he got a red carpet in M and B.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Oct 2013 17:03

Lalmohan wrote:so some "bandits" raided the iranian side of baluchistan earlier today and killed 14 iranian border guards. iran has just hanged 16 "bandits" who were being held in jail in the same province. it is expected that the bandits are sunni rebels

firm action - one way or the other

And in the language understood by the pakis

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Nov 2013 04:51

For completeness.......

The U.S.-Saudi Royal Rumble
by SIMON HENDERSON, foreignpolicy.com
November 1st 2013

What is happening to the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia? Even after loud complaints from top Saudi officials that the longtime alliance was on the rocks, the response of official Washington, outside the punditocracy, was an almost audible yawn.

President Barack Obama's administration should not be so quick to dismiss the trouble the Saudis could cause for the United States in the Middle East -- or the Saudi royals' determination to cause a shift in U.S. policy. Two articles last month quoted unidentified "European diplomats" who had been briefed by Saudi intelligence maestro Prince Bandar bin Sultan that Riyadh was so upset with Washington that it was undertaking a "major shift" in relations.

Saudi Arabia has a litany of complaints about U.S. policy in the Middle East. It faults Washington for pursuing a rapprochement with Iran, for not pushing Israel harder in peace talks with the Palestinians, and for not more forcefully backing efforts to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Saudi royals are also angry that the United States did not stand behind Saudi support for Bahrain when it crushed an anti-government uprising in 2011, and that Washington has criticized the new Egyptian government, another Saudi ally, for its crackdown on Muslim Brotherhood protesters.

Saudi royals have evidently decided that public comments and policy shifts are the only way to convince Washington to alter what they see as its errant path. Bandar's declaration came a few days after the kingdom abruptly decided to reject its election to the U.N. Security Council, claiming it could not tolerate that body's "double standards." As Bandar helpfully pointed out, the incident was "a message for the U.S., not the U.N."

According to an official in Washington, Bandar's "briefing" was actually a several hour conversation with French Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Bertrand Besancenot, who then shared his notes with his European colleagues. Whether Bandar intended to leak his remarks to the media is unclear but the Saudis haven't done anything to wind back his message. Last week, former intelligence chief Prince Turki al-Faisal made many of the same points in an address to the annual Arab-U.S. Policymakers Conference in Washington.

It is hard to judge the significance of Prince Turki's remarks, because he was essentially fired as ambassador to Washington in 2007 after falling out with King Abdullah. With a nod toward candor, he made it clear he doesn't have a role in the Saudi government and claimed not to be privy to its official deliberations. However, given his apparent place on the kingdom's limited bench of officials that can explain its stances to the world, Prince Turki's remarks can't be ignored. As he put it, Saudi Arabia "is a peninsula, not an island."

This is far from the first crisis the U.S.-Saudi alliance has experienced. In early 1939, a Saudi delegation went to Nazi Germany to negotiate an arms agreement, part of which would have been diverted to Palestinian Arabs fighting Jewish immigrants in the British mandate of Palestine. At least some of the Saudi group met Adolf Hitler at his mountain top hideaway at Berchtesgaden.

German arms never reached the kingdom -- or Palestine - as the Saudis could not afford to consummate the deal (that was in the days before the oil revenues started flowing in). However, King Abdullah still treasures a dagger given as a gift from the Fuhrer himself, and occasionally shows it off to guests. Visiting U.S. officials are briefed in advance so they can display appropriate diplomatic sang-froid if Abdullah points out the memento.

But despite the multitude of crises -- from the 9/11 hijackers to Saudi pay-offs to Osama bin Laden -- past difficulties have been quietly repaired. The operative word here is "quietly" -- usually, the general public has not even known of the crisis. The difference now is that, through Saudi Arabia's move at the United Nations and Bandar's briefing, the kingdom is all but trumpeting its displeasure.

Assuming that the Saudi-U.S. relationship is really heading off course, what could go wrong this time? Here are seven nightmare scenarios that should keep officials in the State Department and Pentagon up at night.

1. Saudi Arabia uses the oil weapon. The kingdom could cut back its production, which has been boosted to over 10 million barrels/day at Washington's request, to make up for the fall in Iranian exports caused by sanctions. Riyadh enjoys the revenues generated by higher production, but price hikes caused by tightening supply could more than compensate the kingdom. Meanwhile, a drop in supply will cause the price at the gas pump to spike in the United States -- endangering the economic recovery and having an almost immediate impact on domestic public opinion.

2. Saudi Arabia reaches out to Pakistan for nuclear-tipped missiles. Riyadh has long had an interest in Islamabad's nuclear program: The kingdom allegedly partially funded Pakistan's pursuit of a nuclear weapon. In 1999, then Saudi Defense Minister Prince Sultan was welcomed by Pakistani Premier Nawaz Sharif to the Kahuta plant, where Pakistan produces highly enriched uranium. After being overthrown by the military later the same year, Sharif is now back again as prime minister -- after spending years in exile in Saudi Arabia.

While Islamabad would not want to get in between Riyadh and Tehran, the arrangement could be financially lucrative. It would also help Pakistan out-flank India: If part of Islamabad's nuclear arsenal was in the kingdom, it would effectively make it immune from Indian attack.

Alternatively, the kingdom could declare the intention of building a uranium enrichment plant to match Iranian nuclear ambitions -- to which, in Riyadh's view, Washington appears to be acquiescing. As King Abdullah told senior U.S. diplomat Dennis Ross in April 2009, "If they get nuclear weapons, we will get nuclear weapons."

3. Riyadh helps kick the United States out of Bahrain. When Bahrain was rocked by protests in 2011, Saudi Arabia led an intervention by Gulf states to reinforce the royal family's grip on the throne. The Saudis have the leverage, therefore, to encourage Bahrain to force the U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet to leave its headquarters in Manama, from which the United States projects power across the Persian Gulf.

It wouldn't be a hard sell: Hardline Bahraini royals are already fed up with American criticism of their domestic crackdown on Shiites protesting for more rights. But it would be a hard landing for U.S. power projection in the Middle East: The current arrangements for the Fifth Fleet would be hard to reproduce in any other Gulf sheikhdom. And it's not without some precedent. Riyadh forced the United States out of its own Prince Sultan air base 10 years ago.

4. The kingdom supplies new and dangerous weaponry to the Syrian rebels. The Saudis are already expanding their intervention against President Bashar al-Assad's regime, funneling money and arms to hardline Salafist groups across Syria. But they have so far heeded U.S. warnings not to supply the rebels with certain weapons -- most notably portable surface-to-air missile systems, which could not only bring down Assad's warplanes but also civilian airliners.

Saudi Arabia could potentially end its ban on sending rebel groups these weapons systems -- and obscure the origins of the missiles, to avoid direct blame for any of the havoc they cause.

5. The Saudis support a new intifada in the Palestinian territories. Riyadh has long been vocal about its frustrations with the lack of progress on an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal. Palestine was the top reason given in the official Saudi statement rejecting the U.N. Security Council seat. The issue is also close to Abdullah's heart -- in 2001, he declined an invitation to Washington due to lack of U.S. pressure on Israel. What's more, Riyadh knows that playing the "Arab" card would be popular at home and across the region.

If Saudi Arabia truly feels that the prospect for a negotiated settlement is irreparably stalled, it could quietly empower violent forces in the West Bank that could launch attacks against Israeli forces and settlers -- fatally wounding the current mediation efforts led by Secretary of State John Kerry.

6. Riyadh boosts the military-led regime in Egypt. The House of Saud has already turned into one of Egypt's primary patrons, pledging $5 billion in assistance immediately after the military toppled former President Mohamed Morsy. Such support has allowed Egypt's new rulers to ignore Washington's threats that it would cut off aid due to the government's violent crackdown on protesters.

By deepening its support, Saudi Arabia could further undermine Washington's attempt to steer Cairo back toward democratic rule. As Cairo moves toward a referendum over a new constitution, as well as parliamentary and presidential elections, Gulf support could convince the generals to rig the votes against the Muslim Brotherhood, and violently crush any opposition to their rule.

7. Saudi Arabia presses for an "Islamic seat" on the U.N. Security Council. The kingdom has long voiced its discontent for the way power is doled out in the world's most important security body. The leaders of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a bloc of 57 member states designed to represent Muslim issues in global affairs, have called for such an "Islamic seat."

The United States and other veto-wielding countries, of course, can be counted on to oppose any effort that would diminish their power in the Security Council. But even if the Saudi plan fails, the kingdom could depict U.S. opposition as anti-Islamic. Such an effort would wreck America's image in the Middle East, and provide dangerous fodder for Sunni extremists already hostile to the United States.

Washington insiders will no doubt see any of these potential Saudi policies as self-defeating. However, it would be a mistake to ignore Riyadh's frustration: While Washington thinks it can call the Saudis' bluff, top officials in the kingdom also appear to believe that the United States is bluffing about its commitment to a range of decisions antagonistic to Saudi interests. The big difference is that the tension in the relationship is the No. 1 priority in Saudi Arabia -- but is way down near the bottom of the Obama administration's list of concerns.

Mukesh.Kumar · Post by **Mukesh.Kumar** » 07 Nov 2013 13:31

X-Posting from West Asia Thread.

Mukesh.Kumar wrote:Finally coming out in MSM.
Saudi nuclear weapons 'on order' from Pakistan

Question to guru's -How much is this a fallout of US-Saudi spat?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 07 Nov 2013 13:51

in some arab circles, the pakistani bomb is known as "the sunni bomb"

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Nov 2013 21:03

Mukesh.Kumar wrote:X-Posting from West Asia Thread.

Mukesh.Kumar wrote:Finally coming out in MSM.
Saudi nuclear weapons 'on order' from Pakistan

Question to guru's -How much is this a fallout of US-Saudi spat?

At the core the KSA is threatening to deburkha their nukes acquired from TSP if US reconciles with Iran.
Now that is stupid for that will show the US is in cahoots with KSA and TSP and PRC in proliferating nukes.
The bigger problem is KSA feels insecure of its existence due to two reasons:

- Revival of Shia which threatens the Sunni primacy
- Revival of Iran/Persia as West Asia power

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Nov 2013 21:53

The Indic group of Persians burst on the scene and finished off the Egyptian and Assyrian empires and united the Middle East around 550 BC. That is the historic event. This empire in various forms lasted till the advent of Islam. But even then, the Perso-Arabs converted to Islam and reasserted themselves relegating the Arabs who came up with the Islam formula back to the desert backwaters.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 08 Nov 2013 00:13

^ Ramana ji, Who were these "Indic" group of Persians that you allude to ?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Nov 2013 01:10

BBC's Mark Urban writes:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24855902

What does the Saudi government's nuclear statement mean?

Saudi Arabia's response to our story on Wednesday, in which we stated the kingdom believed it could obtain nuclear weapons at will from Pakistan, is in itself a fascinating signal about that country's intentions at what it regards as a time of great danger.

The Saudi embassy in London issued the rare public response to us on Wednesday afternoon after we had given them details of our report and the evidence it contained.

The kingdom, which is a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has long argued that the Middle East should be a nuclear free-area.

But Wednesday's statement highlighted the "on-going failure" of the UN Security Council to achieve this aim and warned that "lack of international action has put the region under the threat of a time bomb that cannot be refused by manoeuvring around it".

Sir William Patey, former UK ambassador to Saudi Arabia, told BBC2's Newsnight programme he considered the timing of this statement, with nuclear talks ongoing with Iran in Geneva, to be significant.

The refusal of Saudi Arabia to deny our story can be seen as a continuation of signalling that started in 2009.

King Abdullah warned US Middle East envoy Dennis Ross that the kingdom would obtain nuclear weapons, and has continued in recent years with non-attributed briefing of journalists.

What many wonder, particularly in the light of Pakistan's labelling of our piece as "speculative, mischievous and baseless" - although interestingly even it did not use the word "untrue" - is whether the Saudis are simply bluffing, trying to galvanise a tougher American line on the Iranian nuclear question?

Make no mistake, Saudi Arabia, Israel and others such as the United Arab Emirates have long tried to persuade Washington to take a stronger stance on the Iranian issue.

But there are many signs that the kingdom has also thought long term about the situation it faces today, and has taken certain military precautions.

A paper leaked 10 years ago by Saudi officials detailed possible responses to the nuclear challenge as:

- acquiring their own nuclear weapons
- relying on another country to defend them
- working for a nuclear-free Middle East

As Monday's statement shows, the kingdom no longer has any real faith in this last option.

As for relying on a foreign nuclear umbrella, could Pakistan fulfil this role?

Certainly some experts, such as Gary Samore, President Obama's chief counter-proliferation adviser until March 2013, think that the stationing of Pakistani missiles with crews and warheads inside the kingdom is the most likely way that any deal between the two countries might play out. {Becuase shows how much they understand the Paki mind. If they can be given money to offer nukes then also can be bribed to look aside when needed. So KSA will have its own people running the show if needed}

Yet we know also that Saudi Arabia has possessed its own possible delivery system, the 3,000km (2,000-mile) range Chinese-made CSS-2 missile, for more than 20 years.

{The deal was brokered by Prince Bandar then ambassador to US! And now Intelligence chief of KSA}

This summer, the defence publication Jane's published details of a new base for these weapons, with launch pads aiming at Israel and Iran.

Experts such as Pakistani Maj Gen Feroz Hassan Khan, who worked in his country's nuclear program, while avoiding any confirmation of a deal with Saudi Arabia, have written that financial help from the kingdom was essential to that project.

There is enough information out there to create the impression that the kingdom could have a nuclear option and perhaps that is all it wants, in order to deter Iran from further steps.

As the invasion of Iraq showed, the beliefs of intelligence chiefs and policy makers can create their own reality in the Middle East.

Other interpretations are possible too - that a country that takes its security as seriously as the kingdom does, possesses huge financial resources, and has been anticipating this moment for over a decade would not rely simply on bluff.

And it is this fear, perhaps, that caused a senior figure in Nato to share with me a few months ago that he had read intelligence reports that nuclear warheads made in Pakistan for the kingdom were awaiting delivery.

Its most likely German or UK.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 08 Nov 2013 08:41

Assuming the TSP maal really works when needed.

Mukesh.Kumar · Post by **Mukesh.Kumar** » 11 Nov 2013 04:19

X-Posting from West Asia thread

Mukesh.Kumar wrote:Expatriate workers clash with Saudi police when faced with deportation.- With a growing population, government largesse running out and a growing population, this maybe the future of the Middle East.

BBC
al Jazeera
The National

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 11 Nov 2013 07:03

Folks,
As per GOI, the inflow of Hard Currency From Saudia is now 27Billion a year, second after USA. It has happended after MMS visist to Jeddah where he was awarded with some kind of medal by Saudi King. I cant help thinking that islamist activities in india have also gone in high gear after his visit. Even the big Suderi bigot Mullah was invited and hosted by PM . It was no coincident that Pujya PM ji gave statement at same time that He will only be the PM of Muslims only by assigning them the first right over Indian resources.
Did MMS bargained for internal political support from Saudia in exchng for free hand to Islamist terrorists, activities to eliminate political opposition,national security appratus? From time to time Saudi have also handed over few dispensable terrorist idiots to pacify, manipulate public opinion in favour of "Secular" Saradar Sarkar.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Nov 2013 03:04

Nightwatch report

7 Nov 2013

Saudi Arabia-Nuclear Weapons: A BBC Newsnight correspondent, Mark Urban, has written a lengthy article reviewing the circumstantial evidence that Saudi Arabia already is the first Arab country to own nuclear weapons. The backdrop of the article is the diluted US position in the Geneva talks with Iran.

The thesis is that Saudi Arabia already has made arrangements to target nuclear weapons delivered by ballistic missiles to either Tehran or Tel Aviv. The author argues that Pakistan is the likely source of Saudi nuclear warheads and would supply them rapidly on request.

Pakistani officials today strongly denied the BBC Newsnight report and its allegations.

Comment: A quick search of the Web will show that Saudi Arabia has possessed multiple batteries of Chinese CSS-2 intermediate range ballistic missiles since before the first Gulf War in August 1990. These missiles can carry nuclear warheads.

Pakistan's nuclear tests in 1998 established its status as a nuclear weapons-armed state. Thus, Saudi Arabia possessed nuclear-capable ballistic missiles in operational units at least eight years before Pakistan detonated a nuclear device in Pakistan.

Since then, multiple sources have reported that Pakistan consistently has refused to sell or otherwise provide nuclear warheads to Saudi Arabia. No sources suggest that Pakistan's position has changed. Pakistani warheads would not fit Saudi Arabia's Chinese-supplied missiles without significant modifications. That is a point the Newsnight article does not address.

China's position on selling missiles and a missile-launching infrastructure to Saudi Arabia is well established, as demonstrated in the Newsnight article. Multiple open sources also report that in 2003 China sold CSS-5 ballistic missiles to Saudi Arabia to replace the CSS-2s.

What is not known is whether China would also sell to Saudi Arabia or otherwise make available nuclear warheads for the CSS-5 which is a nuclear-capable ballistic missile. What is known is that Pakistan does not have CSS-5 missiles and that China makes warheads that fit the CSS-5, but Pakistan does not.

In summary, NightWatch considers Pakistan's denials more credible than the circumstantial argument that the Newsnight article assembles. On technical grounds, more credible is the hypothesis that China would be willing to sell or make available nuclear warheads for Chinese missiles under extreme conditions in return for Saudi oil.

Nevertheless, the Newsnight article appears to be credible in its thesis that Saudi Arabia is the first Arab country to own nuclear weapons, even though they might not be stored in Saudi Arabia.

There is a fundamental flaw in the above analysis.
The Paksitani bomb is said to be based on the Chinese CHIC-4 test which was dual delivery warhead design first tested in 1968.

So to argue that Pakistani warheads wont fit CSS2 (Dong Feng3) missiles in plain wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-3A

Secondly CSS5(Dong Feng 21) models are replacement for CSS2 models for KSA. So they are capable of common payloads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-21

Thirdly Pakistani capability did not emerge only in 1998!

According to US news reports it emerged in early 1990s after a Pakistani test in Lop Nor.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Nov 2013 20:19

First,tx to Shiv for starting this most essential thread.In the early days of BR,in the last century,one warned members about teh unholy "axis of evil" between Pak,China and Saudi Arabia.The axis of evil has for two decades+ now been one of a covert N-weapon relationship,where the Saudis funded in the main the Paki N-weapon programme,and the Chinese provided the technical knowledge,ballistic missiles-also through its proxy NoKo and warhead designs.This fact has only now being spoken about.Why? The nexus between these 3 entities has a greater geo-strategic dimension than just the axis having an N-ball.Apart from their own selfish and joint interests,the US-Saudi nexus cemented by the Bush family is one of the most enduring relationships on the planet.This explains why the US has winked repeatedly at Paki and Chinese N-proliferation,why it has always supported Pak in its terror war against India,because of the covert links and secret operations and projects that they've worked on together.More on this in later posts.

In the Indian context there is another grave internal danger.The Saudi funding and attempts to radicalise young Indian Muslims,to turn them into a Wahabi plot to be unleashed when the tome is ripe. Saudi Arabia and Pak are the fountainheads of global Islamist/Wahabi extremism and terrorism.In order that the Saudi monarchy is allowed to survive,it is exporting Islamic terror worldwide and funding it,with the Pakis its technical "experts".The US couldn't care a sh*t about India as long as Pak delivers the goods in the sub-continent.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Nov 2013 21:35

china seems to have performed the miraculous feat of being in the good books of both Iran and KSA and helping the conventional and n-weapons projects of both.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 15 Nov 2013 00:21

Singha wrote:china seems to have performed the miraculous feat of being in the good books of both Iran and KSA and helping the conventional and n-weapons projects of both.

My feeling is that massa was the ultimate "doer" in Paki (therefore Saudi case) and that China was massa's Noko wrt the transfer, Just as noko was wrt China and Pakis .....

So Pakis are so called nook nood BUT only wrt West. They have the best nuke tech massa can circulate when it comes to India though.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Nov 2013 17:59

I have seen the Nightwatch report.Watched it again.The current sources for the Saudi-Paki-Sino link have come from Israel and NATO .Saudi and Paki denials are only to be expected.When there are a vareity of cruise missiles with which to reach Iran,why on earth should the Saudis want BMs and have operated Chinese BMs for so long? China requires a long-term supply of oil from the Gulf and M-East where the saudis are literally the kings.Militarily it is securing its logistic "string-of-pearls" from Gwadar across the IOR to Burma and the Malacca Straits.It has made substantial investments in Sri Lanka and is trying very hard with Paki support to "take over" the Muslim populated Maldives through a puppet anti-Indian pres. The axis have much in common to spur JVs in WMDs. With a declining US influence in global affairs,and the reluctance of the US to attack Syria,the Saudis livid at the US capitulation along with the Turks are opening the door more to Chinese assistance in overt manner apart from the covert relationships.

However,the AQK MNC long ago drew attention to its Saudi connections,let alone those with Iran and others.The hard facts are that the Saudis rely upon the Paki military to personally protect them,have a secret joint understanding,as whenever there is a crisis in Pak,they run always to the Saudis for advice and resolution of differences.Saudi Arabia is the godfather of our Paki despots who have a dual role to play in SA,training and operating their BM systems,especially as the Saudis have little or no experience in handling nuclear WMDs,as well as the jihadi factories and madrasas,mass producing Islamist terrorists for global operations.