(Banner will apear here)

Beautiful Kabbalah Jewelry Judaicawebstore.com
Font Size:

ISRAELI-SAUDI ALLIANCE AGAINST IRAN?

Israel and Saudi Arabia appear to be joining forces in case U.S. president Barack Obama caves in on nuclear Iran

Gulf Cooperation Council forms a unified military command to confront Iran

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declares Palestinian Peace Agreement depends on halting nuclear Iran

Israeli PM Netanyahu & Saudi King Abdullah

 In this day and age of the looming Iranian threat, what do Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf States have to fear from Israel? Absolutely nothing. And what does Israel have to fear from them? Again, absolutely nothing. Bu what do the Gulf States and Israel have to fear from Iran? Possibly their very survival! This joint interest, against the backdrop of America’s disengagement from the Middle East could be “the beginning of a beautiful friendship.”

 Israel and the Sunni Arab states are enemies of the fanatical Shiite regime in Tehran. Make no mistake about the enmity between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. A Sunni Arab father once said, “If I were forced to marry my daughter to a Shiite Muslim or a Jew, I’d chose the Jew!” Just look at the daily massacres in Syria being perpetrated by Shiites and Sunnis one against the other. 

 

...even American officials now admit privately that the easing of the sanctions will total 20 billion dollars, nearly three times more than Secretary of State John Kerry’s initial estimate.

 After several decades of America’s wasting of blood and treasure in the Middle East, President Barack Obama has decided to cut losses in the region where it is no longer dependent on oil. So, what is the conclusion of those regional players who may have depended upon the U.S. to check Iran’s nuclear program and territorial ambitions? After the American handling of Egypt’s leadership crisis and Assad’s chemical weapons atrocities, America’s allies have lost faith in Obama’s ‘red lines’ and vague promises. Is it any wonder? Although Assad is being forced to give up most, if not all, his chemical arsenal, the international negotiations with him have lent the tyrant a new lease on Syria’s power. Even Hezbollah chief, Sheikh Hassan Nassralah, who has sent his forces to fight for Assad, has ridiculed the U.S. president as nothing more than a paper tiger. And as a sign of its pique, Saudi Arabia has refused to accept a seat on the UN Security Council. But the lowest point came with the Iranian nuclear agreement in Geneva signed on November 24th. Where was the political common sense in letting a belligerent Iran off the ropes after the sanctions that forced Tehran to start to make some concessions at the conference table? And why did Washington choose to go behind the backs of its allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel, to forge a deal that the French Foreign Minister first called a farce? Again, the conclusion is that the interim agreement is so vague that the Iranians have been celebrating. According to Haaretz, even American officials now admit privately that the easing of the sanctions will total 20 billion dollars, nearly three times more than Secretary of State John Kerry’s initial estimate.

 

It can be said that from Obama’s point of view, Geneva does make sense, if his ultimate goal is to forego the military option and opt for some form of containment down the road.

 The bottom line is that Obama’s credibility in the region has reached an all time low. The American leader may be acting in his country’s best interest, but they now appear to be focused more on reaching a detent with Iran than backing long-time allies. On this score, Henry Kissinger and George Shultz have warned that unless Geneva is rectified, “It will leave Iran as a threshold nuclear state at the head of the Islamist camp.” It can be said that from Obama’s point of view, Geneva does make sense, if his ultimate goal is to forego the military option and opt for some form of containment down the road. For example, permitting the Iranians the capacity to build A-bombs whenever they choose, but warning them of the consequence if they were ever to use them. This is a core concern in Jerusalem, Riyadh, and around the Gulf. (Egypt, another Sunni enemy of Iran, is now preoccupied with its current leadership crisis.)


 So Israel and America’s Arab allies are now hoping for the best, but preparing for the worst. This has led to a confluence of their common interests. For some time there have been rumors that Israeli and Saudi officials have been conferring behind closed doors. In fact, a flurry of unconfirmed reports point to a possible Israeli-Saudi alliance to cope with a nuclear Iran:  

  • Britain’s Sunday times reported that Saudi Arabia has agreed that Israeli jets could fly through its air space for a military strike on Iran’s nuclear sites.
  • Israel radio reported that a high-level Saudi military delegation had conferred with IDF officers in Israel.
  • Iran’s own official news agency, FARS, quoted “confidential sources” as revealing that Mossad Chief, Tamir Pardo, had conferred with his Saudi counterpart, Bandar bin Sultan. They were said to have discussed:

1.     Containing Iran by all possible means

2.     Exerting tighter control over jihadist forces in Syria

3.     Blocking the waves of the Arab spring

  • FARS has also carried a story that Israel and Saudi Arabia have joined forces on activating another computer virus, similar to STUXNET, designed for sabotaging Iran’s nuclear project.

 

Map indicating CCASG members

 Are all these reports fabricated? Or, do they indicate that Israel and Saudi Arabia are teaming up just in case Obama acquiesces on a nuclear Iran? So far this is only conjecture. But the Gulf Cooperation Council (comprised of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman) have agreed to form a unified military command. Meeting in Kuwait on December 10th, the declared goal was said to be a strong union with integrated economies, a joint foreign policy, and a common defense system. It appears to be a decisive move toward confronting Iran. In fact, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed, the Foreign Minister of the United Arab Emirates expressed the GCC’s concern over Iran’s nuclear project, saying, “It’s lack of transparency has aroused suspicions about whether it is really for peace-filled purposes.” 


Netanyahu made clear that Iran must be prevented from going nuclear before he makes any territorial concessions to the Palestinians on the West Bank.

 Finally, before Secretary Kerry returned for another round of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, Netanyahu made clear that Iran must be prevented from going nuclear before he makes any territorial concessions to the Palestinians on the West Bank. Speaking by satellite to the Saban Conference in Washington, the prime minister explained, “Our best efforts to reach Palestinian-Israeli peace will come to nothing if Iran succeeds in building atomic bombs. A nuclear-armed Iran would give even greater backing to the radical and terrorist elements (Hamas and Hezbollah DE) in the region. It would undermine the chances of arriving at a negotiated peace.” 


 That sounds like a prerequisite for a Palestinian peace agreement. It makes sense now that president Obama is perceived as being so unpredictable in his Middle East policies. 


 

 David Essing


Back To The Top