After Israel signed the Abraham Accords in 2020 to normalize relations with the UAE and Bahrain, and then with Morocco, whether Saudi Arabia will be next in line in this process is being actively discussed in the United States, Israel, and the Middle East in general. The intensity of such discussions increased as the Saudi Kingdom began to introduce adjustments to foreign policy, such as stable diplomacy with Iran, making it impossible to interact with Israel, such as the situation with the UAE.

Looking back, Saudi-Israeli relations were mainly due to the close personal relationship between Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of the former US President Donald Trump. Kushner frequently bypassed key US State and Department of Defense officials to push bin Salman into a sharp regional power game that the US foreign policy bureaucracy considered reckless but which was favored by Israel. In response, Kushner provided the Saudi Crown Prince with White House support, allowing bin Salman to play power games such as the blockade of Qatar, the kidnapping of the Lebanese Prime Minister and cleansing internal rivals.

It is no secret that the majority of Israelis continue to consider Saudi Arabia the most coveted prize in the process of normalizing the situation around Israel. Opinion polls have highlighted this in the months following the signing of the Abraham Accords. The Mitvim Institute’s Israeli Foreign Policy Index showed that Saudi Arabia is viewed by Israelis as by far the most important Arab country to develop cooperation with. In the Geneva Initiative poll, the Israelis again ranked Saudi Arabia well above other Arab countries on the most valuable target for Israel’s next peace deal list. Reports in November 2020 of a trilateral meeting between former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman and former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo greatly strengthened hopes in Israel that the desired rapprochement with Riyadh was only a matter of time.

But these hopes never came true. Even worse, this year, such a move by Saudi Arabia has become even more distant. The controversy over Israel among the Saudi royal family has intensified significantly against the backdrop of deteriorating attitudes towards bin Salman from the new White House Administration and its desire to keep the Saudi crown prince at arm’s length over his involvement in the assassination of opposition Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. In addition, Riyadh has opened channels of dialogue with Iran, reflecting a different approach from Israel’s.

Along with this, Saudi Arabia has made repeated statements linking rapprochement with Israel with progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Riyadh’s commitment to the Palestinian issue is not just words. It is reflected in the peace initiatives promoted by the Saudis over several decades, in the King Fahd of Saudi Arabia plan 40 years ago (1981) and the Arab Peace Initiative almost 20 years ago (2002). However, Riyadh has made some conciliatory gestures towards Israel over the past decade. Including, among other things, coordination with Israel on security issues in Iran, participation of former senior Saudi Arabian officials in strategic dialogues and conferences with Israeli counterparts, unofficial visits of delegations to Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and confidence-building measures by religious leaders (such as visits to synagogues abroad and Auschwitz, among other things). There was also permission to fly to and from Israel through the airspace of Saudi Arabia, and more recently, the first interstate sports competition in judo at the Olympic Games in Tokyo.

At the same time, Saudi Arabia emphasizes that good relations with Israel will take place only after the return of the Palestinians and Israelis to the negotiating table. This negotiation request was pointed out on October 15 by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Arab monarchy, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud. According to him, the peace process between Israelis and Palestinians is a strategic necessity for the region.

The readiness of Saudi Arabia to take a step towards normalization with Israel was confirmed the other day by Abdallah Al-Mouallimi, the Kingdom’s permanent representative to the UN, in an interview with the Arab News newspaper. However, he simultaneously made it clear that this would only happen if Israel began to comply with the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative requirements. He recalled that the Arab Peace Initiative envisages ending the occupation of all Palestinian lands seized by Israel in 1967, creating an independent State of Palestine with its capital in Jerusalem and respect for the Palestinian rights, primarily to return and to self-determination. According to Abdallah Al-Mouallimi’s opinion, if all the conditions of the global Arab community are met, Tel Aviv can count on a bonus, which it could not dream of even in its brightest fantasies: the entire Islamic world, all 57 countries of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, will follow the example of Saudi Arabia. He emphasized an axiom known to everyone in the world: the key to peace lies in a just solution to the Palestinian issue. “There is no other solution to the conflict, and there cannot be,” concluded Al-Mouallimi.

Despite the apparent benefit for Israel from the settlement of relations with Saudi Arabia, Tel Aviv has not yet made any reciprocal steps, being still psychologically unprepared to agree with the “Arab initiative.” Any concessions from Riyadh are also unlikely to be expected soon, as well as the signing of an agreement on normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia. At least until the current Saudi king, who represents the camp of the old Arab elite, quite conservative towards Israel, is replaced. King Salman wants to remain in the history of the Arab street and the Arab world as a man who did not betray his solidarity with the Palestinian people, as one of the most outstanding leaders of the Arab Ummah.

Valery Kulikov, political expert, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Recently, Saudi Arabia and its satellites Bahrain and Kuwait have decided to expel Lebanese ambassadors amid the rising tensions between Beirut and some countries of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC). In addition, Riyadh severed economic ties with Lebanon, which looks like a deliberately malicious move aimed at pushing Lebanon into a deeper economic crisis.

Kuwait, and especially Bahrain, diligently obedient to their overlord, followed suit. If the stance of Bahrain, where the Saudi soldiers crushed the “pearl revolution” is understandable, since Riyadh still actively supports the regime of the Khalifa family now ruling there, then the position taken by Kuwait is both alarming and surprising. When Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah was in power in Kuwait, and he died in 2020 after a long stay in power, he tried and succeeded in pursuing a neutral policy towards neighboring countries in the best interest of his people. Often he would successfully extinguish conflicts in the Arab world and was even awarded the UN Peacekeeper International Prize for his outstanding feats. Apparently, times have changed now, and the ruler of Kuwait, Sheikh Nawaf al-Ahmed al-Jaber Al Sabah, is pursuing a new course.

Riyadh initially launched a series of large-scale economic strikes on Beirut to push the Lebanese government into forcing Hezbollah out of the country’s political and military scenes. Officials announced an indefinite ban on Lebanese agricultural products under the pretext of a failed attempt to smuggle 5.3 million amphetamine tablets that were hidden in a shipment of pomegranates that was delivered to the port of Jeddah. Riyadh has banned Lebanon from importing its superb fruits and vegetables, while also closing Saudi territory for transit of Lebanese agricultural goods.

This decision caused a violent and harsh reaction in the Republic. The Lebanese newspaper As-Safir, expressing the opinion of the ruling circles, wrote, “Lebanon and the Lebanese people do not want to irritate the Saudi brothers. We want a better relationship with Saudi Arabia. We support Saudi Arabia in the fight against smuggling networks and their perpetrators.” In addition, Lebanese President Michel Aoun commented on Saudi Arabia’s ban imposed on Lebanon, “It is important for us to maintain economic cooperation with Saudi Arabia, and today we are working to clear the existing uncertainties and get back on track.” But many experts say that Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states are well aware of the fact that banning the import of Lebanese crops wouldn’t put an end to drug trafficking. This is an unfair decision in the eyes of Lebanese farmers and agricultural workers, who are surprised that a country like Saudi Arabia could make such a hasty and unwise decision against the brotherly Lebanese people. Lebanon is also concerned about the intention of other countries to follow Riyadh’s decision, as it eyes GCC member states.

It seems that a video of a popular Lebanese TV presenter that turned politician didn’t just sparked a heated debate on social media platforms across the Arab world, but has also angered Saudi officials. This clip that showed George Kordahi vocally opposing the war between Saudi Arabia and the Emirates in Yemen appeared a few weeks before he became Lebanon’s minister of information. He made contradictory statements, accusing Saudi Arabia and the UAE of attacking “brotherly” Yemen, and said that the Ansarullah movement of the Houthis defends the country against aggressors and occupiers. This is true and is confirmed at least by the fact that it is not the fighters of the Ansarullah movement that invaded Saudi Arabia, it was the other way around. Moreover, Saudi military jets are regularly bombing Yemeni cities, towns and villages in the absence of any air defense systems that could put an end to this. Kordahi’s message would spread quickly across social media platforms, given the fact that he worked with Saudi and Emirati television networks for a long time, and has until recently been a popular media figure in the media space of these two countries. Later on, to lessen the effect of his remarks, the Lebanese minister said that the interview was old, took place on August 5, and that what he said about the futility of the Yemeni war “was done out of conviction, not in defense of Yemen, but also out of love for the Saudi Arabia and the UAE.”

Lebanon is facing both the economic and political crisis, and it must be pointed out that prime minister Najib Mikati have made every effort to evade this recent aggravation that was the last thing his government needed. Mikati has officially stated that Kordahi’s remarks have nothing to do with the policies of the Lebanese government, which has a positive attitude towards Saudis. Moreover, Kordahi would seek ways to defuse tensions by saying whoever wants to paint him in anti-Saudi colors is dead wrong, as he has never attacked or insulted Riyadh. Moreover, he has described the UAE as his second home. Moreover, Mikati, in an attempt to “butter up” the Saudi moneybags and in the hope of their further financial assistance, asked for the resignation of Kordahi amid a diplomatic conflict with Saudi Arabia, Lebanese TV channel LBC has recently reported.

Many analysts believe that the actual ruler of Saudi Arabia, Prince Mohammad bin Salman, has been planning such steps against Lebanon for a long time and that Kordahi’s statements only gave the Saudis a reason to continue their punitive measures against Beirut, knowing that the country seriously affected by the crisis can no longer bear more economic pressure. Riyadh has turned its back on Lebanon since at least 2018, when it put heavy pressure on then-Prime Minister Saad Hariri to undermine Hezbollah’s influence. But the Saudis failed to weaken Hezbollah, and then they began to impose severe economic restrictions on Lebanon, while refraining from providing any financial assistance. Since then, experts say, the Saudis and their allies have been implementing a “free fall for all” tactics. In other words, they are seeking to bring the Lebanese state to complete collapse in an attempt to undermine the Hezbollah. Thus, the Kordahi situation is just one more step in the anti-Lebanese direction, the course currently pursued by the Saudi prince Mohammed.

A stark contrast to the Saudi policy of pressure, the introduction of a sanctions regime and the twisting of arms against the small and defenseless Lebanon is the peace-loving policy of Russia, which always and everywhere advocates a peaceful settlement of conflicts through negotiations and compromises. “Without any doubt, we always stand, including with regard to Lebanon, for the resolution of any conflicts through dialogue. We are in contact with almost all political forces in Lebanon and will try to do this in the future precisely in order to resolve the situation,” Vladimir Putin said at the Valdai Forum. “We cannot comment on any internal political processes that you are talking about … Do we support the ultimatum by one of the parties? No, we do not. Do we support the position of the other side? This would mean that we take the side of one of the warring parties, and this would be counterproductive from the point of view of the possible effectiveness of our efforts at reconciliation,” he said answering the question of a Lebanese journalist. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Russia is in contact with all political forces in Lebanon, and stands for the settlement of the situation without bloodshed. This is how various conflicts in the countries of the world should be resolved in the 2020s.

Viktor Mikhin, corresponding member of RANS, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

The United States has now increasingly engaged in a disinformation efforts through media under its sway, national intelligence agencies, and numerous other avenues, with the express purpose of bringing Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud into disrepute.

Prince Mohammed’s alleged involvement in the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident, journalist, has already been made public in a US National Intelligence Report. And now he is being reminded of this as part of another scandal fed by the British, apparently, in agreement with Washington, namely the purchase of the British football club Newcastle United, whose new chairman, Yasir Al-Rumayyan is accused of receiving assets seized as part of the fight against corruption. Moreover, the primary beneficiary of this scheme is said to be the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. He allegedly gave the appropriate orders to the country’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) head, also Yasir Al-Rumayyan.

Britain is claiming that the interest in the Saudi Crown Prince’s schemes was sparked by the purchase of Newcastle United by the Kingdom’s Public Investment Fund and British discontent with the deal, accusing Riyadh of a range of human rights violations. However, a very active role of the USA in spinning this scandal is evidenced by the fact that Areej Al-Sadhan, a resident of San-Franciso, asked the fans of the British football club to keep in mind the principles of Riyadh’s domestic politics in dealing with the sale of the club.

Further impetus to this scandal, again not without the apparent involvement of the United States, was given by a meeting held in the Civil Court of Canada, where internal documents of PIF were declassified, showing that Yasir Al-Rumayyan is only a formal manager, while the actual owner of the organization is allegedly Mohammed bin Salman.

Another scandal promoted by the United States with the main culprit, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, was his accusation of allegedly wanting to kill the former Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud with a poisoned ring from Russia (and the mention of Russia by the initiators of this scandal was planned as the “cherry on top” for strategists from Washington). The details of this information campaign were presented at some point by the American television channel CBS and expounded by The Washington Post, providing accusations by Saad Aljabri, a former senior Saudi intelligence officer. Saad Aljabri has been an adviser to another Saudi Prince, Mohammed bin Nayef, who led the fight against al-Qaeda (a terrorist group banned in Russia) in Saudi Arabia in the early 2000s and who is Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s main rival to the Saudi throne. Saad Aljabri was the main link in contacts between Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency and the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand. So it comes as no surprise that US intelligence agencies are using him to spin this latest scandal involving Mohammed bin Salman.

Saad Aljabri’s attempt to hit the Crown Prince’s reputation has already been responded to by the Saudi Embassy in the US, stating that the former assistant Interior Minister is unclean, making his remarks unlikely to enjoy public trust. “Saad Aljabri is a discredited former government official with a long history of fabricating and creating distractions to hide the financial crimes he committed, which amount to billions of dollars,” the Kingdom’s Embassy in Washington stated.

The question naturally arises: why has the Biden Administration pounced so vehemently on the Crown Prince lately?

The 46th US President Joe Biden began his strategy to rein in recalcitrant states by taming one of the youngest and most uncooperative Arab representatives – Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is actually trying to conduct an independent policy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including the United States. In recent years, he began to show irrepressible agility in radically changing the archaic and corrupt way of life of Saudi society that had developed over decades, which suited the United States very well. Having initiated the “Saudi transformation,” Mohammed bin Salman has developed a flurry of activity inside and outside the Kingdom, beginning to introduce various reforms that have become part of the “shock therapy” whose meaning he described in his interview with The Washington Post in February 2018. Outside Saudi Arabia, the young heir to the Saudi throne has already gained considerable prestige, including at the highest political levels in Russia and China, which the Biden Administration has been very jealous of.

Realizing what a threat to the well-being of the current US Administration Mohammed bin Salman could pose, Joe Biden decided to “break the map.” From his first days as US President, he demonstrated his intention to remove Crown Prince Mohammed from active contact with the White House.  Besides, the scenario where the Saudis start buying weapons from Russia and China and making friends with Hezbollah and Iran hardly appeals to anyone in Washington and Tel Aviv.

And in this regard, given the challenging situation in the top Saudi circles in the struggle for the throne, Washington hopes to use this factor in curbing Mohammed bin Salman.  Many members of the ruling dynasty in Saudi Arabia, including about 25,000 people (about two hundred of them are princes), have a negative attitude towards Mohammed bin Salman. The relationship has escalated since the 35-year-old prince announced his claim to power in 2017. The fact is that Crown Prince Mohammad ibn Salman, although considered a “grey cardinal” and the real ruler of Saudi Arabia, is publicly heavily dependent on his father. Once King Salman is removed, Muhammad will be pounced upon by all his resentful relatives, eager to promote their clan as high as possible.

One should also not forget that back in 2018, several members of the Saudi royal family opposed Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud becoming heir to the throne and attempted to remove the Prince from the throne with US involvement. The alleged reason was, very pleasantly to Washington, the Prince showing an apparent interest in purchasing Russian weapons, including S-400. If Reuters and other US media sources are to be believed, “dozens of princes and cousins” were then planning to confront the prince. Some analysts, including the Central Intelligence Agency, believe that one of the Saudi princes Mohammed bin Salman should be particularly wary of,  is Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, who has been a favorite of the CIA for years. In 2017, Mohammed bin Salman arrested Nayef and forced him to hand over the title of Crown Prince.  As for Washington, already in 2018, it was seriously considering another candidate for the Saudi throne in opposition to the Crown Prince: King Salman’s only brother, Prince Ahmed, to whom the royal family members who are willing to be in opposition are also loyal.

Back in January of this year, security and military analyst, Jonathan Broder revealed in an article for SpyTalk his survey of former CIA experts who have worked in West Asia for decades, on whether the Biden government would support a possible plot against Mohammed bin Salman. CIA agent Douglas London, whose activities for 34 years have been associated with the region, admits the likelihood of a “hard” scenario for the US to change the government in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Former CIA analyst Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow, and director of the Brookings Intelligence Project, who serves as a senior fellow in the Center for the Middle East Policy, argued in early 2021 that the Mohammed bin Salman “elimination” situation could unfold under two scenarios. According to the first, Biden may try to find a way to convince King Salman that the Prince’s behavior has undermined the royal family’s reputation to the point that Saudi Arabia’s position in foreign policy has been seriously damaged. Riedel called assassination the second option, specifying that Saudi dissidents may want to assassinate Mohammed bin Salman with US support.

However, if the coup is destined to happen, its arrangement will prove to be quite tricky, both for the Saudis and US intelligence agencies. James Clapper, the former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency who also served as Director of National Intelligence under the Obama Administration, believes it will depend on several factors, such as which princes will participate in the plot. Some are more influential than others, so if the CIA decides to help in a coup, it is vital to choose someone who will be the “best US envoy.”

But Gregory Gause, Head of the International Affairs Department at the Bush School of Government and Public Service, Texas A&M University, thinks a much more rational solution for the Biden Administration would be to reach an agreement with the Crown Prince rather than eliminate him.

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

While it is impossible to make at least any positive dynamics on the Israeli-Palestinian track, President Joe Biden Administration has recently been actively seeking to expand the Abraham Accords to confirm its still remaining, albeit small, influence in the Middle East.

To that end, Washington has been pushing hard in recent months for Saudi Arabia to join the agreements between Israel and the Arab states of the Persian Gulf. The US is confident that establishing diplomatic relations between Tel Aviv and Riyadh, the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, would boost normalization between Israel and other Arab and Muslim states.

Let’s not forget that since Donald Trump’s defeat in the presidential election, Saudi Arabia has frozen contacts on the Israeli track, clearly intending to wait and use the peace agreement with Israel to cement relations with the Biden Administration, the latter having become strained due to Washington’s tough stance on human rights abuses in the Kingdom. Primarily because of the assassination of the Saudi regime’s opponent, journalist Jamal Ahmad Khashoggi.

Jake Sullivan, the US National Security Advisor to President Joe Biden, ultimately raised the issue in a meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Riyadh on September 27. The Prince, the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia under the aged and ailing King of Saudi Arabia, Salman Al-Saud, has not rejected the idea of normalization of relations with Israel. At the same time, Sullivan was told in Riyadh that the process would take a long time and was listed several preconditions for rapprochement with the Jewish state. One of the main preconditions is an improvement of relations between the US and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. There won’t be any normalization of relations as long as the Palestinian issue remains unresolved. Unlike Donald Trump, Biden has so far refused to meet the Prince or even call him by phone, limiting himself to a phone call to King Salman, publicly condemning the journalist’s assassination as well as the arrests of human rights activists.

It should be noted that Washington has been trying to convince the Saudis to establish relations with Tel Aviv for more than ten years. In 2009, President Barack Obama asked the late King Abdullah to take steps in this direction, thus giving the green light to other Arab countries. The Trump Administration has also put a lot of effort into this. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman initially showed readiness for rapprochement with Israel, yet his father, King Salman, insists on continuing the Kingdom’s traditional policy towards Palestine, at least until the State of Palestine is established, clearly fearing internal and external reactions from Arab-Muslim society. The aged King Salman still reigns, though he no longer rules. He wants to walk away clean in the eyes of the Arab population at large, without tarnishing himself by abandoning the “Israel is the enemy of the Arabs” formula.

But all the same, today or tomorrow, the burden of deciding to normalize relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel will fall on the heir to the throne, for which Mohammed bin Salman is in principle quite ready and sees no other way than to be friends. Especially since the consequences of the Emirates’ reconciliation with Israel showed that there was nothing wrong with the Abraham Accords – quite contrary, the Emirates won and are now fully reaping the benefits. After all, normal relations with Israel are a pass to the “privileged league” where geopolitical issues worth billions of dollars are decided, and the petrodollars of the Arab elites can bring them further multiplication and enhanced international status.

The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia understands all this very well and is already prepared to change the attitude of the old elites stuck in the twentieth century. Additionally, given the centuries-long confrontation between Sunni and Shiite Islam, he doesn’t want to forget the ever-present Iranian threat. And negotiations on specific areas, which Riyadh is forced to conduct with Tehran, means a temporary tactical weakening of confrontation between two Islamic religious authorities to get a little respite and comprehend the vectors of a new policy in the Middle East. To receive certain dividends from those who claim a leading role in the region today, i.e. not only Washington but also Beijing and Moscow. And in these circumstances, Israel could prove to be a good ally for Saudi Arabia,  especially since mutual sympathies between the Saudis and Israelis have existed for a long time, as have joint actions against the Iranians, which to a large extent already predetermine the alliance between the two countries.

In addition, by withdrawing US missile defense systems from the Prince Sultan airbase 115 km from Riyadh, Washington further pushed the Saudis to step up military cooperation with Israel and acquire Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system as an alternative to the US THAAD and Patriot systems. After all, Saudi Arabia needs a reliable anti-aircraft and anti-missile defense against a background of Yemeni rebels’ constant attacks on oil facilities. Today, only Russia, Israel, and China can provide this as well as the United States. Against this backdrop, the Saudis are already considering the purchase of Rafael’s Iron Dome systems, which have proven themselves against short-range missiles, or Barak anti-aircraft missile systems from Israel Aerospace Industries. And this is one more crucial step towards the future normalization of relations between Riyadh and Tel Aviv. Washington’s role in this rapprochement is frankly spoken of in Israel today, reporting that an agreement for Riyadh to acquire Israeli air defenses could only be concluded with the US approval.

But this is not the only area where a genuine rapprochement between the two countries could be seen in recent times. Saudi Arabia has already agreed to allow Israeli planes to fly over its airspace, cutting routes to the Persian Gulf, India, and other parts of Asia. In addition, some trade deals between the two countries have already started with the participation of the UAE and especially Bahrain as part of the Abraham Accords concluded earlier.

Most certainly, Saudi Arabia is Israel’s most valuable target for the subsequent peace agreement. Beyond the purely political and reputational effects, opening up the Saudi market with its 33 million inhabitants and high purchasing power is of great importance to Israeli companies and exporters.

Therefore, it is understandable that Israel would have to make certain concessions in Riyadh’s preliminary demands for the normalization of relations. One option could be for Israel to make some concessions to the Palestinians so that the Saudis can establish ties, such as in July 2020, when Israel gave up the possibility of annexing the territories of Judea and Samaria in exchange for the Abraham Accords and normalization of relations with the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco. Such a move by Israel towards resolving the conflict with the Palestinians will be necessary to allow and legitimize Saudi Arabia’s decision to join the normalization process and establish diplomatic relations with Israel.

The upcoming 20th anniversary of the Arab Peace Initiative provides an opportunity for such developments, and preparations for achieving that objective should begin now. Recall that the Arab Peace Initiative was adopted by the Arab League in Beirut on March 28, 2002, and aims to achieve comprehensive peace with Israel and end the Arab-Israeli conflict. The primary condition is Israel’s withdrawal from the territories it occupied in 1967 (including the Golan Heights and Shebaa Farms) and its recognition of Palestine in the West Bank.

Vladimir Odintsov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

In recent years, Saudi Arabia and Iran have intensified bilateral talks to resolve existing differences to stabilize the regional situation. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the two country’s foreign ministries discuss some serious issues, not least of which is the situation in Yemen, where the countries support different sides in the conflict. Meanwhile, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian described positively the ongoing direct bilateral talks, noting that the countries are now “on the right track.”

As for the Saudi side’s assessment of the talks, the Kingdom stresses that contacts with Iran are now “experimental” for them – Riyadh is probing the ground and exploring opportunities to improve relations. However, since the American presence and influence in the Middle East is clearly diminishing, Riyadh clearly understands that the balance of power in the region has been shifting lately. Under these circumstances, the Arab states of the Persian Gulf cannot ignore the interests of a major power such as Iran. Riyadh and its neighbors in the Persian Gulf have realized that regional rivalry in the current circumstances hinders the development of the Middle Eastern states. At the same time, stable relations and business contacts, in turn, are a better alternative – they can become the guarantee of security and joint development. In this regard, the launched direct talks between the Iranians and the Saudis may positively stabilize the regional situation.

Against this background of Saudi Arabia’s active rapprochement with Iran, a publicly critical statement of the Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman on September 20 at the annual general conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna drew attention, as he condemned Iran’s desire to acquire a nuclear bomb. “The Kingdom insists on the importance of keeping the Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction. On this basis, we support international efforts aiming at preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons,” he added. However, Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman also voiced calls to eliminate the Israeli nuclear threat and free the Middle East of nuclear weapons.

On October 12, Arab News reported that Saudi Arabia’s cabinet reiterated its call to rid the Middle East of nuclear weapons and reaffirmed its importance in implementing the chemical weapons ban convention. The statements were made by Acting Minister of Media Dr. Essam bin Saad bin Saeed after the weekly cabinet meeting chaired by King Salman of Saudi Arabia.

It is worth noting that just a couple of years ago, Riyadh gave reasonable grounds for the international public to have real concerns that Saudi Arabia itself might turn into a state that would build a nuclear bomb if it wanted to, against the opposition of the world community. And even the Israeli media suggested that the Trump Administration was making efforts to accelerate the transfer of critical nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia.

Recall that Saudi Arabia is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) but has made it clear publicly several times that it reserves the right to enrich uranium on its territory. Riyadh has also insisted on this right amid developments in Iran’s nuclear program, thus showing that Saudi Arabia is interested in building infrastructure to enrich uranium on its territory and will not settle for a peaceful nuclear reactor.

A definite indication of past US involvement was a congressional report released in February 2019. The document was based on testimony from several individuals who pointed to efforts by the Trump Administration to accelerate the transfer of critical nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. According to the same evidence, officials in the administration approved the transfer of technology from American companies to Riyadh to build nuclear reactors in the country, ignoring the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. At the same time, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif sharply condemned the “hypocrisy” of the US over the planned sale of nuclear technology to the Saudi regime.

However, despite opposition in Congress from opponents of Washington’s continued close nuclear ties with Riyadh, in March 2019, former US Energy Secretary Rick Perry approved six secret approvals for US companies to provide nuclear energy technology and other assistance in this area to Saudi Arabia. Reuters learned about it after reading a copy of the document of the US Department of Energy. This same information was also confirmed in late March 2019 by the US publication The Daily Beast, which reported that the US Department of Energy had secretly permitted six US companies to enter into an initial deal with Saudi Arabia to build a nuclear reactor. But while the administration acknowledged this, it declined to disclose which companies were granted permission as part of the agreement.

Meanwhile, many US lawmakers remain concerned that sharing nuclear technology with Saudi Arabia could eventually lead to a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. These sentiments are reinforced by the fact that back in 2018, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman indicated in an interview with CBS America that the Kingdom would develop nuclear weapons if Iran did so.

As Israeli experts have stated in the media, Saudi Arabia, while remaining a conservative Arab country responsible for the spread of radical Islam, can use its reputation as the head of the anti-Iranian bloc to demand uranium enrichment on its territory in a dialogue with the US administration. Moreover, the American president may agree to it without congressional oversight and consultation with the appropriate experts.

In this regard, one senses that under the influence of the changing international conjuncture, and wishing to please the current US authorities, including in preventing further accusations of Washington’s transfer of nuclear technology to Riyadh, the Saudi authorities have adjusted their public statements regarding the nuclear program, calling for ridding the Middle East of nuclear weapons.

However, the sincerity of Riyadh’s statements and its rejection of a military nuclear program, and whether this position is merely an “experimental” one for testing the international ground, just like in the negotiations with Iran, remains to be seen.

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

With Joe Biden’s arrival in the White House, several irritants have once again come to the forefront in US-Saudi Arabia relations. The Saudis are unhappy with President Biden’s intention to return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in relations with Iran, as well as the US refusal to see the Houthi movement in Yemen as a “terrorist organization”. The Biden administration’s repeatedly expressed desire to bring the issue of human rights abuses, which was not raised under Donald Trump, back into the realm of bilateral relations, was also of particular concern. Riyadh’s global criticism of Washington’s sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia by Western powers to continue the war in Yemen did not go unnoticed, as did the US authorities’ intention to review their arms deals with the Arab monarchy.

Besides, this spring, Washington announced the start of the withdrawal of Patriot and THAAD air defense/anti-missile defense systems from the Middle East, including the territory of Saudi Arabia, which is the US ally in confronting Iran. The move was very painfully received in Riyadh as it significantly undermines the Saudi kingdom’s security in the face of continuous missile attacks from the Houthis and Iran. The Pentagon attributed this withdrawal of US anti-aircraft systems to their alleged “limited numbers” and the need to use them in other regions, particularly against China and North Korea. However, Saudi experts do not exclude the possibility that one of the excellent reasons for such a step by Washington was the apparent inability of Patriot systems to combat drones. In these circumstances, the US is simply afraid of losing international credibility due to the evidence of the inability of their air defense system to protect from missiles and drones that fire on Saudi infrastructure. So the other day, Saudi Prince Turki Al Faisal explicitly pointed out to the United States that Washington simply needs to stop withdrawing Patriot air defense systems from the kingdom to prove its previous friendship with Saudi Arabia.

It cannot be ruled out that, amid the compromise of the Americans in Afghanistan, the volume of arms purchases from the US will decrease. This could be one of the symptoms of the disintegration of the former Pax Americana, writes the Polish publication Defence 24.

These circumstances, as well as several other difficulties in relations with Washington in the recent period, have prompted the Middle Eastern Kingdom to think about diversifying military cooperation and its military procurement. Therefore, it is not surprising that Saudi Arabia has turned its gaze to Russia, with its superior weaponry well known worldwide, which has already proven its worth in the fighting in Syria.

Wanting to overcome its complete dependence on American weapons systems, as early as 2020, Riyadh began to negotiate with Moscow over the possible supply of S-400 air defense systems. After the attacks on Saudi targets, it became apparent in the Middle Eastern kingdom that American systems are flawed, and Americans are not prepared to defend their allies. Saudi Arabia has therefore taken a closer look at Russia’s defensive and strike systems: the S-400 surface-to-air missile system, TOS-1A Solntsepyok heavy flamethrower system, the SU-35 multipurpose fighter jet and the Iskander-E tactical missile system.

Relations between Russia and Saudi Arabia have not previously been known for their warmth and mutual trust. Recently, however, the parties have managed to take a step towards each other and reassess mutual interests. Despite Saudis’ discontent with the developing cooperation between Moscow and Tehran, which the kingdom sees as the primary source of threat. However, deep regional problems with its neighbors, including Iran and Qatar, as well as growing criticism of actions against Saudi Arabia by traditional Western allies, have prompted the Middle Eastern Kingdom to cooperate with Russia. The rapprochement between Russia and Saudi Arabia was officially explained by Awwad Bin Saleh Al-Awwad, Minister of Culture and Information of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. He stated that Riyadh seeks “to diversify its foreign policy and foreign economic relations, as necessary for the implementation of the strategic development program Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 2030.” Indeed, due to the recent visits of Russian President Vladimir Putin to Riyadh and the Saudi Princes and King of Saudi Arabia to Moscow, the participation of an impressive Saudi delegation at the Military-Technical Forum “Army-2021” in Kubinka near Moscow on August 23 have boosted business contacts and military cooperation between the two countries. Russia is also important for the kingdom to develop nuclear energy. The Saudi authorities have previously announced plans to build dozens of nuclear power plants in the country, and Moscow would also like to be involved in these projects.

The views of the two countries coincide on many issues. For example, Russia and Saudi Arabia believe that the State of Palestine should be established within the 1967 borders as a result of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations with the participation of international mediators. In addition, Saudi Arabia and Russia share the same views on what is happening in Egypt: both sides support President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi, viewing the Islamist organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, as terrorists. Another reason for such a rapid rapprochement between the two countries is the sharp fall in oil prices in late 2014 and early 2015. Moscow and Riyadh face similar economic challenges: budget deficits, economic diversification, and reduced dependence on oil exports. However, Russia and Saudi Arabia are interested in maintaining high energy prices, given that they jointly provide 25% of global oil production. In 2016, countries reached agreements to reduce black gold production between OPEC and independent producing countries.

American journalists were jealous of the fact that the Saudi authorities went into direct contact with Russia on military cooperation. Thus, reflecting the opinion of the current US authorities, Breaking Defense writes that the agreement between Russia and the Saudi monarchy clearly demonstrates the willingness of the latter to go beyond the established framework of military partnership with the United States and a long-standing focus on Washington.

In these circumstances, and fearing such a Russian-Saudi rapprochement, the US has called on Riyadh and its other allies to avoid significant defense deals with Russia, commenting on the signing of a military cooperation agreement between Russia and Saudi Arabia. In addition, in a clear demonstration of Riyadh’s aversion to the kingdom’s show of rapprochement with Russia, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin postponed a planned August visit to Saudi Arabia under the blatantly contrived pretext of allegedly “having problems with its schedule.”

On the whole, when Biden came to power, the main objectives of the United States in the Saudi track of Middle Eastern policy were outlined as follows: minimize direct involvement in the affairs of the region, preserving maximum influence, reduce dependence on Riyadh, keeping the kingdom in its orbit and not allowing it to get closer to Russia and China. Biden is strictly following his campaign promise to treat the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia like a “pariah.” The Democratic administration has downgraded contacts with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and also imposed sanctions on people and organizations in his inner circle. Meanwhile, Washington believes that such a policy, among other things, could strengthen opposition to Mohammed bin Salman.

However, these moves by Washington are only further pushing Saudi Arabia to strengthen and expand ties with Russia. As for Biden’s promise to “turn Saudi Arabia into a pariah,” even the British publication The Economist questions this implementation by the American president, as the US remains dependent on Riyadh both on oil issues and in terms of its strategic interests in the region. Therefore, the White House will have to pursue a policy that prevents Washington’s unpleasant “impulses” by Saudi Arabia while allaying “its worst fears.”

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Recently, there has been a clear trend among Middle Eastern countries to review the foreign policy directions that have been pursued in recent decades. The most striking example of this is the adjustment of Riyadh’s foreign policy vectors, especially with regard to countries with which Saudi Arabia has long been at enmity.

After preparing a diplomatic breakthrough with Tehran in April 2021, Riyadh initiated direct contacts with Damascus, preparing to reopen its diplomatic mission and establish relations with Bashar al-Assad.

The Saudi embassy in Damascus was closed in March 2012, a year after the start of the Arab Spring in Syria and the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic. Since the beginning of the Syrian crisis in 2011, Riyadh has openly supported terrorist and takfiri groups against the Syrian authorities and the Syrian people, who have tried in vain to overthrow President Assad. However, after the military successes of Damascus, achieved with the help of Russia, the Kingdom and other monarchies of the Persian Gulf revised their position towards trying to restore relations with the Syrian government. Now Riyadh wants to revive diplomatic relations in order to ease the tensions tearing the Middle East apart.

It should be noted that Abu Dhabi had previously wanted to get relations with Damascus back on track by reopening the UAE embassy in late December 2018. In April 2021, a humanitarian shipment of COVID-19 vaccine was brought to the SAR from the UAE.

These actions by the UAE and Saudi Arabia’s intentions to resume diplomatic relations show that there is a possibility of achieving an actual “Arab breakthrough” with regard to Syria and ending the externally orchestrated boycott of the country. Riyadh and Damascus, through the resumption of bilateral relations, will be able to end the protracted armed conflict that has killed more than 2 million ordinary Syrians.

Explaining Riyadh’s adjustment of policy toward Syria, Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan refrained from using the term “Syrian regime” in an April 5 interview with CNN and instead already used the term “Bashar al-Assad government” to emphasize the need to find a compromise way to resolve disputes between the opposition and the government in Syria. He emphasized, “Saudi Arabia supports a political solution in Syria and hopes that Bashar al-Assad’s government will take appropriate steps to find a political solution. Because it is considered the only way to make progress in Syria.” He then went on to say that Riyadh supports the UN-sponsored program to bring the Syrian opposition into the government of Bashar al-Assad.

Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan of the KSA said at a press conference with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov on April 11 that Syria needs to return to its “Arab embrace” and achieve stability and security. The Saudis have recently begun to show that they agree in principle to facilitate the return of Syria to the League of Arab States at the next session of the LAS in Algeria. Earlier, Algeria, Iraq, the UAE and Egypt spoke positively about Syria’s reconstruction in the LAS. Russia and Iran also support the process of Syria’s return to the LAS, as this would finally record Assad’s political victory and restore his international legitimacy. Just as the opening of an embassy in Damascus by Saudi Arabia would look like an obvious admission by the Saudis in the Middle East that Assad has won. Although the Saudis said back in 2018 that Assad remained in the lead in Syrian politics.

As for Riyadh’s relationship with the Syrian opposition, in recent months it has demonstrated its willingness to discuss with Syria the formation of an acceptable legal opposition that Damascus would be willing to recognize and allow to engage politically. It was reported that Saudi Arabia terminated its official relations with the Syrian opposition and reportedly closed the headquarters of the Supreme Opposition Council in Riyadh, trying to show that the Kingdom has done away with its support for terrorists on the territory of Syria.

Against the background of Riyadh’s demonstration of its intention to clearly and consistently implement the Syrian-Saudi “warming” project, Bashar Assad’s regime responds quite adequately to the kingdom’s good intentions, even demonstrating on the international scene a favorable attitude to the Saudis becoming guarantors of security in the MENA region, while maintaining Moscow’s mediating role. In turn, Riyadh is also interested in using Moscow as an intermediary not only in negotiations with Damascus, but also in many other trouble spots in the Middle East. This was demonstrated, in particular, by the results of the visit of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to Riyadh on April 11 and his talks there with his counterpart Faisal bin Farhan and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. As well as almost regular phone conversations between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prince Mohammed bin Salman, which have already become a regular feature of Saudi initiatives on various regional issues and Saudi-Russian relations. Moreover, it cannot be ruled out that, given the strained relations between the new White House administration and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in recent months, the kingdom is trying to determine its future direction in the international arena and find a “fallback ally” in the person of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

As for steps to legitimize Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, Riyadh clearly wants to show its “good will” to Iran, with which Saudi Arabia is also seeking to restore good neighborly relations. In addition, the strengthening of Assad’s position could be, according to the Saudis, a significant deterrent to Turkish expansion.

Undoubtedly, the U.S. and Israel will try to hinder the restoration of relations between Syria and Saudi Arabia, because this process destroys the U.S. policy of political and economic isolation of Syria and will strengthen Iran’s position in the Arab country.

Nevertheless, Saudi Arabia’s steps toward Syria could certainly serve as an international guarantee that the region can soon return to peace and forget about the time of the protracted Arab Spring and mutual conflicts.

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook“.

Information of secret negotiations between Saudi Arabia and Iran in Baghdad has already appeared in the media. This situation was clarified after a sensational statement announced by the Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman who recently said,  “Saudi Arabia wants Iran to prosper and is ready to cooperate based on mutual benefit.”

Iran-Saudi relations became very difficult, especially after Iran’s Islamic Revolution in 1979. The essence of inter-state and religious differences is clear if you look at the Middle East map. Most of the population in a particular country is Sunni or Shiite. In this regard, there is a noticeable polarization of countries, many of which consider Saudi Arabia or Iran as their spiritual and political reference point.

Relations between Riyadh and Tehran have been particularly strained in the past two decades. Especially, after the US-led coalition overthrowing of Saddam Hussein in 2003, president of Iraq, a Sunni Arab and one of Iran’s main enemies, there was no counterweight to Iran’s influence in Iraq, which has been steadily growing since then. During the wave of Arab Spring protests that swept through the region in 2011, Iran and Saudi Arabia tried to use it to promote their influence, particularly in Syria, Bahrain, and Yemen, which further increased mutual distrust.

In recent years, the strategic confrontation has become markedly intense because Iran has become the winner in the regional struggle by many indicators. For example, in Syria, thanks to the support of Iran (and Russia), President Bashar al-Assad managed to suppress most of the opposition forces supported by Saudi Arabia. Regarding the confrontation in Iraq, the supporters of Tehran are also winning. The six-year war waged by Riyadh against rebels from neighboring Yemen, partly driven by Saudi Arabia’s desire to nullify Iran’s supposed influence is also unsuccessful for the Saudi monarchy requiring too much money. The attempt to escalate the political confrontation in Lebanon in order to destabilize the country, in which the Iranian-backed Shiite group Hezbollah plays a leading role in politics and controls the Armed Forces, has not yet brought Riyadh the expected success.

Although Iran and Saudi Arabia have not engaged in direct combat, their support is involved in armed conflicts in the region. Syria and Yemen are clear examples of this. And the missiles that the Houthis have repeatedly fired at Saudi Arabia have intensified the war of words between the two countries.

The current situation has long forced Saudi Arabia to take steps that would defuse tensions in the region. Despite its economic power, from a military point of view, the country is fragile compared to Iran.

The White House made its recommendations regarding the future relations of Saudi Arabia with Iran back in 2016, responding to the initiatives of the Saudi leadership to break off diplomatic ties with Iran. Then The Atlantic published the Obama Doctrine, where the statements of the American President Obama were made public for the first time, which contained harsh criticism of Saudi Arabia and doubted the feasibility of further strategic partnership between the United States and the Saudis. In particular, President Obama noted that Saudi Arabia should learn to live in the region together with Iran and share spheres of influence with it. Riyadh was given to understand that Washington would not, as before, cover Saudi Arabia in the event of a conflict with Iran and would not take an openly pro-Saudi position. (Well, Riyadh should have expected this from the United States, having abandoned its allies on many occasions when their support became a burden to the White House!).

Given that the current administration at the White House essentially repeats the political line of President Obama’s era, Washington’s position on Tehran was voiced by President Joe Biden to Riyadh. This was the reason for the demonstration of signs of warming in relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which drew the attention of Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.  In particular, Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman’s statement that the kingdom seeks good relations with the “neighboring country,” forgetting how three years ago he compared the Supreme Leader of Iran Ali Khamenei to Hitler. According to the publication, the “conciliatory tone” of the crown prince is clearly explained by an attempt to adapt to the new US foreign policy line aimed at normalizing relations with Iran.

Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman spoke about the necessary adjustment of Saudi Arabia’s policy towards Iran and other countries in the region under the influence of the foreign policy conditions that have changed in recent months in an extensive interview with Arab TV channels, emphasizing his 90% support for Biden’s policy. In addition to a possible reconciliation with Iran, Muhammad bin Salman also indicated the kingdom’s readiness to provide economic support to the Yemeni Houthis, but, of course, on certain terms.

Six years after the outbreak of war with Yemen, the kingdom began to search for a way out of the conflict. However, it is difficult for Riyadh to do this without assistance from Iran. At present, the Houthis are not taking any steps to resolve the conflict outside the battlefield. As the Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif recently stated in an interview not intended for the public, causing widespread dissatisfaction in Iran, Saudi Arabia has rejected Iran’s mediation offers in recent years. Nevertheless, the central topic of the Saudi-Iranian talks in Baghdad was Yemen. This conversation is now taking place in a “more constructive tone,” the kingdom is gradually adapting its policy to the new realities. In particular, the adjustment of Saudi Arabia’s policy announced by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman mainly includes the refusal of Riyadh from its intention to expel the Iranian-backed Yemeni Houthi rebels from Sanaa and other parts of Yemen by military means.

The fact that the United States, under President Joe Biden, is trying to achieve rapprochement in the nuclear dispute with Iran is another reality that Saudi Arabia’s policy must adapt to.

Iran, for its part, is also interested in improving relations with Saudi Arabia for many reasons. First of all, it tries to counteract closer cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Israel, strengthening the anti-Iran bloc in the region.  Israel’s outspoken dissatisfaction with the rapprochement between Riyadh and Tehran was demonstrated by Tel Aviv in early April to Saudi Arabia because the latter did not inform in advance about the nature of the ongoing negotiations in Baghdad. In addition, President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif hope that the normalization of relations with Saudi Arabia will strengthen their positions in the internal struggle for power in Iran.

The current situation forces Riyadh to step towards rapprochement with Iran, which will help defuse tensions in the region. After all, one of the main conditions that guarantee the success of the economic reforms conceived by the Saudi authorities is stability and peace in the area: not to spend enormous resources on defense, but to direct such resources to necessary projects that will significantly reduce the kingdom’s dependence on oil revenues.

Vladimir Platov, expert on the Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook“.

Against the backdrop of the attempts to publicly humiliate Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman undertaken by the Biden administration, Washington in recent weeks has actively sought to use Riyadh in a game against Iran to its own advantage. To ease its sanctions and develop contacts with Tehran, the White House gave appropriate instructions to its strategic partner Saudi Arabia to soften Riyadh’s approach toward building new relations with Iran.

Saudi Arabia and Iran are two powerful neighbors committed to two different Islamic movements (Iran is predominantly Shiite, and Saudi Arabia is considered to be the leader of Sunni Islam). For decades, they have been vying for supremacy in a region where the majority of the Sunni or Shiite population consider either Riyadh or Tehran as their spiritual landmark.

Relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran have become particularly exacerbated over the past 15 years. To a certain extent, this happened after 2003, when a coalition led by the United States overthrew Iraqi Sunni leader Saddam Hussein, and afterwards opposition to Iranian influence was dealt a blow in this important country in the region, so that has been steadily growing there ever since. The Arab Spring protests that swept across the region in 2011 were used by Iran and Saudi Arabia to advance their own influence, particularly in Syria, Bahrain, and Yemen, further fueling mutual animosity.

In 2016, in the wake of the execution n Saudi Arabia of the famous Shiite cleric Ayatollah Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr and forty-six members of its Shiite minority that were accused of involvement in terrorism, the subsequent anti-Saudi statements made by Tehran, and an attack on the Saudi embassy in Iran, Saudi Arabia broke off diplomatic relations with Iran. Bahrain, Sudan, and Djibouti also suspended their diplomatic relations with Iran out of solidarity.

In recent years, the confrontation has become especially aggravated due to the events in Yemen, Syria, as well as mutual accusations of terrorism.

As a result, nowadays among the regional allies that Saudi Arabia has are the Sunni countries: the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Egypt, and Jordan.

Iran’s ally is the government of Syria. In armed confrontations, Iranian-backed Shiite groups, including Hezbollah, also played a significant role in the fight against Israel and the forces that oppose Iran, mainly the Sunni opposition in certain countries. The predominantly Shiite Iraqi government is also Iran’s close ally, although paradoxically it maintains close ties with Washington.

Therefore, it is not surprising that in an effort to start a new game in the Middle East with the participation of Saudi Arabia and Iran, Iraq was the one specifically chosen by the White House.

On April 9, it was in Baghdad that direct negotiations took place between delegations from Saudi Arabia and Iran took place, which resulted from the mediating mission by Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kazimi. Naturally, the main issue under discussion was the conflict in Yemen, which has turned into the largest humanitarian catastrophe of the 21st century – one in which Riyadh and Tehran support opposing sides. Saudi Arabia is looking for ways to end the war, which poses a threat to the security of the kingdom, and is striving to stop the advance of Shiite militants in the province of Marib, reopen the port of Hodeidah – through which a significant part of humanitarian aid arrives in Yemen – and put an end to the attacks using missiles and UAVs made by Houthis on the kingdom’s territory. Although the parties acknowledged that the very fact the meeting took place was a significant, positive shift in bilateral relations, according to Iranian media the delegation of the Islamic Republic still took a tough stance, suggesting that Saudi Arabia should negotiate not with Iran, but with the Houthi movement’s leadership.

Back in July 2019, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif announced his readiness to hold a dialogue with Saudi Arabia, given reciprocal signals in response from Riyadh. However, since that time relations between the two geopolitical adversaries have only worsened, especially after a series of incidents involving tankers in the Persian Gulf. The culmination of bilateral tensions was the September 14, 2019 air attack against oil facilities on Saudi territory, for which Riyadh and Washington blamed Tehran.

Speaking about the latest contacts in Iraq, which was first reported by the British Financial Times, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh reiterated on April 19 that Tehran has always welcomed dialogue with Saudi Arabia, but still did not confirm or refute media reports about the start of direct talks this month between these traditional Middle Eastern geopolitical rivals. At the same time, a senior Iranian official and two other diplomatic sources told Reuters that Saudi and Iranian officials held talks in Iraq to ease tensions as Washington works to revive the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran, and to end the war in Yemen.

However, the plan developed by Washington for the “to reconcile Saudi Arabia and Iran” has already begun to fail. The reason for this was that the US Congress House of Representatives approved a bill that would limit the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia. This legislative initiative was a response to the 2018 assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and will remain in effect until the US president can confirm that the kingdom is not engaged in repressing and torturing dissidents, as well as arbitrarily detaining its citizens.

Owing to this, Saudi Arabia has already begun to withdraw from peacekeeping actions taken in respect to Iran, and has called upon the international community to bolster the measures to control the situation and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. However, the negotiation process between the United States and Iran is progressing rather slowly so far. The sanctions against Iran turned out to be a stumbling block: Tehran is demanding the complete lifting of all restrictive measures imposed by Washington, while the United States says it is not ready to view restrictions as a negotiating tool. For its part, Riyadh also supports resuming work on the “nuclear deal”, but on condition that deal spells out the issues that govern Iran’s missile program. In addition, the Saudi authorities are calling upon other Gulf states to join the negotiation process.

Vladimir Platov, expert on the Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

It appears that another scandal is brewing between Washington and Riyadh in which President Joe Biden wants to demonstrate his superiority over Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud.

The fact is that in late February, the US National Intelligence Agency published a report claiming that the operation, which resulted in the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, was approved personally by the Crown Prince.  “We base this assessment on the crown prince’s control over decision-making in the Kingdom, the direct involvement of a key advisor and members of Mohammed bin Salman’s security team in the operation, and the crown prince’s support for using violent measures to silence dissidents abroad, including Khashoggi,” the statement said.

Incidentally, in declassifying the report, President Biden reversed his predecessor Donald Trump’s refusal to release it in violation of the 2019 law, reflecting a new US willingness to challenge the kingdom and show its superiority.  In this case, however, a number of politicians believe the US president is walking a fine line as he seeks to maintain ties with the kingdom in an effort to revive the 2015 nuclear deal with its regional rival Iran and address other issues, including combating Islamist extremism and developing Arab-Israeli ties. At the same time, Washington orchestrated events to soften the blow, with Joe Biden speaking personally over phone with the crown prince’s 85-year-old father, King Salman, during which the two sides said they reaffirmed their longstanding alliance and promised to continue working closely together.

Biden’s new director of national intelligence, Avril Haynes, has pledged to comply with the 2019 defense law, which required her office to release within 30 days a declassified report on the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Twenty-one Saudis have since been arrested, and five high-ranking officials, including Deputy Chief of Intelligence Ahmad Asiri and Saud al-Qahtani, a senior MBS aide, have been fired.  In January 2019, 11 people were brought to closed trial. Five were given death sentences, which were commuted to 20 years in prison after they were forgiven by the journalist’s family, and three others received prison terms.  Ahmed Asiri was tried but acquitted “due to insufficient evidence,” while Saud al-Qahtani was investigated but not charged.

As part of the rebalancing of Joe Biden’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, as stated in Washington, he will communicate only with the king, which may allow Washington to set an age distance of 35 between the president and the crown prince.  It would restore the protocol broken by Trump and his son-in-law, top aide Jared Kushner, who maintained a direct channel of communication with the crown prince and they resolved many issues bypassing Congress.  As a matter of fact, the report was prepared during the administration of the previous US President Donald Trump, but then it was left on the back burner. Now Joe Biden wants to demonstrate his independence of policy, only where he can change the foreign policy of Donald Trump.

But it’s rather clear that President Biden doesn’t want to fundamentally change Washington’s relationship with Riyadh after a long-awaited US intelligence report concluded that the de facto leader of Saudi Arabia endorsed the horrific political murder of Jamal Khashoggi. It seemed that the publication of the report would aggravate US-Saudi relations, or at least lead Joe Biden to harshly criticize Mohammed bin Salman. But despite promising to punish top Saudi leaders during his election campaign, the US leader refused to impose sanctions on the kingdom’s crown prince. Opponents of the Riyadh government have already harshly criticized the US president for not imposing any sanctions against the Saudi prince, who in recent years has personally ordered the arrest of dozens of human rights activists and his personal opponents. Yahya Asiri, general secretary of al-Jamaa al-Watani party, stated that “the lack of sanctions against MBS and other officials means that we have to expect other crimes at any time”. Many dissidents believe, rightfully so, that an international court should bring to justice all those responsible, regardless of whether they were directly involved in the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi or related to those who orchestrated the murder.

Although Secretary of State Antony Blinken later announced visa restrictions affecting 76 Saudis involved in the harassment of activists and journalists, he did not announce measures affecting the crown prince. Senior administration officials said the president has now decided that the price of “direct punishment” for MBS amid accusations that he was responsible for the murder of a Saudi journalist is too high and now is not the time to settle scores with a possible future Saudi king. In this regard, Omar Abdul Aziz, a prominent Saudi dissident, compared the trial of those responsible for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi in Saudi Arabia to a “joke”. He stressed that the journalist’s problem was not only with the man and his family, but also with the behavior of MBS, and that his exclusion from sanctions meant that justice had not yet been served.

Saudi Arabia, quite naturally, officially rejected what it called “a negative, false and unacceptable assessment in the report pertaining to the kingdom’s leadership,” according to a Foreign Ministry statement.  The Ministry added that the perpetrators of the “heinous crime” had been tried in Saudi courts and that “justice has been served.”  Commentators close to the government took to social media to defend the crown prince.  Ali Shihabi, former head of the Arabia Foundation in Washington, said there is nothing in the report that hasn’t been said before, and “absolutely no smoking gun.”   “It’s surprising that all this ruckus has been raised about this document…. This thin ‘report’ is actually proof that no hard evidence against MBS exists,” Shihabi wrote on Twitter.   “The nation is strengthened,” the conservative and semi-official newspaper Okaz opined on the front page of its issue with a large photo of the smiling Crown Prince.  “The Biden administration will soon realize that the region’s complex problems will find no solution except through a new and exclusive agreement with its partners in the region, which includes holding Tehran accountable,” Okaz wrote.

The general impression when reading the Saudi newspapers is that they are all as one in defense of the crown prince and the sovereignty of the kingdom. “America has no right to intimidate a strategic regional ally, and it is not in its interest to allow internal disagreements to harm its regional interests and those of its partners,” Khaled al-Malik wrote in the local Al-Jazeera newspaper. Expressing the official view, he noted that Saudi Arabia, which relied on the United States for its defense, including during the first Gulf War and after attacks on its oil infrastructure in 2019, could turn to China and Russia for weapons. “But the kingdom prefers America because of its historical and strategic ties and shared goals,” he said, referring to Iran.  Abdullah al-Otaibi, writing in the London-based newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, said the kingdom, Washington’s oldest Arab ally, “is not a banana republic to be shaken by threats”.  We want to strengthen deep-rooted ties (with the United States), but not at the expense of our sovereignty. Our judicial system and our decisions are the red line, Fahim al-Hamid wrote in the newspaper Okaz.  Since the US report was published, many Saudis have flooded Twitter with the hashtag “We are all Mohammed bin Salman.”

If we analyze this veritable information storm, it becomes quite obvious that the whole essence of Joe Biden’s “new policy” with regard to Saudi Arabia is even greater political, economic and military subordination of the kingdom to Washington’s plans. And, evidently, this is why we can see more than once this kind of feigned “disagreement” between the two states.

Viktor Mikhin, corresponding member of RANS, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.