The end of a beautiful friendship.

                     After weeks of unnerving silence this week, the Biden administration finally contacted the Saudi leadership. As it was suggested before Biden did not contact the Saudi Crown Prince, but directly talked to his aging father, King Salmān ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azīz. The king’s weak health was a constant topic ever since he took power in 2015, and for years now his son and Crown Prince is practically running the country. Also a number of major Saudi projects. Some, like certain social programs and the futuristic plan of Nayūm city project, give a modernizing image, while others, like the drastic steps against any opposition, are distinctly Middle Eastern.

            This long-awaited contract, however, came only a day before the Biden administration disclosed an intelligence report about the infamous Hāšuqğī murder. In this, the Americans openly name the Crown Price as the main responsible for the brutal assassination. This was a somewhat known fact, just like Trump’s involvement in covering up the story. But the step at this stage is a clear message that Washington is reconsidering its positions vis-à-vis Riyadh. Since almost immediately some 70 hint ranking members of the kingdom were put under sanctions.

            The step, though expected, is still surprising. Not because Crown Prince Muḥammad ibn Salmān was a favorite protégée of Trump which now would even fasten his demise. But because the young prince was so far an invaluable asset. Buying weapons, moving along the American policy in the region, and even paving the way for a very crucial matter for Washington, the Saudi normalization with Israel. Even more, because by now Muḥammad ibn Salmān became the practical ruler and overseer of the Saudi state apparatus, which is ironically included in the reports from 2018. It is part of the “evidence” against him on the basis that how else could have ordered such operations in this high ranking level. So a “war” against him means a lack of trust towards the state itself. Muḥammad ibn Salmān all these years did his best to fit well with the Americans until his time comes as the king. Now, however, his worst nightmare is about to happen, being pushed aside by the Americans. But this is not a personal story of an heir apparent now falling out of grace. This is a matter of state stability for the kingdom.

            Has America started to pull the plug on Muḥammad ibn Salmān? What would that result? Is that all about the changing policy in Washington defending basic human rights? Or part of the grand rearranging with Iran and Riyadh is just a disposable asset?

            Is that the end of the beautiful friendship which was fundamentally built on the personal link between Trump and Muḥammad ibn Salmān? Or Biden’s team has other goals in mind way beyond the next king of Riyadh?

 

The infamous murder

            Since this sudden shift in the American policy vis-à-vis Riyadh is apparently built on one criminal case, perhaps it is better to recount what really happened more than two years ago in Istanbul, which led to this new scandal.

 

            On 2 October 2018 Saudi journalist Ğamāl Hāšuqğī entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul for routine paperwork after which he completely disappeared. His Turkish wife, who was waiting outside complained and called the authorities, which was followed by a diplomatic scandal, as for days the Saudi authorities maintained that Hāšuqğī left the compound and they have no information on his later whereabouts. Hāšuqğī, however, was a well-known personality most especially in the U.S. and therefore his disappearance caused a huge uproar. Which was aided by the

Turkish authorities, as at that time – unlike now – the relations between Ankara and Riyadh were extremely stiff. The growing scandal forced the Saudi authorities to allow the search of the consulate and the investigations soon involved the Saudi state attorney to help and oversee the process.

            Because of the diplomatic relations at that time, the Turkish state and media did their best to keep the topic at the center of public interest serving new and very gruesome details almost every day for weeks.

            It was soon concluded that a 15 members Saudi hit squad was sent to Istanbul the previous day, which assassinated Hāšuqğī, dismembered him, and made the body disappear. And it should be noted that all details of the crime are suggestions and deductions, as the body was never found, even partially.

            On 20 October, though investigations were still going on the Saudi Foreign Ministry practically admitted that the journalist died and some sort of investigation has to follow the incident. And from that point on the story snowballed. Soon the Turkish media obtained and published audio footages of Hāšuqğī’s last minutes and soon all blames were put on Saudi Crown Prince Muḥammad ibn Salmān. With whom Hāšuqğī had a particularly bad relation. Such details show that the matter had from the very beginning huge international connotations beyond any murder investigation. After all, how could any Turkish authority – including the secret services – have any information on what was going on within the consulate, unless they tapped the building before? The rapid speed with which very precise details were put together also suggests the theory that the Turkish leadership knew, or at least heavily suspected that something is about to happen, yet they went along with it for political purposes.

            The later international scandal, which by 18 November 2018 included a CIA report – the one revealed only now by Biden – concluding that the Crown Prince directly ordered the murder, forces the Saudis to act. A lengthy and secret set of trials were conducted, which on 23 December 2019 sentenced five suspects – all Saudi secret service operatives – to death, 11 got prison sentences and others were acquitted. Those who were found not guilty were the “biggest fishes”. The Saudi consul in Istanbul, Sa‘ūd al-Qaḥṭānī, a very influential advisor and alleged hitman of the Saudi Crown Prince, and Aḥmad ‘Asīrī, former deputy director of the Saudi state intelligence, an other close ally of Muḥammad ibn Salmān. These key allies were pardoned, but dismissed, the series of purges by the Crown Prince ended – at least outside of the country – and as Riyadh was concerned that was to be the end of it. President Trump sealed the CIA – and all other intelligence – reports and it seemed that in time the matter will fade into obscurity, even if it left a very dark spot of Muḥammad ibn Salmān’s record.

            While it is a gruesome story, it should be pointed out that from the very beginning it was much more of an international power struggle intertwined with the still stiff power struggle within the kingdom. Which internally Muḥammad ibn Salmān won, at least for the moment. But the scandal had many edges. There was a diplomatic war by Ankara trying to hit back Riyadh for severing relations and putting Turkey’s key ally Qatar under blockade. There was a very active inter-American struggle trying to discredit Trump for his immense support for the Saudi Crown Prince. And there was a very active power struggle within the kingdom hoping to discredit the Crown Prince and make him impossible to inherit the throne. Which later did not succeed, but eliminated many of his most trusted personal aids. So from the very beginning, the whole story was not that much about whether Muḥammad ibn Salmān guilting or not. Probably he was, though it can still not be ruled out that it was an internal job to discredit him. But it was a matter of how could such a scandal be exploited properly. And in that many sides had their own individual agendas.

 

A perfect martyr

            By now Ğamāl Hāšuqğī, who is largely forgotten in his home country for good reason, became almost sanctified in the Western mainstream media. In his life, he was an influential tv editor and owner of several Saudi outlets, and a regular columnist at Washington Post, and a guest in several American TVs and intellectual round tables. He was a renowned voice of the kingdom in the West. But his personality had many much darker shades to it than it is remembered now.

            Ğamāl Hāšuqğī was of mixed Turkish and Saudi origin and belonged to a very influential a privileged family, which had more than excellent ties to the American elite. In many ways, he was more Western than Saudi. He started his media career in the ‘80s even making several interviews with Usāma ibn Lādin when he was still a “freedom fighter” in Afghanistan, which he could hardly ever done without the support of the Saudi state authorities’ support. He was a very influential voice in the Saudi court, a sort of intermediary between the top Saudi and the American political circles. He is remembered now as a “humanist” and a “hero of human rights”, but all along with the so-called “Arab Spring” he was an outspoken advocate of the phenomenon, and an in particular about Syria, a very active warmonger. He was totally part of the Saudi elite, even after King Salmān took the throne and his son started to take over the country. It was only around 2017 when Muḥammad ibn Salmān ran a series of purges against his adversaries when the two became enemies.

            For his criticism, being partially targeted, and losing much of his and his family’s influence he fell out of grace, and much of his involvements in the country were left without state sponsorship. That is the time he left the country for good, moved to the West permanently, and became a fierce critic of the Saudi policies. Not in general, but those of Muḥammad ibn Salmān. Thus appearing in the light of a human rights advocate.

            Now, completely forgetting his past and his less than perfect background on Saudi Arab language channels he is being immortalized as a symbol of human rights and the brutality of the current Saudi leadership’s cruelty. Which is not unfounded. Yet this stance is very hypocritical, when the same Western leaderships knew the nature of the Saudi elite for decades, and supported it for our very days, for which the war in Yemen is a perfect example.

 

The aims

            Within this context, it is easy to see that the move by the Biden administration is not a coincidence, nor it is entirely motivated by human rights conviction. After all, some 70 people, almost all of the top Saudi state officials, and close allies of the Crown Prince are put under American sanctions, while Biden and his State Secretary are pushing for even more severe accounting. Knowing how important ally Saudi Arabia is for the U.S. and how harmful this process is to the Saudi state leadership, especially in this sensitive time, the move is curious.

            Could it be that the new administration in Washington is unaware of the harm they are causing to the careful balance in the Saudi power politics? Of course, not. Meaning that this is intentional. Consequently, the aim is to undermine Muḥammad ibn Salmān and set the board for someone else to take over the kingdom soon. As we suggested earlier, such a person may already have been chosen in Sa‘ad al-Ğabrī. But even if not, there are plenty of other ideal candidates. Which lead to the question, why would Washington try to remove Muḥammad ibn Salmān and put someone else in charge? After all, there could not have been a more ideal candidate than this prince. Young, ambitious, a perfect candidate to represent the generation change in the upper echelons of the Saudi state, strong ally of America, who did everything to support the American policies in the region, and even a great supporter of the normalization process with Israel. What better job could have been done?

            The possible answers are many. First of all, regardless of all purges and cruel safety measures Muḥammad ibn Salmān Still has weak control of the state. He is not loved, nor trusted by the Saudi elite. He gained a lot of enemies and made a lot of foolish mistakes since he took over. The war in Yemen, which initially served to prove him an able leader backfired, the blockade against Qatar was disastrous and ended in practical surrender, and all efforts against Iran might end up with Washington returning to the nuclear deal. Meaning he is not a good decision maker and has an unstable grip on the country. Yet replacing him with a more subtle person could provide internal cohesion.

            Overall most of his proclaimed ideals might be appealing in the West, but are not particularly favored within Saudi Arabia. He is too much for the old elite, while too controversial and little for the youth.

            His replacement is partially for the aim to find a more effective “manager”, while others are connected to the fundamentally different regional vision of the Biden administration.

 

A region redrawn

            It should be pointed out that the “attack” against the Saudi leadership is the most severe diplomatic change compared to Trump, but it is far from being the only one. All other arms deals to the Gulf are put on hold, including the most iconic F-35 warplanes to the Emirates. At the same time the most highly advertised Middle Eastern project of Trump, and to some credit, the most successful, the so-called normalization process between Israel and some Arab states is also put on hold. It was clear to see that the White House was the main facilitator for this process pressuring countries to accept it, and that is not even spoken about anymore. These steps are connected to one coherent strategy or view on the region.

            Trump’s vision both by the ideological conviction of his team being devoted Zionists and the idea to rid the U.S. from this secondary frontier was to make Israel able to stand on its own feet in the region with almost no needed help from America. That was served by settling most pending Israeli territorial claims from Jerusalem to the Ğūlān even supporting the incorporation of the West Bank. The normalization process building up a strong Israeli-Emirati(-Saudi?) alliance also served this vision. Because with several Arab states working with Israel, some being allies and having bridgeheads in North Africa and the Gulf, Israel would become an integral part of the region, not a pariah as it was. So it could solve it regional matters without constant American care.

            The new vision is different, a return to the already well-tested method, in which Washington is the main hub for relations in the region. Therefore no “ally” state should be allowed to be that independent to act without the Americans. Cutting the support for the normalization works in this way. Cutting the arms deal to the Gulf and putting pressure on them also slows this forming block. Returning Iran to the fold as a stronger counterweight is the same. And that is where removing Muḥammad ibn Salmān from the picture becomes extremely important. Because regardless of all the deals with the Arab countries, a normalization with Saudi Arabia would have had a whole different dimension. It would serve as a land corridor between the two key allies, the Emirates and Israel, and would give religious and moral backing to such alliances, even on a formal level in the future.

            Very significant that recent changes were announced on the strategic level as well. Right after Biden took office it was announced that Washington is studying the possibility of building new bases in Saudi Arabia. The reason for that is the allegedly growing tension with Iran.

            That is very curious, as both in Yemen, and about the nuclear deal in fact Washington is easing the tension with Iran now. After years of Trump’s “maximum pressure” Biden is offering a compromise, which on a hypothetical level is well received in Sana’a and in Tehran. Also, it worths pointing out how many new bases are envisioned and where. While there are talks of about half a dozen of new bases, there are direct mentions of a new naval base at Yanbu‘ – the key outlet of Saudi oil pipelines to the Red Sea – as two other air force bases at Tabūk and aṭ-Ṭā’if.

            These sites are in fact quite distant from Iran being on the Western, not the Eastern edge of the kingdom. They are key positions monitoring the possible trade links between the Gulf and Israel, and also being sensitively close to the holiest cities of Mecca and Medina. Also, there seems to be little point in this, as there are already a dozen American military bases in the Gulf the biggest airbase being in Qatar and the naval base in Bahrain. This apparent contradiction is noticed by the American press calling them “fallback bases”, secondary positions if Iran chose to attack first. That is not only unlikely, but Iran does not even have the capacity to knock out all these bases existing bases completely with one strike.

            This suggests that Washington has very different agendas. A more firm grip on the country – even more than before – and control over the key economic hubs. Securing American control over a possible economic corridor.

 

The end of a beautiful friendship?

            Overall the relations between Trump and his Saudi protégée were not without tension, but it was operating well. The indications are that the White House and the Pentagon has a very different view on Saudi Arabia’s role in the region. And this rearrangement can be exploited in the negotiations with Iran.

            For such a new policy and new, more capable leader appointed in Riyadh is an ideal move. It is further helped by the fact that it can be portrayed as yet another of Trump’s dark legacy removed. But that does not mean the U.S. would abandon Saudi Arabia as a key asset.

            It just means the Muḥammad ibn Salmān is not needed anymore. Will he give up, or not is a different question, but he lost of charm. And the end of this “beautiful friendship” can be the prelude of another “beautiful friendship”. Just with someone else, and on more restricted grounds.