Will Mideast Allies Drag Us Into War?

By Patrick J. Buchanan

 

Share Pat's Columns:

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn Share on StumbleUpon

Tuesday - January 5, 2016

 The New Year's execution by Saudi Arabia of the Shiite cleric Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr was a deliberate provocation.

 Its first purpose: Signal the new ruthlessness and resolve of the Saudi monarchy where the power behind the throne is the octogenarian King Salman's son, the 30-year-old Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman.

 Second, crystallize, widen and deepen a national-religious divide between Sunni and Shiite, Arab and Persian, Riyadh and Tehran.

 Third, rupture the rapprochement between Iran and the United States and abort the Iranian nuclear deal.

 The provocation succeeded in its near-term goal. An Iranian mob gutted and burned the Saudi embassy, causing diplomats to flee, and Riyadh to sever diplomatic ties.

 From Baghdad to Bahrain, Shiites protested the execution of a cleric who, while a severe critic of Saudi despotism and a champion of Shiite rights, was not convicted of inciting revolution or terror.

 In America, the reaction has been divided.

 The Wall Street Journal rushed, sword in hand, to the side of the Saudi royals: "The U.S. should make clear to Iran and Russia that it will defend the Kingdom from Iranian attempts to destabilize or invade."

 The Washington Post was disgusted. In an editorial, "A Reckless Regime," it called the execution risky, ruthless and unjustified.

 Yet there is a lesson here.

 Like every regime in the Middle East, the Saudis look out for their own national interests first. And their goals here are to first force us to choose between them and Iran, and then to conscript U.S. power on their side in the coming wars of the Middle East.

 Thus the Saudis went AWOL from the battle against ISIS and al-Qaida in Iraq and Syria. Yet they persuaded us to help them crush the Houthi rebels in Yemen, though the Houthis never attacked us and would have exterminated al-Qaida.

 Now that a Saudi coalition has driven the Houthis back toward their northern basecamp, ISIS and al-Qaida have moved into some of the vacated terrain. What kind of victory is that — for us?

 In the economic realm, also, the Saudis are doing us no favors.

 While Riyadh is keeping up oil production and steadily bringing down the world price on which Iranian and Russian prosperity hangs, the Saudis are also crippling the U.S. fracking industry they fear.

 The Turks, too, look out for number one. The Turkish shoot-down of that Russian fighter-bomber, which may have intruded into its airspace for 17 seconds, was both a case in point and a dangerous and provocative act.

 Had Vladimir Putin chosen to respond militarily against Turkey, a NATO ally, his justified retaliation could have produced demands from Ankara for the United States to come to its defense against Russia.

 A military clash with our former Cold War adversary, which half a dozen U.S. presidents skillfully avoided, might well have been at hand.

 These incidents raise some long-dormant but overdue questions.

 What exactly is our vital interest in a permanent military alliance that obligates us to go to war on behalf of an autocratic ally as erratic and rash as Turkey's Tayyip Recep Erdogan?

 Do U.S.-Turkish interests really coincide today?

 While Turkey's half-million-man army could easily seal the Syrian border and keep ISIS fighters from entering or leaving, it has failed to do so. Instead, Turkey is using its army to crush the Kurdish PKK and threaten the Syrian Kurds who are helping us battle ISIS.

 In Syria's cινιℓ ωαr — with the army of Bashar Assad battling ISIS and al-Qaida — it is Russia and Iran and even Hezbollah that seem to be more allies of the moment than the Turks, Saudis or Gulf Arabs.

 "We have no permanent allies ... no permanent enemies ... only permanent interests" is a loose translation of the dictum of the 19th century British Prime Minister Lord Palmerston.

 Turkey's shoot-down of a Russian jet and the Saudi execution of a revered Shiite cleric, who threatened no one in prison, should cause the United States to undertake a cost-benefit analysis of the alliances and war guarantees we have outstanding, many of them dating back half a century.

 Do all, do any, still serve U.S. vital national interests?

 In the Middle East, where the crucial Western interest is oil, and every nation — Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Libya — has to sell it to survive — no nation should be able drag us into a war not of our own choosing.

 In cases where we share a common enemy, we should follow the wise counsel of the Founding Fathers and entrust our security, if need be, to "temporary," but not "permanent" or "entangling alliances."

 Moreover, given the myriad religious, national and tribal divisions between the nations of the Middle East, and within many of them, we should continue in the footsteps of our fathers, who kept us out of such wars when they bedeviled the European continent of the 19th century.

 This hubristic Saudi blunder should be a wake-up call for us all.
 
Do You Appreciate Reading Our Emails and Website?

   Let us know how we are doing - Send us a Thank You Via Paypal!

 

Read More At:  http://buchanan.org/blog/will-mideast-allies-drag-us-into-war-124529

 

Share Pat's Columns:

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn Share on StumbleUpon

 

Visit Pat Buchanan's Official Website at Buchanan.org
   -- Sign up for Pat's email updates, follow on Twitter, FaceBook and Pat's YouTube Channel.... Plus all of his syndicated columns and more!
 

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book: The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority

 

Get Pats Books...  Signed by Pat Buchanan!
http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-shop

 

Or See All of Pat's Books on Amazon...

 

Please Support the Funding of Our Email List and Website:
http://buchanan.org/blog/keep-us-online

 



 
 

Storm Clouds Gathering-World War 3. The New Axis of Evil-You Tube:

WAR WARNING:  Serious Grounds To Believe Turkey Planning a Military
Invasion of Syria:

21st Century Wire


Russian Major General Igor Konashenkov has announced that Russia now has ‘serious grounds’ to believe Turkey is preparing an illegal ground invasion of Syria:

“We have serious grounds to suspect intensive preparations by Turkey for a military invasion on the territory of the sovereign state of Syria,”

“We are recording more and more signs of concealed preparations by the Turkish military,”

“We are surprised that the talkative representatives of the Pentagon, NATO and numerous organizations allegedly protecting human rights in Syria, despite our call to respond to these actions, still remain silent,”

“Such steps carried out by a country, which is a NATO member state, in no way contribute to the strengthening of trust and security in Europe.”

Turkey also recently denied a Russian request to fly a surveillance aircraft over the Turkish-Syrian border, which Konashenkov calls “a dangerous precedent and an attempt to conceal illegal military activity near the border with Syria.”

The Major General added that, “if someone in Ankara thinks that the cancelation of the flight by the Russian observers will enable hiding something then they’re unprofessional.”

If Turkey is planning to invade Syria they will probably look to Israel for help, as the two countries seek to establish oil and gas pipelines through Syrian territory. It is well docuмented that Turkey has already been working with ISIS to smuggle stolen oil out of Syria.

The Turks already shot down a Russian jet in a ruthless act of aggression, so it would not be surprising if they looked to escalate things further. In response, Russia deployed its S-400 missile system, meaning it will not take long for things to spiral out of control should Turkey choose to invade.

Are we closer to World War III than ever before?