PDA

View Full Version : The Salman Doctrine: the Saudi Reply to Obama's Weakness



Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
03-30-2016, 07:45 AM
http://www.nationalinterest.org/feature/the-salman-doctrine-the-saudi-reply-obamas-weakness-15623


The Salman Doctrine: the Saudi Reply to Obama's Weakness

Nawaf Obaid
March 30, 2016

Following a thorough explication of Obama’s foreign policy doctrine in a recent Jeffrey Goldberg article, it is now clearer than ever that America and Saudi Arabia are on a collision course over strategic decisions in the Middle East. This is because the “Obama Doctrine” is diametrically opposed to the emerging “Salman Doctrine,” which the Kingdom is developing in order to restore peace and a modicum of stability to the region. And while the Saudis and their allies would benefit immensely from having the United States at their side, Washington also has much to lose by distancing itself from the Saudi agenda. Since the end of World War II, American influence and standing in the Arab world has, to a large extent, been dependent on the “special relationship" with the Kingdom.
President Obama expressed this doctrine on his first campaign trail when he said that “the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems.” This explains his decisions to refrain from taking out Assad after Syria crossed his “red line” by using chemical weapons on its people, to capitulate to Iran’s regional ambitions to strike the nuclear deal, to allow the development of Shia militias in Iraq, to avoid pressing Israel on the Palestinian issue and to initially go easy on ISIS because it is “not an existential threat to the United States.” Yet, as the Goldberg article makes clear, the Obama Doctrine not only represents the president’s extreme hesitation toward American military intervention, but also evinces his specific abandonment of the Arab world and his now declared support for a more powerful Iran.

The best way to demonstrate the complete opposite worldview of the Obama doctrine is to look at the Salman Doctrine. The Saudi leadership believes that Assad must be removed from Syria; that Iran’s regional and nuclear ambitions must be denied; that the Shia militias of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen are terrorist groups and must be destroyed; that the world needs to recognize a Palestinian state; and every global effort must be made to defeat ISIS and Al Qaeda. At the center of many of these doctrinal differences is the Saudi assertion that Iran is at the root of numerous security problems now plaguing the Middle East. Obama’s assertion that Saudi Arabia should “share” the region with Iran is patently absurd, given Tehran’s vast and unending support for terrorism.
There are three elements one must understand about the Salman Doctrine: it has not spontaneously appeared, it is based on a solid assessment of history and it is bringing about significant real world changes. First, the Salman Doctrine has emerged from strategic necessity, following the increasing withdrawal of American leadership from the region as a result of the Obama Doctrine. Second, just as President Obama’s views are steeped in American history, King Salman’s views are steeped in Arab history, and he has no intention of allowing Iran, which seeks to give its minority Shia sect the upper hand in worldwide Islam, to disrupt 1,400 years of majority Sunni domination. Finally, the Salman Doctrine is backed up by extensive, transformational developments in Saudi Arabia’s military, public policy and Arab alliance system. Indeed, when one looks closely at what the Saudis and their allies are doing in order to push back against the region’s chaos, mostly supported by Iran, one can see that the Obama Doctrine is cutting America out of a major growing multinational coalition of like-minded states taking shape in the Islamic world.
The Saudi military expansion that took place over the past five years is unprecedented. The Kingdom has already committed over $150 billion to an enhanced defense posture; this will increase by about $100 billion over the next five years. The Saudi military and its allied forces are seeing more frequent action in the region, as evidenced by its deployment into Bahrain in 2011 and the current war in Yemen to fight Iranian proxies. Further, the air forces of Saudi Arabia and certain of its Arab allies are part of the anti-ISIS coalition in Syria, and these efforts could be extended to Iraq in the near future.

Tell me how it is that the damn big eared bastard(traitor) in charge always gets it wrong when it comes to this nation's best interests and national security matters.
Obvious that obama wants a Nuked up Iran to threaten us later as well as threaten Europe.
Folks, that is pure and outright treason!!
He gets by with it only because he is a damn globalist puppet.
Wake up.. -Tyr

DLT
03-30-2016, 09:18 AM
Tell me how it is that the damn big eared bastard(traitor) in charge always gets it wrong when it comes to this nation's best interests and national security matters.
Obvious that obama wants a Nuked up Iran to threaten us later as well as threaten Europe.
Folks, that is pure and outright treason!!
He gets by with it only because he is a damn globalist puppet.
Wake up.. -Tyr


The Saudi leadership believes that Assad must be removed from Syria; that Iran’s regional and nuclear ambitions must be denied; that the Shia militias of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen are terrorist groups and must be destroyed; that the world needs to recognize a Palestinian state; and every global effort must be made to defeat ISIS and Al Qaeda.


It's a very complex issue, isn't it. On one hand, I agree with the Saudis against empowering Iran with nukes and that the Shia militias now over-running the ME (ISIS) are terrorist groups that must be destroyed. But I don't agree that the world needs to recognize Palestine as a state or that Assad needs to be removed.

Obama is for whatever is in the worst interest for the USA, however. That remains a clear and obvious constant in this universe.

Gunny
03-30-2016, 09:48 AM
It's a very complex issue, isn't it. On one hand, I agree with the Saudis against empowering Iran with nukes and that the Shia militias now over-running the ME (ISIS) are terrorist groups that must be destroyed. But I don't agree that the world needs to recognize Palestine as a state or that Assad needs to be removed.

Obama is for whatever is in the worst interest for the USA, however. That remains a clear and obvious constant in this universe.

ISIS is Sunni, not shia. The whole Middle East thing is a circle jerk. We're allies with SA who gave us AQ and ISIS, and now O-Dumbo has us kissing Iran's asses who gave us Hamas and Hezbollah.

I say we blow ISIS back to Hell then let the Sunni and Shia kill each other off. We don't actually need their oil. If the dumba$$ politicians here would let us use our own resources.

DLT
03-30-2016, 09:52 AM
ISIS is Sunni, not shia. The whole Middle East thing is a circle jerk. We're allies with SA who gave us AQ and ISIS, and now O-Dumbo has us kissing Iran's asses who gave us Hamas and Hezbollah.

I say we blow ISIS back to Hell then let the Sunni and Shia kill each other off. We don't actually need their oil. If the dumba$$ politicians here would let us use our own resources.

I stand corrected.

Have you ever had a mental block with something? I had one with algebra. Had one with sewing. And I have one with the Shia vs. Sunni thing. I can't seem to keep it straight in my head which is which! Gaaa!

I am all for blowing ISIS off the face of the planet. I concur.

Gunny
03-30-2016, 10:03 AM
I stand corrected.

Have you ever had a mental block with something? I had one with algebra. Had one with sewing. And I have one with the Shia vs. Sunni thing. I can't seem to keep it straight in my head which is which! Gaaa!

I am all for blowing ISIS off the face of the planet. I concur.

Uh ... me and algebra? No bueno. That's like trying to mix oil and water.:laugh:

I understand the ME thing because I did a lot of reading on the topic. Especially before I got there. The sunni believe the monarch is the law and the holy roller is an advisor. The shia believe the holy roller is the final word. That is their fundamental difference. How and why Iran got involved in the Israel/Palestine issue is beyond me. I think it started when they became best buds with Syria in the 80s.

The Saudi's on the other hand are playing both ends against the middle and our politicians are complicit. On one hand they're our so-called allies. On the other hand, they have supported AQ. ISIS is just a more radical offshoot of AQ. So in effect, we're allies with the people funding our enemies. It will only get worse if Billary is elected because the Clintons and Saudi's go way back.

DLT
03-30-2016, 10:09 AM
Uh ... me and algebra? No bueno. That's like trying to mix oil and water.:laugh:

I understand the ME thing because I did a lot of reading on the topic. Especially before I got there. The sunni believe the monarch is the law and the holy roller is an advisor. The shia believe the holy roller is the final word. That is their fundamental difference. How and why Iran got involved in the Israel/Palestine issue is beyond me. I think it started when they became best buds with Syria in the 80s.

The Saudi's on the other hand are playing both ends against the middle and our politicians are complicit. On one hand they're our so-called allies. On the other hand, they have supported AQ. ISIS is just a more radical offshoot of AQ. So in effect, we're allies with the people funding our enemies. It will only get worse if Billary is elected because the Clintons and Saudi's go way back.

Yep. But....don't you mean....'when' Billary is elected? :laugh:

Imagine what a laughingstock America will become then. And we thought it couldn't get any worse (with a closet muzzie in the WH).

Gunny
03-30-2016, 10:16 AM
Yep. But....don't you mean....'when' Billary is elected? :laugh:

Imagine what a laughingstock America will become then. And we thought it couldn't get any worse (with a closet muzzie in the WH).

I REALLY hope she's not. She's a bigger liar than O-blah-blah. She's been going since Whitewater. I'm going to hold my nose and vote against her just to be voting against her. I'm no more of a Trump fan than you are, but geez ... the Dems have to go.

DLT
03-30-2016, 10:22 AM
I REALLY hope she's not. She's a bigger liar than O-blah-blah. She's been going since Whitewater. I'm going to hold my nose and vote against her just to be voting against her. I'm no more of a Trump fan than you are, but geez ... the Dems have to go.

Yes, it's all 'evil by degrees' now, eh? Last time I voted FOR a candidate vs. against the bigger evil was back in 1984 with Reagan. I remember how excited me and my husband were to go vote that year. Haven't felt like that since (neither of us), sadly.

Gunny
03-30-2016, 10:23 AM
Yes, it's all 'evil by degrees' now, eh? Last time I voted FOR a candidate vs. against the bigger evil was back in 1984 with Reagan. I remember how excited me and my husband were to go vote that year. Haven't felt like that since (neither of us), sadly.

I hear ya. Reagan was the last President I voted "for".