Facebook Feed

3 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
Purim Guide for the Perplexed 2023: bit.ly/3ZdlxHY ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

3 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
אתגר מרכזי לביטחון לאומי: bit.ly/3xkSwh1 ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

3 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
US-sponsored anti-Israel UN Security Council statement - acumen: bit.ly/3lVqpCM ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

The Israel-Saudi labyrinth

The recent enhancement of strategic coordination between Israel and Saudi Arabia highlights Israel’s role in bolstering the national security of the House of Saud. This coordination has become particularly critical, for Riyadh, due to the erosion of the US’ posture of deterrence, while the clear and present lethal Iran-fueled threats to Saudi Arabia are dramatically exacerbated.  

While the blossoming Jerusalem-Riyadh coordination is consistent with short-term, surgical Saudi national security interests, it is inconsistent with the long-term, inherently puritanical Islamic, Wahhabi worldview of the Saudi regime, which considers the Jewish State an illegal, infidel, usurper, provisional entity in “the abode of Islam,” as documented by Saudi school textbooks and religious sermons. Could the enemy (Saudi Arabia) of Israel’s enemy (Iran) become Israel’s friend?

Israel’s added strategic value – to Saudi Arabia – has been demonstrated since the 1967 Six Day War.  Israel’s devastation of the Pan-Arab, radical, pro-USSR, anti-US and anti-Saudi Egyptian President Nasser aborted the latter’s military offensive in Yemen, which aimed at invading Saudi Arabia and toppling the House of Saud and other pro-US Arab regimes in the Persian Gulf.  

In 1970, Israel mobilized its military to the joint Israeli-Syrian-Jordanian border, forcing a swift rollback of the pro-USSR, anti-US, anti-Saudi Syrian invasion of Jordan, which intended to bring down the pro-US Hashemite regime and proceed to destabilize Saudi Arabia.  

In 1981, Israel’s destruction of Iraq’s nuclear infrastructure – carried out by Israeli planes which flew, unchallenged, through Jordanian and Saudi airspace – snatched Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other pro-US Arab regimes from the lethal jaws of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, also sparing the US a nuclear confrontation (or grave humiliation) in the 1991 First Gulf War. 

In 2007, Saudi Arabia cheered the destruction of Syria’s nuclear infrastructure, which reduced imminent threats to Saudi stability, and provided a tailwind to Riyadh’s efforts to topple the pro-Iran (“apostate,” Shi’a) Assad regime.

In 2014, Saudi Arabia, along with all pro-US Arab countries, blamed the July/August Hamas-Israel war in Gaza on the Palestinian Hamas, a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood terror organization – which has traditionally challenged the legitimacy of the House of Saud – and an ally of Iran, the arch-enemy of Saudi Arabia.  Contrary to conventional wisdom, the Saudis do not consider the Palestinian issue to be a crown jewel. They regard Palestinians as a potential subversive element, especially since the 1990 collaboration of Mahmoud Abbas and Arafat with Saddam Hussein’s occupation of Kuwait, the triggering of a series of civil wars in Lebanon, and the 1970 Palestinian collaboration with Syria’s invasion of Jordan.  The $100mn annual Saudi foreign aid to the PLO has been in suspension since the 1990 betrayal of Kuwait.

In 2015, the Saudi regime considers Israel its most effective ally in the face of a potential self-destructive US agreement with the Ayatollahs, concurring with Israel’s stance on Iran, as stated by the editor-in-chief of the House of Saud-owned daily, Al Arabiya: “President Obama, listen to Netanyahu on Iran.”  Like Israel, the Saudis focus on the Ayatollahs walk since 1979 – and not on the moderate talk in Lausanne – which has been rogue, terrorist, subversive, supremacist, megalomaniacal, apocalyptic, anti-US, non-compliant, deceitful and violently intolerant of “apostates” (e.g., Saudi Arabia) and “infidels.”  Like Israel, the House of Saud is convinced that a constructive agreement must be preconditioned upon a dramatic transformation of the nature of the Ayatollahs, and that the military threat/stick must be on the table as the most effective means to prevent war.

Notwithstanding the expansion of the Iran-oriented Israel-Saudi strategic dialogue and moderate Saudi policy pronouncements, Saudi Arabia’s short-term national security interests have yet to impact Saudi Arabia’s long-term, inherent Wahhabi worldview, which rejects the “infidel” Christian, Jews and Buddhist, as well as other branches of Islam, considering a Jewish sovereignty in the Middle East an aberration to be decisively uprooted.

According to a multi-year Hudson Institute study of Saudi school textbooks – which are also disseminated to Saudi controlled mosques throughout the globe, including the US – the Saudi education system, K-12, indoctrinates children in religious intolerance and violence, which constitutes an extremely fertile ground for recruits to Islamic terrorist organizations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Chechnya, Syria, Iraq, the Persian Gulf, Africa, Europe and the American continent. Most September 11, 2001 terrorists were Saudi.  

Until recently – when overtaken by the Ayatollahs – the Saudi royal family was the leading world banker of Islamic (Sunni) terrorism.  Covert ties with terror organizations are still sustained today via Saudi businessmen and “charitable organizations.”  The Policy Department of the European Parliament concluded: “the risks posed by Salafist/Wahhabi terrorism go far beyond the geographical scope of the Muslim world. The attacks on New York, Washington D.C., London and Madrid remind us of this….”

Saudi children are instructed that “Jews and Christians are enemies of the believers” (Hadith, 9th grade, p. 149), “the struggle against Jews and Christians will endure as long as God wills” (Hadith, 9th grade, p. 148) and that “the apes are the people of the Sabbath and the swine are the infidels of the communion of Jesus” (Monotheism, 8th grade, p. 42).  They are taught that “the whole Muslim nation is engaged in a Jihad [“holy war”] against international Zionism, manifested by the State of Jewish gangs called Israel, established on Palestinian land” (Islamic History, 8th grade, p. 105) and that “Jews will not leave Palestine except by Jihad” (Islamic World, 12th grade, p. 126).  

Could the enemy (Saudi Arabia) of Israel’s enemy (Iran) become Israel’s friend?  Nothing more than a fleeting, tenuous “friend,” unless the House of Saud dramatically transforms its core Islamic ideology and hate-education system, which perpetuate the inherent rejection of the Jewish State, while benefitting from short term national security coordination with the “infidel entity.” 



The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb

The Abraham Accords – the US, Arab interests and Israel

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan believe that the expansion of the Abraham Accords, the enhancement of Israel-Saudi defense and commercial cooperation and the conclusion of an Israel-Saudi Arabia peace accord are preconditioned upon major Israeli concessions to the Palestinian Authority.

Is such a belief consistent with Middle East reality?

Arab interests

*The signing of the Abraham Accords, and the role played by Saudi Arabia as a critical engine of the accords, were driven by the national security, economic and diplomatic interests of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and the Sudan.

*The Arab interest in peace accords with Israel was not triggered by the realization that the Jewish State was genuinely seeking peaceful-coexistence, nor by a departure from the fundamental tenets of Islam. It was motivated by the assessment that critical concerns of the respective Arab countries would be effectively-served by Israel’s advanced military (Qualitative Military Edge), technological and diplomatic capabilities in the face of mutual and lethal enemies, such as Iran’s Ayatollahs and Muslim Brotherhood terrorism.

*Saudi Arabia and the six Arab peace partners of Israel (including Egypt and Jordan) are aware that the Middle East resembles a volcano, which occasionally releases explosive lava – domestically and/or regionally – in an unpredictable manner, as evidenced by the 1,400-year-old stormy intra-Arab/Muslim relations, and recently demonstrated by the Arab Tsunami, which erupted in 2011 and still rages.

They wish to minimize the impact of rogue regimes, and therefore are apprehensive about the nature of the proposed Palestinian state, in view of the rogue Palestinian inter-Arab track record, which has transformed Palestinians into an intra-Arab role model of subversion, terrorism, treachery and ingratitude.

*They are anxious about the erosion of the US posture of deterrence, which is their most critical component of national security, and alarmed about the 43-year-old US diplomatic option toward Iran’s Ayatollahs, which has bolstered the Ayatollahs’ terroristic, drug trafficking and ballistic capabilities. They are also concerned about the US’ embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Sunni terrorist entity with religious, educational, welfare and political branches. And, they are aware of the ineffectiveness of NATO (No Action Talk Only?), the European vacillation, and the vulnerability of all other Arab countries.

Israel’s role

*Saudi Arabia and the Arab partners to peace accords with Israel feel the machetes of the Ayatollahs and the Moslem Brotherhood at their throats. They consider Israel as the most reliable “life insurance agent” in the region.  They view Israel as the most effective US force-multiplier in the Middle East, and appreciate Israel’s proven posture of deterrence; flexing its military muscles against Iran’s Ayatollahs in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran itself and against Palestinian and Hezbollah terrorism. They respect Israel’s unique counter-terrorism intelligence and training capabilities, and its game-changing military and counter-terrorism battle tactics and technologies.

*The Arab view of Israel as a reliable partner on “a rainy day” has been bolstered by Israel’s willingness to defy US pressure, when it comes to Israel’s most critical national security and historic credos (e.g., Iran, Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria).  In addition, Saudi Arabia and Israel’s peace-partners aim to leverage Israel’s good-standing among most Americans – and therefore among most Senators and House Representatives – as a venue to enhance their military, commercial and diplomatic ties with the US.

*Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain are preoccupied with the challenge of economic diversification, realizing that they are overly-reliant on oil and natural gas, which are exposed to price-volatility, depletion and could be replaced by emerging cleaner and more cost-effective energy.

Thus, they consider Israel’s ground-breaking technologies as a most effective vehicle to diversify their economy, create more jobs in non-energy sectors, and establish a base for alternative sources of national income, while bolstering homeland and national security.

*The Abraham Accords – as well as Israel’s peace accords with Egypt and Jordan – and the unprecedented expansion of defense and commercial cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Israel, demonstrate that critical Arab national security interests may supersede fundamental tenets of Islam, such as the 1,400-year-old rejection of any “infidel” sovereignty in “the abode of Islam.”  Moreover, critical national security interests may lead to a dramatic moderation of the (Arab) education system, which is the most authentic reflection of one’s vision and policies.

Thus, contrary to the Palestinian Authority, the United Arab Emirates has uprooted hate-education curriculum, replacing it with pro-Israel/Jewish curriculum.

Abraham Accords’ durability

*The success of the Abraham Accords was a result of avoiding the systematic mistakes committed by the US State Department. The latter has produced a litany of failed peace proposals, centered on the Palestinian issue, while the Abraham accords bypassed the Palestinian issue, avoiding a Palestinian veto, and focusing on Arab interests. Therefore, the durability of the Abraham Accords depends on the interests of the respective Arab countries, and not on the Palestinian issue, which is not a top priority for any Arab country.

*The durability of the Abraham Accords depends on the stability of the individual Arab countries and the Middle East at-large.

*The Abraham Accord have yielded initial and unprecedented signs of moderation, modernity and peaceful coexistence, which requires the US to support the respective pro-US Arab regimes, rather than pressuring them (e.g., Saudi Arabia and the UAE).

*However, one should not ignore the grave threats to the durability of the accords, posed by the volcanic nature of the unstable, highly-fragmented, unpredictable, violently intolerant, non-democratic and tenuous Middle East (as related to intra-Arab relations!).  These inherent threats would be dramatically alleviated by a resolute US support.

*A major threat to the Abraham Accord is the tenuous nature of most Arab regimes in the Middle East, which yields tenuous policies and tenuous accords. For example, in addition to the Arab Tsunami of 2010 (which is still raging on the Arab Street), non-ballot regime-change occurred (with a dramatic change of policy) in Egypt (2013, 2012, 1952), Iran (1979, 1953), Iraq (2003, 1968, 1963-twice, 1958), Libya (2011, 1969), Yemen (a civil war since the ’90s, 1990, 1962), etc.

*Regional stability, the Abraham Accords and US interests would be undermined by the proposed Palestinian state west of the Jordan River (bearing in mind the intra-Arab Palestinian track record). It would topple the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River; transforming Jordan into another platform of regional and global Islamic terrorism, similar to Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen; triggering a domino scenario, which would threaten every pro-US Arab oil-producing country in the Arabian Peninsula; yielding a robust tailwind to Iran’s Ayatollahs, Russia and China and a major headwind to the US.

*While Middle East reality defines policies and accords as variable components of national security, the topography and geography of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and the Golan Heights are fixed components of Israel’s minimal security requirements in the reality of the non-Western Middle East. Israel’s fixed components of national security have secured its survival, and have dramatically enhanced its posture of deterrence. They transformed the Jewish State into a unique force and dollar multiplier for the US.

*The more durable the Abraham Accords and the more robust Israel’s posture of deterrence, the more stable the pro-US Arab regimes and the Middle East at-large; the more deterred are anti-US rogue regimes; the less potent are Middle Eastern epicenters of anti-US terrorism and drug trafficking; the more bolstered is the US global posture and the weaker is the posture of the US’ enemies and adversaries.

*Would the Arab regimes of the Abraham Accords precondition their critical ties with Israel upon Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, which they view as a rogue element? Would they sacrifice their national security and economic interests on the altar of the Palestinian issue? Would they cut off their nose to spite their face?

The fact that these Arab regimes concluded the Abraham Accords without preconditioning it upon Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, and that they limit their support of the Palestinians to talk, rather than walk, provides an answer to these three questions.

Support Appreciated






The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb