Saudi will intervene in Iraq if US withdraws-aide

[avsp]

Reuters - WASHINGTON, Nov 29 (Reuters) - Using money, weapons or its oil power, Saudi Arabia will intervene to prevent Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias from massacring Iraqi Sunni Muslims once the United States begins pulling out of Iraq, a security adviser to the Saudi government said on Wednesday. He said if the United States begins withdrawing from Iraq, "one of the first consequences will be massive Saudi intervention to stop Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias from butchering Iraqi Sunnis."

Nawaf Obaid, writing in The Washington Post, said the Saudi leadership was preparing to revise its Iraq policy to deal with the aftermath of a possible U.S. pullout, and is considering options including flooding the oil market to crash prices and thus limit Iran's ability to finance Shi'ite militias in Iraq.

"To be sure, Saudi engagement in Iraq carries great risks -- it could spark a regional war. So be it: The consequences of inaction are far worse," Obaid said.

The article said the opinions expressed were Obaid's own and not those of the Saudi government.

"To turn a blind eye to the massacre of Iraqi Sunnis would be to abandon the principles upon which the kingdom was founded. It would undermine Saudi Arabia's credibility in the Sunni world and would be a capitulation to Iran's militarist actions in the region," he said.

U.S. President George W. Bush will meet Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in Jordan on Wednesday to discuss a surge in Sunni-Shi'ite violence in Iraq.

Bush has said he does not support calls for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, but he is expected soon to receive proposals for possible changes in U.S. policy in Iraq from a bipartisan panel.

Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil producer and exporter and a close U.S. ally, fears Shi'ite Iran has been gaining influence since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq toppled Saddam Hussein's government.

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney held talks with Saudi King Abdullah in Riyadh on Saturday. Details were not disclosed.

Obaid said Cheney's visit "underlines the pre-eminence of Saudi Arabia in the region and its importance to U.S. strategy in Iraq."

He said if the United States begins withdrawing from Iraq, "one of the first consequences will be massive Saudi intervention to stop Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias from butchering Iraqi Sunnis."

Obaid listed three options being considered by the Saudi government:

- providing "Sunni military leaders (primarily ex-Baathist members of the former Iraqi officer corps, who make up the backbone of the insurgency) with the same types of assistance", including funding and arms.

- establishing new Sunni brigades to combat the Iranian-backed militias;

- or the Saudi king "may decide to strangle Iranian funding of the militias through oil policy. If Saudi Arabia boosted production and cut the price of oil in half ... it would be devastating to Iran ... The result would be to limit Tehran's ability to continue funnelling hundreds of millions each year to Shi'ite militias in Iraq and elsewhere."

fanx to the good blokes at bfc for this tip

[DosEquis]

INteresting. The only reason i could think that they do not do that now, is the Saudi's do not want to look THAT close to the americans. Otherwise if Saudis did was they are talking about, combined with the support of 150,000 US soldiers, they would be far more affective imo.

[avsp]

Yet more further reasons why the coalition cant leave, ..., & the Saudis know it.

It is in no way perculiar that this is timed with PNAC stalwarts Dick Cheney's visit, for they believe that their strategy depends upon a 'no u-turn' approach.

[avsp]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

INteresting. The only reason i could think that they do not do that now, is the Saudi's do not want to look THAT close to the americans. Otherwise if Saudis did was they are talking about, combined with the support of 150,000 US soldiers, they would be far more affective imo.

I think it makes them look VERY close to the US, ..., are at least some part of it.

[edit to add]Its a bluff designed to scare the 'West' IMO.[/edit]

Originally Posted by article

- or the Saudi king "may decide to strangle Iranian funding of the militias through oil policy. If Saudi Arabia boosted production and cut the price of oil in half ... it would be devastating to Iran ... The result would be to limit Tehran's ability to continue funnelling hundreds of millions each year to Shi'ite militias in Iraq and elsewhere."

Were this to happen then i very much suspect that the UK would b subject to scheduled blackout & non-essential buildings, (like libraries) would close 'for the duration', ..., but then I feel that its designed as a threat more than anything else

The problem is that such 'brinksmanship' can lead us all down the path to WWIII. Lets face it Ahmadinejad cant be publically seen to this as anything other than a direct challenge.

Its hard to see how AQ will view it, ..., do their Sunni roots matter more than their disdain for the West.

Events in Iraq indicate that the Muslim concept of Ummah (brotherhood?, soldidarity?) mean little when push comes to shove.

[DosEquis]

How come the UK would be subject to such an energy pinch that they would require blackouts and such, when the saudis are just talking about slamming the market with tons of extra oil?

[sj23]

@ Iran threatening to disrupt the price of oil if Israel attacked. They're the Saudi's bitch now it seems like.

Isn't Saudi building a wall on border with Iraq too at the moment?

[RMNIXON]

The Civil War seems to have many players and agendas at the moment. I am not sure if Saudi intervention would be a good or bad thing?

[avsp]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

How come the UK would be subject to such an energy pinch that they would require blackouts and such, when the saudis are just talking about slamming the market with tons of extra oil?

coz i fear that the Saudi fields/facilities would be attacked