You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Arabia
Gulf of Rumsfeld countries ponder security independence from US
2004-12-08
Gulf countries are making noises about new security arrangements that would reduce their traditional alliance with the United States, a move whose feasibility was quickly questioned by observers.
I think it's a stupid idea, do I count as an observer?
Did you keep your visitors' pass and souvenir parking ticket from the UN tour? Good. That makes you a certified international observer.
The ideas were floated during a weekend conference at the press hotel bar organised by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, under the theme "security and dialogue in the Gulf", and held in Bahrain, the base of the US Fifth Fleet.
Where they could sit in the balmy breezes, secure in the knowlege that the US Navy was surely on patrol.
Speaking at the meeting, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal stressed the "urgency of global reforms in countries of the region." He also stressed "the need for a security (system) in the Gulf, based on four pillars: the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), plus Yemen, Iraq, and a country to be named later India."
As if the Master Race™ is going to depend on a bunch of heathen Hindoo for their security.
"The international dimension of security proposed for the Gulf requires the positive participation of Asiatic powers, which have shown themselves recently on the international scene, particularly China and India," the minister said, witnessing to a desire for change by the political heavyweight of the GCC. Besides Saudi Arabia, the GCC comprises Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates.
Sterling security credentials, each and every one.
Prince Faisal, who had criticised US policy in Iraq, said "security in the Gulf needs international guarantees which cannot be ensured by a single party, even by the sole world superpower."
Fine. Go handle your allenist wackjobs by yourself.
His Iranian countpart, Kamal Kharazi, underlined Tehran's position. He favoured "the creation of a security system in the Gulf with all the countries in the region taking part, on the basis of independence ... and without proceeding to any agreement with foreign powers which may threaten, directly or indirectly, the security of all the countries" of the area. "Collective security is not something which can be exported to the region," Kharazi told the conference, which was attended by Stephen Hadley, the new national security advisor to US President George W. Bush, and by the head of US Central Command, General John Abizaid.
"Who needs to depend on a superpower for their security when you have us Iranians next door?"
Opening the conference, Bahrain's Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Mubarak al-Khalifa called for the setting up in the Middle East of "new institutions ... susceptible to lay down the basis of a durable peace which would allow continued development in econnomic and political fields."
That sounds positively ... Y'urp-peon.
More specifically, his Omani counterpart, Yussef bin Alawi Abdullah, called for a regional group to be created taking in the GCC countries, Iraq, Yemen, non-Arab Iran and Pakistan. "The GCC countries could think of a new organisation with the involvement of Iran, Iraq, Yemen and Pakistan, which will be based on cooperation, especially economic cooperation," the minister said.
And all at the table stroked their long flowing beards and nodded piously in agreement.
But a Western diplomat in the Bahraini capital told AFP he believed a modification of the Gulf countries' traditional alliance with Washington would be impossible. The diplomat, who asked not to be named, stressed his belief that "the GCC countries with the exception of Oman still have no confidence in Iran." "In the short term, any regional security arrangement is not possible under the current regime in Tehran, while it needs time for Iraq to achieve internal stability," he said. "I doubt that the major powers can accept such a security approach," he said.
He later added a statement about allowing the fox to guard the henhouse, and then wandered off to the hotel bar to get a stiff drink.
Posted by:Steve White

#11  Look, it's nice to talk and discuss the future of the region. But the FM of Iran was in the same room as our NSA and Abizaid? Huh? Did they get up and walk out when the Irani spoke? Or did they exchange business cards? This can only prop up the Mullahs, which is not in our or Iranian's interest. Do we want the Mullahs in power or out of it, W?
Posted by: chicago mike   2004-12-08 2:12:56 PM  

#10  but there aren't enough rantburgers to make a difference when the press gets its Crusade on

Not currently, no, but this can and will change. All the more reason for rantburgers and bloggers to start sourcing and reporting news stories themselves.

We're really in a footrace here to develop democracy in the middle east before the mullahs get nukes and the other gulf-region thugocrats figure out how to play off the mullahocracy against us. Likewise, at home we're also in a footrace to develop alternative news sources before the MSM can pull another Cronkite a la Tet.

Faster, please.
Posted by: lex   2004-12-08 10:31:49 AM  

#9  
Who's we? Don't bag 'we' with MSM. Did you expect from them something else?


"We" means the entire country. I know rantburgers are sane, but there aren't enough rantburgers to make a difference when the press gets its Crusade on.

Until we have a press that doesn't commit treason as easily as it breathes, we're screwed.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2004-12-08 10:23:46 AM  

#8  RC, ...without spending more time on the few mistakes than on what we've accomplished.

Who's we? Don't bag 'we' with MSM. Did you expect from them something else?

Anyhoo...
Some fresh snippets...
Seems Syria is on the table:

Washington Post reports US troops in Fallujah discovered global positioning signal receiver containing “waypoints originating in western Syria” to direct bomb charges.

Jordan’s Abdullah charged in Washington: Foreign fighters are coming across the Syrian border after training in Syria. Another White House visitor Iraqi president Yawar said Saddam remnants in Syria are trying to bring back “the vicious Saddam dictatorship.”
Posted by: Sobiesky   2004-12-08 8:41:48 AM  

#7  we have the will to use them.

No, we don't.

We don't even have the will to carry out the world's cleanest, most conscientious conventional campaign without spending more time on the few mistakes than on what we've accomplished.

The US will never use nukes. Saddam and bin Laden called our bluff.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2004-12-08 8:11:56 AM  

#6  These countries would be wise to remember that we have nukes and if they do something really stupid, we have the will to use them.
Posted by: 2b   2004-12-08 7:51:40 AM  

#5  After reading Putin's comment about the invalid elections in Iraq, due to the occupation - it's becoming more clear what is going on here. These countries, threatened by the inevitable prospect of democracy in their region are under the delusion that they can join to crush it. No wonder we are sending more troops.

That they will inevitably begin to eat each other up doesn't bother them because each one has their own delusions of grandeur.
Posted by: 2b   2004-12-08 7:45:11 AM  

#4  Gulf countries are making noises about new security arrangements that would reduce their traditional alliance with the United States, a move whose feasibility was quickly questioned by observers.

The term 'observers' is journalese for other journalists.
Posted by: badanov   2004-12-08 7:43:19 AM  

#3  So they want to include Pakistan, with India as the military guarantor of regional security? Yuppers, that'll work.
Posted by: trailing wife   2004-12-08 7:26:39 AM  

#2  Not afraid of Iraq anymore?
Posted by: Anonymous6236   2004-12-08 6:58:32 AM  

#1  I expect China will eventually be the new protector. They both don't mind shooting their own citizens.
Posted by: ed   2004-12-08 4:30:40 AM  

00:00