Meet Saudi Arabia's Bandar bin Sultan: The Puppetmaster Behind The Syrian War

Zero Hedge ^ | 27 August 2013 | Tyler Durden

[SeekAndFind]

Yesterday the Telegraph's Evans-Pritchard [8] dug up a note that we had posted almost a month [9]ago, relating to the "secret" meeting between Saudi Arabia and Russia, in which Saudi's influential intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan met with Putin and regaled him with gifts, including a multi-billion arms deal and a promise that Saudi is "ready to help Moscow play a bigger role in the Middle East at a time when the United States is disengaging from the region", if only Putin would agree to give up his alliance with Syria's al-Assad and let Syria take over, ostensibly including control of the country's all important natgas transit infrastructure [10]. What was not emphasized by the Telegraph is that Putin laughed at the proposal and brushed aside the Saudi desperation by simply saying "nyet." However, what neither the Telegraph, nor we three weeks ago, picked up on, is what happened after Putin put Syria in its place. We now know, and it's a doozy.

[11]

Courtesy of As-Safir [12](translated here [13]), we learn all the gritty details about what really happened at the meeting, instead of just the Syrian motives and the Russian conclusion, and most importantly what happened just as the meeting ended, unsuccessfully (at least to the Saudi). And by that we mean Saudi Arabia's threats toward Russia and Syria.

First, some less well-known observations on who it was that was supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt even as US support was fading fast:

Bandar said that the matter is not limited to the kingdom and that some countries have overstepped the roles drawn for them, such as Qatar and Turkey. He added, “We said so directly to the Qataris and to the Turks. We rejected their unlimited support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. The Turks’ role today has become similar to Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war. We do not favor extremist religious regimes, and we wish to establish moderate regimes in the region. It is worthwhile to pay attention to and to follow up on Egypt’s experience. We will continue to support the [Egyptian] army, and we will support Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi because he is keen on having good relations with us and with you. And we suggest to you to be in contact with him, to support him and to give all the conditions for the success of this experiment. We are ready to hold arms deals with you in exchange for supporting these regimes, especially Egypt.”

So while Saudi was openly supporting the Egyptian coup, which is well-known, it was Turkey and most importantly Qatar, the nation that is funding and arming the Syrian rebels, that were the supporters of the now failed regime. One wonders just how much Egypt will straing Saudi-Qatari relations, in light of their joined interests in Syria.

Second, some better-known observations by Putin on Russia's relationship with Iran:

Regarding Iran, Putin said to Bandar that Iran is a neighbor, that Russia and Iran are bound by relations that go back centuries, and that there are common and tangled interests between them. Putin said, “We support the Iranian quest to obtain nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. And we helped them develop their facilities in this direction. Of course, we will resume negotiations with them as part of the 5P+1 group. I will meet with President Hassan Rouhani on the sidelines of the Central Asia summit and we will discuss a lot of bilateral, regional and international issues. We will inform him that Russia is completely opposed to the UN Security Council imposing new sanctions on Iran. We believe that the sanctions imposed against Iran and Iranians are unfair and that we will not repeat the experience again.”

Then, Putin's position vis-a-vis Turkey, whom he implicitly warns that it is "not immune to Syria's bloodbath."

Regarding the Turkish issue, Putin spoke of his friendship with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan; “Turkey is also a neighboring country with which we have common interests. We are keen to develop our relations in various fields. During the Russian-Turkish meeting, we scrutinized the issues on which we agree and disagree. We found out that we have more converging than diverging views. I have already informed the Turks, and I will reiterate my stance before my friend Erdogan, that what is happening in Syria necessitates a different approach on their part. Turkey will not be immune to Syria’s bloodbath. The Turks ought to be more eager to find a political settlement to the Syrian crisis. We are certain that the political settlement in Syria is inevitable, and therefore they ought to reduce the extent of damage. Our disagreement with them on the Syrian issue does not undermine other understandings between us at the level of economic and investment cooperation. We have recently informed them that we are ready to cooperate with them to build two nuclear reactors. This issue will be on the agenda of the Turkish prime minister during his visit to Moscow in September.”

Of course, there is Syria:

Regarding the Syrian issue, the Russian president responded to Bandar, saying, “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters. During the Geneva I Conference, we agreed with the Americans on a package of understandings, and they agreed that the Syrian regime will be part of any settlement. Later on, they decided to renege on Geneva I. In all meetings of Russian and American experts, we reiterated our position. In his upcoming meeting with his American counterpart John Kerry, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will stress the importance of making every possible effort to rapidly reach a political settlement to the Syrian crisis so as to prevent further bloodshed.”

Alas, that has failed.

So what are some of the stunning disclosures by the Saudis? First this:

Bandar told Putin, “There are many common values ??and goals that bring us together, most notably the fight against terrorism and extremism all over the world. Russia, the US, the EU and the Saudis agree on promoting and consolidating international peace and security. The terrorist threat is growing in light of the phenomena spawned by the Arab Spring. We have lost some regimes. And what we got in return were terrorist experiences, as evidenced by the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the extremist groups in Libya. ... As an example, I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics in the city of Sochi on the Black Sea next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us, and they will not move in the Syrian territory’s direction without coordinating with us. These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role or influence in Syria’s political future.”

It is good of the Saudis to admit they control a terrorist organization that "threatens the security" of the Sochi 2014 Olympic games, [14]and that house of Saud uses "in the face of the Syrian regime." Perhaps the next time there is a bombing in Boston by some Chechen-related terrorists, someone can inquire Saudi Arabia what, if anything, they knew about that.

But the piece de resistance is what happened at the end of the dialogue between the two leaders. It was, in not so many words, a threat by Saudi Arabia aimed squarely at Russia:

As soon as Putin finished his speech, Prince Bandar warned that in light of the course of the talks, things were likely to intensify, especially in the Syrian arena, although he appreciated the Russians’ understanding of Saudi Arabia’s position on Egypt and their readiness to support the Egyptian army despite their fears for Egypt's future.

 

The head of the Saudi intelligence services said that the dispute over the approach to the Syrian issue leads to the conclusion that “there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate. We believe that the Geneva II Conference will be very difficult in light of this raging situation.”

 

At the end of the meeting, the Russian and Saudi sides agreed to continue talks, provided that the current meeting remained under wraps. This was before one of the two sides leaked it via the Russian press.

Since we know all about this, it means no more talks, an implicit warning that the Chechens operating in proximity to Sochi may just become a loose cannon (with Saudi's blessing of course), and that about a month ago "there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate." Four weeks later, we are on the edge of all out war, which may involve not only the US and Europe, but most certainly Saudi Arabia and Russia which automatically means China as well. Or, as some may call it, the world.

And all of it as preordained by a Saudi prince, and all in the name of perpetuating the hegemony of the petrodollar.

P.S. Russia and Saudi Arabia account for 25% of global oil production.

[Rockingham]

In addition, the Syrian civil war is a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia and is yet also another chapter in the long and bitter struggle between Shia and Sunni Islam. Obama, dope that he is, want us to throw a punch against Assad, and not because of national interest, but for the abstract principle that the use of chemical weapons is forbidden, even when they are only used internally against a regime’s own populace.

[ConservativeMan55]

Bttt

[PieterCasparzen]

Putin knows that Saudi Arabia is simply a puppet of the US branch of the financial oligarchy, that is, big American capital is the real boss, while the mechanical governmental relationships are handled by the US-SA diplomats, militaries and intelligence services, which are fairly well joined at the hip.

SA is, in this case, a tiny runt backed up by the strong kid of the neighborhood.

So right off the top, for Putin, the whole conversation is at best taken with a grain of salt.

The Anglo-American financial oligarchy, i.e., new world order, is ultimately the financier and chief espionage practitioner / advisor to both the Communist/Eastern bloc and the West. That’s the key part of the “conspiracy” that’s always thought to be way off base, but that’s because most folks don’t know about a lot of relationships and they’ve been conditioned to see things only at the level of US-Russia competitiveness during most of the 20th century. One nice place to start to gain some insight is a review of the story of the “Cambridge Five” from an intelligence point of view, and Wall Street’s “Red Cross” mission to the Soviet Revolution, or the capitalists Armand Hammer and David Rockefeller from a business or finance perspective.

If a world war were in the works, it would be by NWO design and they would prepare for it and decide who they wanted to win prior to starting it, in order to minimize their losses and maximize their returns on their “war”. Right now, the safest place to “keep things” is in America since it has the biggest military, and I really don’t see NWO “walking away from” America or the UK financially.

The West, namely the US, is still far and away the biggest economic engine, the place that generates the most investment returns in absolute dollars for new world order.

NWO earns high percentage returns in China, being a “wild west”, new project like the US was 200 years ago. But China does not generate absolute returns on the same scale as the mature US economy can. Note that is a cultural problem, in that the Chinese oligarchs really can’t control their population if they allow them to gain much wealth. This means that the Chinese economy simply won’t have the per capita wealth like that of the US.

Note how the UK is still a NWO financial base of operations, i.e., the “mother ship” nation, that preserves key legal/financial paradigms, like freewheeling rehypothecation, so it can function as a headquarters for NWO. Of course, Switzerland remains their “bank” HQ, with BIS located there.

Trouble is for NWO, the US economy has them in a real pickle, due to all their machinations of the past few decades. One of the key issues is a US Treasury debt bubble that continually requires more money to be blown into it to keep feeding the corporate feral pigs and unemployed slaves gorging at the Congressional trough.

NWO, in managing their “football-rivalry”-like Russia-US competition, has had Syria and Iran playing for the East, but now NWO wants a them and a whole bunch of arab countries to switch over to the West and fully adopt their Western economic regime. This will allow for US corporations to find new sales to boost revenue, and simultaneously have new central banks and financial firms to buy US government debt. What is essentially the world “economic machine” will either continue to grow in size, remain stable, or shrink, and in order to produce investment returns it needs to grow. Arab “oil nations” are a good target for this, when you think about it, if they have a socialist governmental structure, because the amount of cash that winds up in the hands of most of their population can be controlled and limited, even though the total national revenue per capita is very high from their oil business. This allows the maximum amount of the petrodollars the oil nation earns to come back to the US to be earned as sales by major US corporations (NWO) or received by them as investments made by arab sovereign wealth funds. Along with the arab citizenry getting a small “cut”, some money is carved out for military purposes, just a cost of doing business.

If one looks at Britain’s East India Company, one can learn about new world order by seeing some parallels between EIC’s operations and today’s “independent colony” operations.

[GOPJ]

Not one of those arab ME countries is worth the life of one American or one Russian soldier.

If the House of Saud wants war they should buy some army uniforms for their home grown boys and tell them that stuff about all the women they'll get when they die. It's NOT OUR JOB... no matter how much money they give our corrupt public servants.

[Rockingham]

America’s interests sometimes require that we spend blood and treasure in places and for causes that are of marginal or uncertain value. The argument for the US to participate in the Syrian civil war is that defeat of the Assad regime would be a major blow to Iran, which they are allied with. More cogently, if we want to strike at Iran, we should do so directly instead of getting diverted into a war in Syria.

[dfwgator]

The argument for the US to participate in the Syrian civil war is that defeat of the Assad regime

To be replaced with what?

[Rockingham]

If we had weighed in early, we might have contrived a pro-Western government as the successor to Assad — and with the French as allies, no less. That moment soon passed, and the two plausible aims now would be to prevent the worst elements among the insurgents from getting substantial power and establishing a federal system with a weak central government and the protection of religious and ethnic minorities. In no such scenarios though should US troops be committed.

[GOPJ]

More cogently, if we want to strike at Iran, we should do so directly instead of getting diverted into a war in Syria.

I agree - if that's what needed. Taking out Iran's nuclear capabilities might be all that's needed... and on that important mission we sit on our hands.

None of the countries in the ME are worth defending except Israel... Saudis can man-up and buy uniforms for their own kids - not pay off our politicians to slaughter American fathers, sons, and brothers... and now sisters, mothers, and daughters. Really, I don't want ONE American to lose a drop of blood for the Saudis. They are NOT our friends.

[GOPJ]

Tell me what ‘interest’ we have with the Saudis? Are you saying they won’t ‘sell’ oil to us? Fine. It’s not like they’re giving us oil - they SELL to us. If we stopped paying , they would stop selling to us. It’s a business relationship. It’s not worth dying for. You’re a smart person Rockinham - so if you can give me ONE reason why we should die for the House of Saud, tell me.

[Rockingham]

Our relationship with the Saudis is founded on our and the world’s need for oil. Even with the surge in US energy production, US security guarantees to the Saudis and other allied petro states are essential to assuring the flow of oil to the rest of the world so that their economies keep ticking over and they produce and buy goods and services from the US and our core allies. In addition, after 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq, the Saudis have become important allies against Muslim terrorism.

[Rockingham]

Agreed. I would put the Saudis on the frenemy list and have little hesitation to hammer them if they get out of line. Then again, the Saudis deserve considerable credit for now because they recently provided essential economic and political support to the Egyptian military in their crushing of the Muslim Brotherhood.

[GOPJ]

In addition, after 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq, the Saudis have become important allies against Muslim terrorism.

That's true - but it's also true the majority of killers on 9/11 were Saudis...

[dfwgator]

The only reason is that the Muslim Brotherhood is in the way of the Saudis spreading Wahhabism throughout the globe.

[Rockingham]

Supposedly, after 9/11, the Saudi government was coerced and threatened in stark terms in order to gain their cooperation. The Iraq War further shocked Saudi society in the way that the US vanquished both Saddam and the insurgency, while taking a substantial toll of young Saudi men who went into Iraq to fight against the US. While Saudi cooperation remains useful for the US, there is a part of me that regrets that we did not crush them out after 9/11. I have a settled suspicion that 9/11 was known in advance of and supported by key elements in the Saudi and Pakistani intelligence services and governments.

[Rockingham]

For the Saudis and the Gulf petro states, the Muslim Brotherhood in power has become a menace to regional stability and even to the long term survival of their regimes. This is consistent with the history of Islam and its recurrent religious revivals and messianic leaders who discomfit and threaten the established order.

[Praxeologue]

While Saudi cooperation remains useful for the US, there is a part of me that regrets that we did not crush them out after 9/11.

The alternative to the Saudi monarchy was and is Wahhabist fundamentalism: far worse than the status quo. Did you envision a permanent U.S. military occupation?

[Rockingham]

The Saudi state is an artificial concoction that, after 9/11, could have been dismembered along its natural fault lines. The main oil producing region along the Persian Gulf could have been detached and then, under American protection, aligned with the Gulf Arab states.

The residual Saudi state would have been placed under new leadership. It would then have been a diminished threat due to much diminished financial and oil resources and the need to accommodate to a young populace dissatisfied with the severity of Wahhabi rule and the profound corruption of the ruling family and its multitudinous hangers on.

Although less plausible and desirable now, in the months after 9/11, such a plan would have been relatively easy to carry out on a showing of Saudi state level complicity in the terror attack on the US. An American ultimatum backed by military assets at the ready might well have sufficed, and, if military force were needed, it would have required far less effort and sacrifice than the Iraq war demanded.

Going forward, the potential for America to forcibly dismember the widely disliked Saudi state could be useful in extremis -- assuming that we have an administration that is credible. Since we are discussing a hypothetical scenario that I do not advocate, we may pass over counter-arguments based on our strategy against Iran and other considerations.

[GOPJ]

I don’t want to crush the Sauds - don’t care about ‘em enough to bother... I just want them to stay out of my county - and I want our people to stay out of theirs... These two cultures - ours and theirs - have NOTHING to offer each other. If they want to sell us oil, fine. If they want to buy something we make, fine. But I don’t want them or their ideas over here... or ours over there.

[Praxeologue]

The Saudi oil reserves are in Shiite-majority areas. The Wahabbists live inland. http://www.flickr.com/photos/mideaststrategy/3402046179/sizes/o/in/photostream/