The Saudi Cables: Revelations from Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Lebanon, Sudan & Egypt

wlogo-smWikiLeaks announced it would publish half a million cables and other documents from Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry last week. It released nearly 70,000 files, which the organization’s publisher Julian Assange said would “lift the lid on an increasingly erratic and secretive dictatorship.”

The files, in Arabic, have mostly received a minimal amount attention in the United States press. However, multiple independent journalists around the world have been translating the documents to uncover revelations.

Ali Hadi Al-Musawi, who blogs at 1001 Iraqi Thoughts, sifted through the files for important documents on Saudi Arabia’s influence in Iraq.

“A quick scan of the available documents that relate to Iraq reveal three consistent approaches adopted by the Kingdom in an effort to extend its influence in the country,” Al-Musawi wrote. “Financial and political support for Sunni Arab tribes, politicians, and Kurdish actors that are willing to undermine the central government in Baghdad; close communication with Baath Party officers, financial support, and political asylum for families of high-ranking former officials; and regional diplomatic efforts aimed at undermining the sovereign legitimacy of the Iraqi state.”

Significantly, Al-Musawi called attention to a “three-stage plan” proposed by Saudi Arabia to “co-opt” Sunni Arab tribes and Iraqi politicians.

“The stated goal is to undermine the government of Prime Minister al-Maliki and nurture assets that are sympathetic to Saudi Arabia’s policies in Iraq,” Al-Musawi reported. “The cable recommends close coordination between the Kingdom’s foreign ministry and intelligence agency, and suggests inviting co-opted Iraqis on a regular basis to the Kingdom in order to ‘strengthen relations and exchange views and information.'”

A group of anonymous individuals in Yemen are examining the documents for revelations about Saudi Arabia and their country. The group uncovered a cable that shows the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs order the “transfer of $100,000″ to the Saudi mission to the United Nations for a “campaign” to win a seat on the Human Rights Council.

One memo marked “highly confidential and urgent” from Minister of Foreign Affairs Saud al-Faisal and addressed to the Crown Prince suggests the war being waged in Yemen may have something to do with an oil pipeline to the Yemen coast. It referred to a special Saudi commission’s effort to find a naval port for the Kingdom in the Arabian sea through Oman or Yemen. The commission was “made up of senior level members from the Ministries of Interior, defense, foreign affairs, finance, oil and mineral resources, transportation, economy and planning, as well as the presidency of the General Intelligence.” (more…)

Yemeni Whose Family Was Killed by Signature Drone Strike Sues US Government

Faisal bin Ali JaberA Yemeni civil engineer has filed a lawsuit in a United States federal court requesting that a judge declare that a drone strike was unlawful and resulted in the wrongful deaths of two members of his family.

On August 29, 2012, Faisal bin Ali Jaber’s brother-in-law, Salem, and his nephew, Waleed, were killed. The drone strike was reportedly a “signature strike,” which means based on patterns of life an attack team decided to carry out the strike that killed his family.

Salem, according to the complaint filed by Reprieve, was “an imam known locally for his sermons against terrorist violence.” Days before Salem’s death, “he had preached in Khashamir against al Qaeda and its methods.”

“Faisal’s nephew Waleed was the village’s local traffic policeman, who accompanied Salem as protection to an evening meeting with three youths who had driven into the village earlier in the day and had asked to meet with Salem. These three young men were the apparent targets of the drone strike,” the complaint claims.

“While the drone operators fixed on the visitors as their principal targets, Salem and Waleed were anonymously—but deliberately—attacked simply for having spoken to them.”

The complaint argues that Khashamir was not nearby “any battlefield” and, therefore, there was no “urgent military purpose or other emergency” to justify exterminating Salem and Waleed.

“The strike plainly violated the Torture Victim Prevention Act’s ban on extrajudicial killings,” the complaint further suggests. “Even if the strikes were taken as part of the United States’ war on al Qaeda, the strike violated the principles of distinction and proportionality. These are established norms of the laws of war, which are elements of customary international law that the United States explicitly acknowledges bind this country and apply to its drone warfare operations.”

An unnamed Yemeni official contacted family to offer condolences, which could be viewed as a tacit admission that wrongful deaths occurred.

Faisal bin ali Jaber pursued avenues of justice in Yemen but was met with “official silence.” He traveled to the US in late 2013 to meet with members of Congress and representatives of President Barack Obama’s National Security Council.

“Do they approve of such a policy? Do they approve of the killing of innocent civilians in a very far country?” Jaber wanted to find out. Or, are they people who believe Yemen means them no harm? “What is their reaction? Are they a peaceful society which really doesn’t mean any harm to other people?”

While officials were willing to offer “personal condolences” for his loss of family, “they could not or would not explain the reason for the attack or acknowledge officially that a US drone killed” his relatives.

Obama acknowledged weeks ago that a US drone had killed two hostages, an Italian and an American, who were being held hostage by al Qaeda. He stated that victims’ “families deserve to know the truth” and maintained that his apology demonstrated how the US is willing to “confront squarely our imperfections and to learn from our mistakes.”

In the filed complaint, Reprieve asks, “The President has now admitted to killing innocent Americans and Italians with drones; why are the bereaved families of innocent Yemenis less entitled to the truth?” (more…)

Podcast: The Case of Sharif Mobley, Detained American Possibly Killed in Saudi Attack in Yemen

Kat Craig, legal director for Reprieve
Kat Craig, legal director for Reprieve
Sharif Mobley is a US citizen, who was kidnapped in Yemen and has been in detention for five years. The FBI is known to have interrogated him. His life has been increasingly endangered as war rages in Yemen, and this past week the military compound, where he has been held, was bombed.

His family and lawyers representing him are afraid he has been killed. They have pled for assistance from the United States State Department. Like previous attempts to obtain assistance, the US government has failed the American’s family miserably.

Authorities in Yemen (and presumably the US government as well) claim that Mobley attempted to escape a hospital after he was kidnapped. He has been accused of shooting a guard, who died later, and faces a murder charge. That has been the justification by the Yemen government for his continued detention. It does not, however, justify how he has essentially been held incommunicado.

On the “Unauthorized Disclosure” weekly podcast, Kat Craig is the show’s guest. She is the legal director of the international human rights non-governmental organization, Reprieve. She has worked extensively on Mobley’s case.

Kat Craig, legal director for Reprieve, which is an international human rights non-governmental organization, joins the show to talk about Sharif Mobley’s case.

Later in the episode, hosts Rania Khalek and Kevin Gosztola talk about the Obama administration being ordered to redact and prepare videos of Guantanamo Bay force-feeding for release. Khalek highlights the $1.9 million in arms being given to Israel by the Obama administration. Khalek and Gosztola also talk about the made-up terrorist group in Syria, “Khorasan Group,” which the US government conjured to build support for war. Finally, Gosztola delves into the importance of the expiration of Patriot Act provisions.

The podcast is available on iTunes for download. For a link (and also to download the episode), go here. Click on “go here” and a page will load with the audio file of the podcast. The file will automatically start playing so you can listen to the episode.

The episode can also be heard by clicking “play” on the below player:


(more…)

The Media Misses the Point on ‘Proxy War’

Yemen is a Saudi war of aggression, while Syria and Libya are the result of a dangerous Gulf-led strategy of backing groups of sectarian fighters

By Gareth Porter

The term “proxy war” has experienced a new popularity in stories on the Middle East. Various news sources began using the term to describe the conflict in Yemen immediately, as if on cue, after Saudi Arabia launched its bombing campaign against Houthi targets in Yemen on 25 March. “The Yemen Conflict Devolves into Proxy War,” The Wall Street Journal headlined the following day. “Who’s fighting whom in Yemen’s proxy war?” a blogger for Reuters asked on 27 March.

And on the same day the Journal pronounced Yemen a proxy war, NBC News declared that the entire Middle East was now engulfed in a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

It is certainly time to discuss the problem of proxy war in the Middle East, because a series of such wars are the heart of the destabilisation and chaos engulfing the region. The problem with the recent stories featuring the term is that it is being used in a way that obscures some basic realities that some news media are apparently not comfortable acknowledging.

The real problem of proxy war must begin with the fact that the United States and its NATO allies opened the floodgates for regional proxy wars by the two major wars for regime change in Iraq and Libya. Those two profoundly destabilising wars provided obvious opportunities and motives for Sunni states across the Middle East to pursue their own sectarian and political power objectives through proxy war.

Is Yemen really a proxy war?

Prominent 20th century political scientist Karl Deutsch defined “proxy war” as “an international conflict between two foreign powers, fought out on the soil of a third country, disguised as a conflict over an internal issue of the country and using some of that country’s manpower, resources and territory as a means of achieving preponderantly foreign goals and foreign strategies”.

Deutsch’s definition makes it clear that proxy war involves the use of another country’s fighters rather than the direct use of force by the foreign power or powers. So it obvious that the Saudi bombing in Yemen, which has killed mostly civilians and used cluster bombs that have been outlawed by much of the world, is no proxy war but a straightforward external military aggression.

The fact that the news media began labelling Yemen a proxy war in response to the Saudi bombing strongly suggests that the term was a way of softening the harsh reality of Saudi aggression.

The assumption underlying that application of “proxy war” is, of course, that Iran had already turned Yemen into such a war by its support for the Houthis. But it ignores the crucial question of whether the Houthis had been carrying out “preponderantly foreign goals and foreign strategies”. Although Iran has certainly had ties with the Houthis, the Saudi propaganda line that the Houthis have long been Iranian proxies is not supported by the evidence. (more…)