The State Department has just issued its annual report on religious freedom around the world.
Saudi Arabia, to judge by the language of the report, vied with North Korea as the worst offender. The Saudis, Rex Tillerson said, ought to “embrace greater degrees of religious freedom for all of its citizens.” He cited criminal penalties — but did not explain that for some of those “crimes” the penalty is death — for apostasy, atheism, blasphemy, and insulting the Saudi state’s interpretation of Islam, as well as discrimination against, and attacks targeting, Shi’ite Muslims.
He did not mention the ferocious warfare now being conducted against pockets of Shi’a resistance to the Saudi Wahhabis, that receives so little attention, though he might have produced videos of the complete flattening, in recent weeks, of the Musawara district, with its 400-year old buildings, in the Shi’a town of Awamiya, which can be seen here.
And while limits on the religious freedom of foreigners was mentioned, the report did not go into the details of how, in Saudi Arabia, the observation of Christian worship, no matter if held behind closed doors, is strictly forbidden and severely punished. A few years ago, four Korean women were singing Christmas carols softly in their rooms, far from any Muslims. The matawain, or religious police, who are always on the prowl, overheard them, hauled them away, and they were promptly deported for their caroling sins. They may have been lucky; the usual punishment for singing carols is 1000 lashes, which can prove fatal for some. And before there were the Korean women, there were British nurses, also caught celebrating Christmas behind doors. And that 1000 lashes is also the punishment prescribed for wishing anyone Merry Christmas in the thoroughly Islamic state of Saudi Arabia.
Nor did the State Department report take up the perennial problem of Saudi textbooks which preach hatred of Christians and Jews, about which discussion has been going on for more than a decade, with the Saudis constantly reassuring the Americans that they are making all the necessary changes. In fact, those textbooks continue to include lessons describing the Jews “as the sons of apes and pigs,” and of Infidels as the “most vile” of creatures (which is just a quote from Qur’an 98:6, though the State Department may not realize it). It has always been State Department policy to work quietly with the Saudis on this textbook matter. But more than a decade of unhappy experience with suave Saudi assurances of changes that are always just about to be made, but somehow never are, or where the changes made are so slight as to be only cosmetic, make clear that only a public discussion of these textbooks, holding their contents up to widespread public view, and shaming the Saudis in Western (though not of course Muslim) eyes, might have some effect.
Meanwhile, in official Washington, Saudi Arabia is still considered a “friend and ally.” Even though it persecutes millions of Christians among its foreign workforce, prevents them from the observance of their faith, seizes Bibles and crucifixes (though a single Bible for personal use, not proselytizing, may be allowed), teaches hatred of Jews and Christians in its schools, and continues to spread Salafi Islam, with billions spent — sums hardly to be missed by the Saudi petrocrats — on mosques, madrasas, and imams all over the Muslim world.
It is true that the Saudis now oppose the Muslim Brotherhood, and its financial supporter Qatar. But that should not be misinterpreted as a sign of Saudi “moderation.” The Saudis are opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood because its program of a “pan-Islamic state” would mean that the Saudis would be enfolded into a much larger political structure. The vast sums the Saudis now receive, and that the royal family battens on, would then be shared by all the Muslims in this pan-Islamic state. And that notion horrifies the Saudis. They were shaken by how rapidly the Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt and put Mohamed Morsi in power, and did the same in Tunisia during the “Arab Spring.” Though the MB was beaten back in both cases, its members remain a threat. And that is why the Saudis are so adamant in their demands that Qatar cease all support for the Brotherhood, and that it shut down Al Jazeera, which expresses the Muslim Brotherhood point of view.
Saudi Arabia is neither a friend nor ally of the United States, notwithstanding a long history of Americans being convinced that it has been both, from the moment when FDR met with Ibn Saud on the navy cruiser Quincy, to Saudi Arabia supposedly doing us economic favors — it never did — in OPEC pricing, and from that moment all the way up to Obama and his awkward bow of seeming obeisance to the Saudi king and Trump’s bouncing up and down as he participated in a “Sword Dance” with Saudi royals, many Americans still think of Saudi Arabia as a friend and ally. At the moment, there is one point of agreement: Saudi fear and hatred of Shi’a Iran accords nicely with our own hostility to the Islamic Republic of Iran. But that is merely a coincidence of interests, not a true friendship. We can do nothing to stop the Saudis from bombing civilians indiscriminately in Yemen, nor to keep them from helping to suppress the Shi’a subjects of the Sunni ruler in Bahrain, nor should we even try. The more aggressive the Saudi behavior against the Shi’a in Yemen or Bahrain, the more deeply angry Iran — which has just approved an additional $800 billion to its defense budget — will become. And aside from sending aid to the Houthis in Yemen, as they apparently have done, why wouldn’t the Iranians want to stir up trouble for the Saudis among their Shia coreligionists in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia? That’s the province where almost all of the Shi’a in Saudi Arabia– some 2-3 million — live; it is also the province where all the Saudi oil comes from. And because of that oil, the Saudis will do everything they can to hold onto that province. It’s entirely possible that the Iranians will provide the Shi’a in that province with arms, and trainers, and “volunteers.” But this is not a province the Saudis can afford to lose — it contains all of their wealth. If they deem it necessary, the Saudis could certainly transfer the local Shi’a population, moving it either deeper into Saudi Arabia, entirely away from the oil-bearing region in the east that the Iranians could reach by sea, or could even, if they acted quickly and forcefully, could push the Shi’a out of Saudi Arabia altogether, transporting them over the border into Iraq on the grounds that they constitute a Shi’a “fifth column” that is being whipped up by Iran. Could Saudi Arabia behave that ruthlessly with its own citizen-subjects? Why, of course it could. In a New York minute.
But before the Saudis could complete this massive transfer of the Shi’a population, isn’t it likely that Iran would step in, as a Defender of the World’s Shia, and go at it with the Saudi military, who are greatly outnumbered by Iran’s forces, and likely to be bested unless, of course, Sunnis from elsewhere — Egyptians, Jordanians, Pakistanis — rented by the Saudis, enter the fray? Should the West worry about any of this? Not at all. It would be like the eight-year Iran-Iraq War, which from the West’s point of view ought to have gone on forever. That war used up men, materiel, money, and fully preoccupied two aggressive Muslim states that otherwise might have turned their aggression against the West. It is the same situation now. The more Sunnis and Shi’a go at it, the more each side expends in men, materiel, money, and morale, in fighting with each other in many different theaters — Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Bahrain, possibly the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan (where Sunni terrorists of Sipah-e-Sahaba target for murder the Shia whom they regard as Infidels), Afghanistan (where the Taliban and ISIS both carry out attacks on the Shia Hazara, also seen as Infidels) — the less trouble they can make for us, the Infidels. The “proxy war” between Iran and Saudi Arabia that is now going on will be even more useful to the West if it becomes a direct and ferocious conflict, and one which, given the balance of forces in the area, is likely to go on for at least as long as did the Iran-Iraq war. Perhaps there is some downside to such an outcome, but I just can’t figure out what that might be.
The Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia can never “take Christians or Jews” as their friends, nor for that matter can the Shi’a of Iran — see, with a vengeance, Qur’an 5:51 — so let’s hope that the dwindling band of those still in the Trump administration who understand the meaning and menace of Islam can hold fast, and not let themselves be railroaded, or further mcmastered, out of office, and hope that they remember too, that a House of Islam divided against itself — like some other houses we’ve heard of in history — cannot stand.
That sectarian war between Sunni and Shi’a goes back to the first century of Islam. It has waxed and waned over 1400 years, but now, when an aggressive Islam, with tens of millions of its adherents having been negligently allowed into our Infidel midst, presents a greater threat to the West than at any time since Charles Martel threw back the Muslim invaders at Poitiers in 732. That Sunni-Shi’a war is now, fortunately, everywhere waxing. Ideally, other Sunni states — Egypt, Jordan, Pakistani — will send “volunteers” with weapons, from tanks to planes, to help the Saudis, while Hezbollah may offer its Shi’a bezonians to help Iran. Such a conflict, ever widening, offers the best hope for the West to divide and, if not exactly conquer, to buy itself time, so as to better withstand its external Muslim enemies, including that country which has done so much to spread propaganda world-wide for a fanatical version of the faith of Islam, the johnny-appleseed of Salafism, our putative “friend and ally” Saudi Arabia.
dumbledoresarmy says
I hope that this article is read by President Trump.
Hugh should send a copy to the President, with a brief and polite covering letter.
The USA needs to be finding ways of disentangling itself from its dangerously-dhimmi-like ‘relationships’ with assorted Muslim entities both state ( Pakistan, the Abominable House of Saud, Qatar, Emirates, Turkey) and non-state (the so-called ‘palestinians’, that is, the Arab Muslims currently occupying Gaza, Judea and Samaria). No more jizya, no more ‘tribute’ no more nuthin’.
Strengthen the alliance with Israel – move that embassy to Jerusalem, like, yesterday (with NO explanations nor apologies, just do it) – and do some serious talking with India. If USA disengages from sinister and deceitful Islamic Pakistan, cuts off the jizya/ tribute tap, and uses whatever leverage it can to punish Pakistan for its gross and frequent abuses of the human rights of non-Muslim minorities whether Hindu or Christian, and at the same time, gets to work to hammer out an alliance – and lots of juicy mutual-benefit business deals – with India, money would not only be *saved* but MADE.
RonaldB says
Thank you dumbledoresarmy. I quite agree with you that the US ought to disengage from entanglements in the Middle East (or anywhere our direct security is not involved).
I do not agree with you on strengthening ties with Israel. Israel is doing just fine on its own. The US and Israel ought to disentangle the co-dependent relationship they have, and treat each other as integral countries. My preference is that the US cut off foreign aid to Israel, a thoroughly modern economy, and stoop kibbitzing every time Israel builds an apartment in its territories. I also think the US ought to continue voting down the UN resolutions aimed at damaging Israel. I also favor continued collaboration on military technology, as long as the US receives full benefits from the collaboration.
I’m neutral on moving the embassy to Jerusalem. Being an American Firster, I think it is not up to the US to validate or condemn any particular Israeli move. I would consider Israel’s dealings with Jerusalem to be an internal Israeli matter, and therefore not a topic for US concern.
Daniel Triplett says
Israel is our closest ally in the Islamic War Ron.
I believe we should cut off all foreign aid to everyone except Israel.
They’re on the front line in this war, fighting with limited resources. Military service is mandatory for every young Israeli man and woman. Israeli parents lay awake at night so that we may live and sleep in peace without thinking of the war.
Mark says
Agree. US should limit them to training and selling them weapons . no American soldiers should fight for them.
moeped says
As long as one side doesn’t win and take over all the oil, fighting between the two groups doesn’t pose any issue.
moeped says
These people simply can’t live in peace. It’s not in their nature.
Susette says
That is certainly true. Given that muhammad spread islam with the sword, violence was, has been and always will be in their DNA.
Allan Mandrowski says
We surrender our liberty, morals and ethics to the petrodollar.
We fight Islamic terrorism on one hand and on the other we wholly enable it by laying in bed with chief terror sponsors Saudi Arabia.
Jason says
“The more Sunnis and Shi’a go at it, the more each side expends in men, materiel, money, and morale, in fighting with each other in many different theaters”
The only problem is that this will create “refugees”, which the West will be expected to take in.
Keys says
Yes I think it (open war between Iran and Saudi Arabia) will cause refugees, mainly rich Saudis fleeing to the US or to their European holdings.
Other variables are:
Iran uses nukes of their own or provided by greasy Pakistan or North Korea.
Russia supports Iran?
China supports Pakistan?
India supports ?
World oil prices rise – economic fallout.
Iran attacks Saudi oil ports with their navy. Iran has over 30 subs. Saudi Arabia probably has none, but wants to buy five German submarines for around €2.5 billion ($3.4 billion) and more than two dozen more in the future.
What else?
Irene Brekelmans says
I think the lefts created the problem with the nazis, I don’t like and despise nazisme , but when you take away the freedom of speech, you can expect this . People will get to rebellion, sooner or later because you can not keep everything from them and especially the younger generation, they are smarter then we are and don’t believe everything you tell them, and they know us, they will not accept everything you tell them and what they have to do and what they have to leave alone. They will not be the slaves, we were. We were stupid. and again:
If you want to know who rules you,
find out whom you may not critisize .
And that is what is happening all over the world, so we know who rules us, and what will happen? do we hear any words from the leftists, any offer to talk or debate? Nothing, they think, if we stay nice to muslim people, we will keep peace, but if one party is not able to live in peace, it will not happen, it is impossible, no matter how many men or women is setting up an institution of “peace”
It becomes a hype, it becomes like moviestars, people seem to get in a que to put their word in and become famous as the peace people and so sweet and cuddly, and in fact they sold us out.
But things will change and the truth will set us free. But leftists only make it worse, day by day.
Did any moslim community stand up en masse to let the world know that they do not want this either?
They never dared to stand up in their own country and they do not dare it in Europe, and probably hoped that governments here would stand straitght and help them, but surprise, they did not know our governments and neither did we ourselves.
Irene Brekelmans says
IF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS TAKEN AWAY,
THEN DUMB AND SILENT WE MAY BE LED LIKE SHEEP TO THE SLAUGHTER.
George Washington.
Some quotes will always stay the same trough the end of times.
Daniel Triplett says
A massive Sunni – Shia war would be helpful to us.
Of the 100+ countries where I landed on military duty, Saudi Arabia is the only one that ever inspected our belongings, every time. They rifled through our bags looking for booze, Bibles, Crucifixes, porn, and even bodybuilding mags. The USAF warned us ahead of time.
The USAF even agreed to force female US servicemembers to wear veils and walk behind male members whenever we went outside the base, which was a bit amusing to us men (but the women weren’t laughing). The gold markets and Chop-Chop Square were popular pastimes for us. Then Martha McSally defiantly refused to wear the veil. The USAF reacted to McSally by prohibiting everyone, male and female alike, from ever leaving base unless on a mission. A big buzzkill.
RonaldB says
Daniel,
While I agree that the Sunni – Shia split can be used to benefit the US (if exploited wisely) but I do not think the US ought to encourage in any way a war in the Middle East (or anywhere else). The Muslims are people too. As long as they stay in Muslim countries, there’s no huge problem. A major problem emerges when Muslims are allowed to immigrate to the West. And that problem cant be solved by exploiting the split.
There are some Muslim countries that are threatening to non-Muslim countries. Pakistan is one. Hopefully Trump will follow through on his insight and cut off foreign aid to Pakistan. Turkey is another country: Islamic fanaticism is mixed with Turkish nationalism. But, Turkey is more concerned with the Kurds than with the Shia. And the US ought to stay out of that affair, unless Turkey becomes even more threatening to East European countries. In that case, Europe (not the US) could ramp up support for separate Kurdish territory carved out of Turkey. If you want to see a funny reaction, propose that as an official US objective.
Daniel Triplett says
This question was asked and I answered at length on a different thread today.
I agree that Muslims are people too.
I don’t believe, however, that Islamic cultures are equal to Western cultures. The result of Islamic culture on Muslims is self-evident. Islam produces entirely different morality, human dignity, and economic prosperity outcomes, at a minimum. Afghanistan and Sudan are incomparable to America.
Some believe America has no obligation to set the example for and export Liberty to the World. Personally, I believe we do have such an obligation. We’re the finest country and man’s best hope ever to grace God’s Earth:
“…When someone has been given much, much will be required in return; and when someone has been entrusted with much, even more will be required.” Luke 12:48 NLT
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/08/mcmaster-mattis-and-tillerson-prod-trump-to-send-more-american-troops-to-train-afghan-forces/comment-page-1#comment-1726796
Irene Brekelmans says
IF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS TAKEN AWAY,
THEN DUMB AND SILENT WE MAY BE LED LIKE SHEEP TO THE SLAUGHTER.
Some sayings go to the end of times. They always will be the same.
Consciousness always talks to you what to do and not to do.
Each one of us is free and no slave of another.
It seems at this moment, our planet with the collective consciousness is destroying itself.
I am afraid , that the USA and Europe, Australia, Canada will fall apart. Thanks to the so called “refugees”
who costed us tons of money for their upkeep and safety measurements everywhere, but in the end, nobody will have anything anymore not even with your “infidel” taxes. You are not able to think for yourselves, like machines you listen to your hate imams who have already destroyed the minds of the next generation, But Cosmic Law CAUSE AND EFFECT. It all goes to an end and you will not conquer this world, sorry !!!!
BARBARA BROOKS says
Most people–left or right–agree that Saudi Arabia is a backward dictatorship. We need a bi-partisan movement to stop states like Saudi Arabia from funding religious and educational institutions in the West. The average American is very much against Saudi Arabia. They do not want to see individual, law-abiding Muslims get a raw deal, but almost no one (except the recipients of funds and their allies) wants to see Saudi Arabia and other Muslim extremist states funding such project in the West. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to fund a poll on the subject and then do some investigative journalism to find out how Saudi Arabia intimidates dissidents in the West. Maybe veterans and parents of college students could be mobilized to insist that Congress approve legislation blocking funding of religious institutions and education by theocratic states with bad human rights records. The special interests would oppose it, but my guess is that close to 75% of the public opposes Saudi funding of religion and education in the West.
RonaldB says
To Hugh Fitzgerald,
Thank you for a masterful summary of the vast arena of the Sunni – Shia conflict and also for your perspective that the US should stay out of involvement in the internal affairs of countries like Saudi Arabia, however brutal they may be.
I have a small point of disagreement. You say it is in the interest of the US that there be active conflicts between Sunni and Shia countries or regions. While you did not specifically draw the inference, one might deduce that it would benefit the US to encourage war, as it did in the war between Iran and Iraq. I disagree. If wars and conflicts occur between Muslim countries, so much the better, as long as the US is not involved, and I mean in any way, even covert supplying of weapons.
The primary danger from Muslims comes from immigration, which is a separate issue. The suicidal policies of Western leaders cannot be ameliorated by supporting or encouraging mass killings in Muslim countries. I’ll go so far as to say the Deep State loves intervention as it loves immigration. If Iran and Iraq choose to murder each others people, good. If not, better. If the US is involved it is a criminal administration.
Another danger is, as you point out, Saudi money and influence-peddling. I won’t go down the list of US politicians tied to Saudi money (Bush, Bush, Bush) but influence-buying involves communication and educational institutions as well, all thorough strumpets with the same easy virtue as the politicians they pretend to dislike. I would like the US to make it a felony for any foreign money to be invested, directly or indirectly, in educational, technological, communications, political, or religious grant. I’d like to see some exceptions where the origin is clear: RT, for instance, is openly a Russian creation which presents news from the Russian perspective; El Jazera is the same type of creature, an openly Muslim point of view owned openly by a Muslim country. I have no objection to these types of outlets. I do object to the Georgetown Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, which is a plain Saudi bribe to an established US educational institution funded with public money.
My point is that a country really interested in protecting itself can be sensibly protectionist without cutting off the flow of information to those who wish to know. I do think it ought to be illegal for religious institutions to accept foreign money.
Anyway, it is moral for the US to employ the deadly intra-Muslim rivalries, but immoral to encourage them for any purpose other than to enhance our physical security, as opposed to our political interests.
Jack Diamond says
Don’t think there’s much need to worry about the US government encouraging such a war (not exactly a lot of Richelieus and Machiavellis handling our Grand Strategy), more a matter of it not doing everything it can to prevent such a war and to halt such a war (and, yes, take in the ensuing swarm of refugees, real and bogus). In this case, events are proceeding at a pace making that prevention difficult. The one fortunate thing about Islam is just that Muslim groups are usually most preoccupied with hating and in-fighting amongst themselves (cannibalism) before uniting (temporarily) against a common infidel enemy. Not that the in-fighting has ever stopped the jihad but it is a means (handed to them) for infidels to control this beast, historically.
The Saudis are less important than they used to be, and so their fate is becoming less important. They are becoming more isolated in the Muslim world, too (Qatar, Turkey, the Al-Azhar condemnations of Wahhabism, the Saudi peace gestures toward Israel–another symbol of weakness and isolation, and the fear of Iran as it encroaches in Yemen, Bahrain, and SA itself). Not good, if you are looking out from Riyadh.
Let’s not forget both Saudi Arabia and Iran are up to their necks in the 9/11 act of war against the United States. Then let’s discuss morality.
WorkingClassPost says
Could we really stand aside and leave them to it?
At the very least we would supply arms and intelligence to Saud’s, and possibly ‘advisors and trainers’ too.
Another quagmire of unintended consequences.
UNCLE VLADDI says
Rex Tillerson just announced that he hopes to work along side “moderate” TALIBAN MEMBERS.