Drawing Battle Lines in the Middle East

While it has often been overshadowed by more pressing issues in headlines, the bellicosity Iran and Saudi Arabia have for decades shown one another is arguably one of the most pressing concerns for the region. The culmination of events over the weekend involving the two countries - Saudia Arabia's mass execution of 47 individuals including a prominent Shiite cleric, and the subsequent violent protests occurring at the Saudi Arabian embassy in Iran - underscore this point perfectly. Now the Middle East, a region already at the precipice of outright catastrophe, is in a particularly precarious position. What happens next between the two countries will reverberate across the entire Middle East and, in certain ways, the globe.

Saudi Arabia has long been a bastion of Sunni Islam while Iran, for decades the black sheep of the region, has been a home to Shiites, the minority of the two in the region. As far back as the Revolution in 1979, Iran and Saudi Arabia have been seen as bitter enemies, constantly attempting to one-up one another and choosing proxy battlegrounds along the way.

Two of these battlegrounds exist right now: Syria and Yemen. Since the uprising began in Syria five years ago, Iran has desperately attempted to help prop up President Asad, who is of a minority Shiite sect called Alawite. Unlike its leader, however, Syria is a predominantly Sunni state--giving Saudi Arabia entree into the conflict in an attempt to restore power to the majority religious population.

Anti-Saudi Arabia protest. Courtesy of WSJ

A civil war has similarly erupted in Yemen and continues to serve as a proxy battle for Iran and Saudi Arabia, who have taken sides. In a particularly decisive move, Saudi Arabia began conducting airstrikes and providing military support on a mass scale to the government of Yemeni President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi. Iran, meanwhile, has been providing military and logistical support to the houthi insurgency, loyal to former Yemeni President Saleh, which has waged all-out warfare against the sitting government.

These battles have had lasting repercussions for the entire region--most notably the governance vacuums they have created in Syria and Yemen that have permitted the Islamic State to thrive. The emerging diplomatic conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia may prove to be a much more urgent geopolitical issue, however.

Tragically, the disagreement comes just as progress was being made in Syria peace talks. Both Iran and Saudi Arabia have participated in multi-national talks in recent weeks, demonstrating the possibility of a preliminary agreement being reached in the coming months. Hundreds of thousands have died in Syria to date and much of the country has been reduced to rubble--it is well past time that a ceasefire was negotiated. Should tensions continue to flare between Iran and Saudi Arabia, however, it is likely that the scheduled talks in Geneva later this month will be put on hold--something the Syrian people cannot afford.

Secretary of State Kerry with Saudi King Salman. Courtesy of WSJ

The disagreement also has the possibility of undermining the Iran nuclear agreement that was signed last year. The United States has been placed in a precarious position: on one hand, President Obama is striving to improve relations with Tehran following the agreement in an effort to not only strengthen the agreement, but make Iran less of a hostile player in the region. Iran tests of ballistic missiles in recent weeks have caused distrust and stoked anger in the U.S. as well as Iran; the U.S. cannot afford any more issues. Saudi Arabia, however, is the leading ally of the U.S. in the region, and will see any warmth towards Iran as hostility towards themselves and a degradation of the relationship. President Obama must walk the diplomatic tightrope and ensure that both sides feel that they are being treated respectfully.

Finally, the disagreement has and will continue to affect the global oil market. Brent shares fell on Monday on news of Saudi Arabia's decision to sever diplomatic ties with Iran. With Middle Eastern countries producing so much of the world's oil, the reminder that it remains a highly volatile region will be unsettling to investors. Further, while Saudi Arabia has vowed to keep production high, any escalation in conflict that more quickly drains their monetary reserves will result in a halt of production, sending oil prices soaring and hurting American consumers.

As of today, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Kuwait have all severed diplomatic ties with Iran following the protests in Tehran over the weekend. The United Arab Emirates has also downgraded their diplomatic ties. It is unclear how Iran will respond, but the United States is urging both sides to exercise caution moving forward. The entire region's stability likely depends on it.

On the Anniversary of Hiroshima, a New Nuclear Crossroads

Today marks a somber anniversary, the 70^th anniversary since the United States dropped the first of two nuclear weapons on Japan. Seven decades ago today, the US, ostensibly to end WWII in the Pacific, dropped a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima, followed three days later by a nuclear attack on Nagasaki. In the aftermath, hundreds of thousands of people died in the two cities, and over one hundred thousand were killed in the initial blasts alone. The nuclear weapons used in the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were comparatively small compared to the destructive power of nuclear weapons today, and they still devastated two large cities. Japan marked the occasion with speeches by the few remaining survivors, a national moment of silence, and the tolling of a bell.

Pres. Obama speaks on the nuclear deal at American University

The anniversary comes at a moment when the United States faces yet another nuclear crossroads: whether or not to enact a nuclear deal reached with Iranian negotiators on July 14. On one side stands the Obama administration, which negotiated the deal and hopes to pass it through a Congressional vote, despite significant, somewhat bipartisan opposition. On the other stand politicians from both sides of the aisle, although largely Republican, who say the deal will not stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and argue that the US should continue the current sanctions regime in the hopes of obtaining a better deal. If such a deal never materializes, then armed intervention in Iran becomes an option.

A Tale of Two Abdullahs

Look at that face. Look how benevolent he looks.

As world leaders including Pres. Obama streamed into Riyadh this weekend to pay their respects to the late Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, the obituaries and op-eds that emerged painted two very different pictures of the deceased monarch. On the one hand, world leaders and some foreign policy analysts called the king a reformer who sought “discreet” changes for women including a pledge to allow them to vote and run in 2015 municipal elections, and who sought “stability” in the region as a whole. In such analyses, Abdullah was a benevolent dictator whose moderate policies struggled to find a place in a conservative society.

On the other, Abdullah’s less-publicized regressive policies come to the fore as examples of his autocratic tendencies and refusal to make real changes in the lives of most Saudi citizens. Despite some advances for women during his rule, his policies towards female rights and activism remained woefully medieval. Four of his 15 (or so) daughters have been held under house arrest since 2002 for speaking out about the deplorable state of women’s rights in the Kingdom. Women continued to be prosecuted and cruelly punished for personal indiscretions such as (alleged) adultery, divorce, and even having a boyfriend. The country’s large population of foreign domestic workers and stateless people enjoy virtually no rights, and yet are often held to account under Saudi law by the regressive justice system that is almost certain to find them guilty of alleged crimes. Countless activists, bloggers, human rights lawyers, LGBT citizens, and stateless people have been arbitrarily detained, tortured, and executed in brutal fashions (although one could argue that all execution is brutal) under Abdullah’s rule. While Abdullah’s publicists did a very good job lauding his “reformist” policies, surely the examples to the contrary outweigh his supposed reforms, many of which were largely window dressing on a dictatorship that insists on the suppression of any hint of dissent.

Wrongful Deaths: Saudi Arabia’s Execution Policies

Saudi Arabia executed seven young men this morning for the crime of robbery. That might seem a bit extreme, but in the Kingdom, there is no official Penal Code that outlines crimes and their associated punishment. Thus death sentences are handed down by judges based upon their subjective interpretation of Shari’a law. While the most infamous punishment for simple theft in the country is the removal of the offending limb, executions are incredibly common in Saudi Arabia, earning the condemnation of the international community. 345 people were beheaded publicly between 2007-2010 and a person was executed on charges of “sorcery” as recently as 2012. The human rights situation in the country is dismal all around: torture abounds in places of detention, unfair trials using forced confessions as the sole piece of evidence are widespread, and arbitrary detention is commonplace for any criticism of government policies. Yet the use of the death penalty as a final solution to get rid of people the government views as “unwanted” is perhaps the most disturbing.

Protests against the use of the death penalty in KSA, courtesy of EuroNews