JOURNAL: Previous | Next | Current | Index

31 October 2001

Saudi Arabia

Surely various bloggers do not wish to be taken seriously when they advocate a U.S. takeover of Saudi Arabia, yet I've seen it in a number of places from people who do seem to be serious.

I'm no defender of the House of Saud, as my blog should make clear. In many ways, American concern for that monarchy's stability has undercut the presentation of a principled, coherent foreign policy in the region and in the world, although it is somewhat understandable given the radical, fundamentalist, anti-American regime that likely would result if the House of Saud falls.

But as big a hawk as I am (there are few people who are more supportive of the principled application of American military power globally), I have serious reservations about a takeover of Saudi oilfields justified solely by the idea that the House of Saud is not responsive enough to U.S. foreign policy interests. Certainly, if the Saudis are harboring and/or financing terrorists, we must do whatever it takes to put an end to it (though Iraq and Syria seem much more likely culprits in that regard). But to take over a nation's sovereign territory because we disagree with them (and not as a result of a direct attack on the U.S. or an ally) is a step that does take us down the road to imperialism (which, contrary to the views of the goofy anti-interventionist left/libertarian fringe, has NOT been the policy of the United States throughout its history). That's a serious step, and one that surely calls for a national debate.

Furthermore, it is not as simple as a computer wargame. With a regional operation in Afghanistan and a regional operation in Saudi Arabia, U.S. forces would be strapped to fulfill treaty obligations elsewhere in the world (say, South Korea), never mind other strategic interests (Taiwan). And after occupation, then what? Imposing democracy on a nation that's never experienced it? The last time I recall such an endeavor in the region, the British were more than happy to turn their Mandate for Palestine over to the United Nations and get the hell out after thirty-plus years of frustration. I wonder what American occupiers would do differently than the British mandatory powers did in Palestine? I haven't seen anyone write about that yet.

I understand that part of the fun of blogging is making strong statements. In the end, it's relatively harmless and even entertaining. But it does make me happy that much more serious people are walking around the Pentagon, especially in the Policy and International Security Policy shops.

[Posted @ 11:19 PM CST]


Powered By Greymatter


If you can read this, your browser does not fully comply with standards. You can still view the site via the navigation bar below.

Reductio (old) | Journal | Glossary | Search | Bio | Photos | Disclaimer