David Sanger and William Broad reported
in The New York Times [1] on Thursday that before Saudi Arabia’s Crown
Prince Mohammed bin Salman was implicated in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi,
American intelligence agencies were trying to solve a separate mystery: was the
prince laying the groundwork for building an atomic bomb?
According to the report, the Saudi heir apparent had been
overseeing negotiations with the US Energy Department to get Washington to sell
designs for nuclear power plants to the kingdom. The deal was worth upward of
$80 billion, depending on how many plants Saudi Arabia decided to build.
But there is a hitch: Saudi Arabia insists on producing its
own nuclear fuel. Such fuel can be used for benign or military purposes: if
uranium is enriched to 4 percent purity, it can fuel a power plant; at 90
percent, it can be used for a bomb. Saudi Arabia has vast uranium reserves and
there are currently five nuclear research centers operating in the kingdom.
The report further states that the Crown Prince set off
alarms when he declared in a CBS News interview in March, “Saudi Arabia does
not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt, if Iran developed a
nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible.”
Regarding Saudi Arabia’s clandestine nuclear activities, in
November 2013, BBC’s defense correspondent, Mark Urban, published a report [2] that
Pakistan’s military had made a secret deal with Saudi Arabia that in the event
of Iran developing a nuclear weapon, Pakistan would provide ready-made nuclear
warheads along with delivery systems to Saudi Arabia.
Similarly, in 2004, it emerged during the investigation of
Pakistan’s top nuclear scientist, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, who has been dubbed as
“the father of Pakistan’s nuclear program,” that he had sold centrifuge designs
to Iran, Libya and North Korea.
Additionally, in recent years, Pakistan’s defense production
industry, with Chinese assistance, has emerged as one of the most sophisticated
military-industrial complex in the region. Not only does it provide
state-of-the-art conventional weapons to the oil-rich Gulf states, but
according to a May 2014 AFP report [3], Pakistan-made
weapons were used in large quantities in Sri Lanka’s Northern Offensive of 2008-09
against the Tamil Tiger rebels.
Moreover, in May last year, Pakistan’s former army chief,
General Raheel Sharif, has been appointed to lead a 40-member military alliance
of Muslim nations dubbed as “the Muslim NATO.” Although the ostensible purpose
of the alliance is to combat terrorism, in fact the alliance of Sunni Muslim
nations has been cobbled together by Saudi Arabia as a counterweight to Iran’s
meddling in the Arab World, which Saudi Arabia regards as its own sphere of
influence.
Furthermore, it’s worth noting that Pakistan’s military and
Saudi Arabia have forged very deep and institutionalized ties: thousands of
Pakistani retired and serving army officers work on deputations in the Gulf
Arab States. And during the 1980s, when Saudi Arabia lacked an efficient
intelligence set-up, Pakistan’s Inter-services Intelligence (ISI) virtually
played the role of Saudi Arabia’s foreign intelligence service.
Regarding the murder of the Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi
at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2, a question would naturally
arise in the minds of astute readers of alternative media that why did the
mainstream media, Washington Post and New York Times in particular, take the
lead in publicizing the assassination?
One apparent reason could be that Khashoggi was an opinion
columnist at The Washington Post, which is owned by Jeff Bezos, the owner of
Amazon. Washington Post has a history of working in close collaboration with
the CIA because Bezos had won a $600
million contract [4] in 2013 to host the CIA’s database on the Amazon’s
web-hosting service.
It bears mentioning that despite the Saudi Crown Prince
Mohammad bin Salman being primarily responsible for the war in Yemen that has
claimed tens of thousands of lives and has created a famine in Yemen, the
mainstream media hailed him as a “moderate reformer” who had brought radical
reforms in the conservative Saudi society by permitting women to drive and by
allowing cinemas to screen the Hollywood movies.
So what prompted the sudden change of heart in the
mainstream media that the purported “moderate reformer” was all of a sudden
vilified as a brutal murderer? It could be the nature of the brutal
assassination, as Khashoggi’s body was barbarically dismembered and dissolved
in acid, according to the Turkish sources.
More significantly, however, it was the timing of the
assassination and the political mileage that could be gained from Khashoggi’s
murder in the domestic politics of the US. Khashoggi was murdered on October 2,
when the US midterm elections were only a few weeks away.
Donald Trump and his son-in-law Jared Kushner in particular
have known to have forged close business relations with the Saudi royal family.
It doesn’t come as a surprise that Donald Trump chose Saudi Arabia and Israel
for his first official overseas visit in May last year.
Thus, the mainstream media’s campaign to seek justice for
the murder of Jamal Khashoggi was actually a smear campaign against Donald
Trump and his conservative political base, which is now obvious after the US
midterm election results have been tallied. Even though the Republicans have
retained their 51-seat majority in the Senate, the Democrats now control the
House of Representatives by gaining 39 additional seats.
Finally, two factors were mainly responsible for the
surprising defeat of the Republicans in the US midterm elections. Firstly, the
Khashoggi murder and the smear campaign mounted by the neoliberal media, which Donald
Trump often pejoratively mentions as “fake media” on Twitter, against the Trump
administration.
Secondly, and more importantly, the parcel bombs sent to the
residences of George Soros, a dozen other Democratic Congressmen and The New
York Times New York office by Cesar Sayoc on the eve of the elections. Though
the suspect turned out to be a Trump supporter, he was likely instigated by
shady hands in the US deep state, which is wary of the anti-establishment
rhetoric and pro-Russia tendencies of the so-called “alt-right” administration.
No comments:
Post a Comment