Support NeoGAF

[Funky Papa]

Interesting and fairly ruthless article from DefenseOne (Atlantic Media), penned by two well regarded researchers.

For half a century, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been the linchpin of U.S. Mideast policy. A guaranteed supply of oil has bought a guaranteed supply of security. Ignoring autocratic practices and the export of Wahhabi extremism, Washington stubbornly dubs its ally “moderate.” So tight is the trust that U.S. special operators dip into Saudi petrodollars as a counterterrorism slush fund without a second thought. In a sea of chaos, goes the refrain, the kingdom is one state that’s stable.

But is it?

In fact, Saudi Arabia is no state at all. There are two ways to describe it: as a political enterprise with a clever but ultimately unsustainable business model, or so corrupt as to resemble in its functioning a vertically and horizontally integrated criminal organization. Either way, it can’t last. It’s past time U.S. decision-makers began planning for the collapse of the Saudi kingdom.

In recent conversations with military and other government personnel, we were startled at how startled they seemed at this prospect. Here’s the analysis they should be working through.

Understood one way, the Saudi king is CEO of a family business that converts oil into payoffs that buy political loyalty. They take two forms: cash handouts or commercial concessions for the increasingly numerous scions of the royal clan, and a modicum of public goods and employment opportunities for commoners. The coercive “stick” is supplied by brutal internal security services lavishly equipped with American equipment.

...

Riyadh is hardly running out of funds.

Still, expanded oil production in the face of such low prices—until the Feb. 16 announcement of a Saudi-Russian freeze at very high January levels—may reflect an urgent need for revenue as well as other strategic imperatives. Talk of a Saudi Aramco IPO similarly suggests a need for hard currency.

A political market, moreover, functions according to demand as well as supply. What if the price of loyalty rises?

...

Such comparisons may be offensive to Saudi leaders, but they are telling. If the loyalty price index keeps rising, the monarchy could face political insolvency.

Chayes and De Wall pulling no punches. They talk big, but I don't think they are wrong.

The Arab Spring revealed that even the most developed Arab states remain deeply fragmented and clan-minded despite numerous attempts to spread some form of coherent nationalism to unite their countries. Religious and tribalistic lines remain as present as ever. Alliances are driven by economics instead political affinities, with large amounts of hard currency (being distributed among prominent families, chieftains and their numerous underlings in order to keep them in line) being the only common interest. This creates massive inefficiencies at all levels and rewards incompetence such as the one shown in Yemen, where the Saudi-led coalition keeps struggling against the Houthis despite its overwhelming technical and financial superiority.

While it doesn't look like the collapse of Saudi Arabia is set in stone yet, the risk is present and more nations should be taking precautionary measures. The fallout could be monumental when you consider the outflow of Saudi money (and thus influence) all over the region. Geopolitics abhors a power vacuum.

 

[Omegasquash]

If there were ever a title that gets you to open a thread, that's it. And it's not even clickbait.

 

[Joezie]

Don't know about political decision makers, but It is likely that the Military has at least considered something of a wargame about it given the focus on the region.

Though can't say for certain of course as this is merely a hunch.

 

[phaze]

News at eleven: Authoritarian country nr 234 has some internal problems.

 

[80s Bad Guy]

Wouldn't it be a good thing, in the long run? Aren't they just corrupt misogynistic d-bags who spread a vile form of Islam?

Or is this a situation where there would be a vacuum filled by something even worse. Like, Iraq, Libya, soon Syria, etc...

 

[Abinash117]

If SA collapse the US and some European countries would be one of the first jump to try a get control and Iran would the first as well. A power vacuum such as this probably lead to conflict and possibly war(s).

Wouldn't it be a good thing, in the long run? Aren't they just corrupt misogynistic d-bags who spread a vile form of Islam?

Or is this a situation where there would be a vacuum filled by something even worse. Like, Iraq, Libya, soon Syria, etc...

It depends if wars happen and how tries to benefit or maintain control, then no it won't be good in the long run abet not for a long time. Iran benefits the most and many nations in the ME don't want a strong Iran, including Israel. Syria possibly made relations worse.

 

[Rubenov]

We should just attack their oil. Then take it.

 

[Mr. Giggles]

It'll happen at some point.

Pretty much all the GCC countries operate like the saudis. When the cash runs out, the country will become another iraq

 

[Somnid]

Wouldn't it be a good thing, in the long run? Aren't they just corrupt misogynistic d-bags who spread a vile form of Islam?

Or is this a situation where there would be a vacuum filled by something even worse. Like, Iraq, Libya, soon Syria, etc...

In the long run the middle east will forever have issues until the ethnic groups there beat the shit out of each other and reform the borders. In the short terms bad things will happen, and we'll keep intervening just enough to put the current system back on life support and repeat every few years.

 

[BajiBoxer]

Clicked expecting clickbait. Leaving kind of worried :-(

 

[Anoregon]

We should just attack their oil. Then take it.

It's how we will make america great again.

 

[Funky Papa]

If SA collapse the US and some European countries would be one of the first jump to try a get control and Iran would the first as well. A power vacuum such as this probably lead to conflict and possibly war(s).

I think there's no way Europe would be sending a proper force by a host of issues, from our own inability to react on time to the population stepping out and showing the middle finger to the first politician to ever utter such an idea. Saudi Arabia is seen as incredibly toxic. The Iraq war was wildly unpopular and Lybian mess sealed the deal, IMO. Then there's Putin being an ass and tossing beer cans into our backyard.

As for America... I think that selling the idea of invading another Arab country (nay, Saudi Arabia) could prove problematic, not to mention that finding an ally to support could be incredible difficult given its potential fragmentation.

Even the distant possibility of the country turning into another Syria should be enough for everybody to start paying attention. This is one of these situations that can't go just merely "wrong" if they finally go off the rails.

 

[LegendofJoe]

Twenty years from now the Obama administration is going to be looked back on as visionaries for their pivot towards repairing our relationship with Iran for this exact reason. In the long run Iran is much more likely to be stable and prosperous. Their people are better educated and their stance towards women, while still awful, is much more progressive than that of Saudi Arabia.

 

[RustyNails]

Premature.

The kingdom is not going to collapse. The Monarchy enjoys tremendous, deep seated support from it's citizens. What will happen however is pressure release valves being opened up in the form of more representation. There will be a bigger drive towards transition. The Shoura Council will likely see a higher international clout. The Al Sauds will have no choice but to delegate power. We will see small but notable form of taxation. The rice and oil subsidies will be slowly curtailed.

 

[Nivash]

I'd be very surprised if the US doesn't already have plans to deal with a possible Saudi crash. We're talking about the country that had invasion plans for Canada as part of a war with the UK written up in the 20s after all - in fact, the colored war plans covered basically any possible permutation of WWII. Before the war had even happened. And those are just the ones that have been declassified and which we know of. I wouldn't be surprised if the US has war plans for an invasion from Mars, to be honest, there have likely been hundreds of strategists employed by the Pentagon over the last century who've had the sole mission of figuring out every possible way shit can go to hell.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Outside of the suffering for the people there when the tribal struggles will start, why should the world care too much?

Their money running out means that the oil is so low because of over supply or low demand that at least the US doesn't need it - it doesn't really need to right now also I think. What is the incentive to go there exactly?

Best case scenario, the people get more power. Worst case, we get a new rogue state that can't really project power outside its borders.

 

[sphagnum]

Should've never overthrown Mossadegh and stayed allied with Iran.

 

[Krappadizzle]

It's how we will make america great again.

We give our oil back to us.

 

[bionic77]

America meddling with a former/current ally in the Middle East to further its own interests?

That is a bit of a stretch. These "researchers" need to study history before they make such outlandish claims.

 

[ogbg]

I guess as long as we keep selling them weapons and using their bases to launch drone strikes they aren't collapsing any time soon.

 

[Funky Papa]

I'd be very surprised if the US doesn't already have plans to deal with a possible Saudi crash. We're talking about the country that had invasion plans for Canada as part of a war with the UK written up in the 20s after all - in fact, the colored war plans covered basically any possible permutation of WWII. Before the war had even happened. And those are just the ones that have been declassified and which we know of. I wouldn't be surprised if the US has war plans for an invasion from Mars, to be honest, there have likely been hundreds of strategists employed by the Pentagon over the last century who've had the sole mission of figuring out every possible way shit can go to hell.

The article is not making a case for military planning, though, but political one. There's a chance that the Obama administration noticed the situation and moved towards better relations with Iran in the event things get dangerously out of hand, but there's still a lot of open questions.

Even if Saudi Arabia remains stable, cutting the outflow of Saudi money towards its foreign allies could have unexpected consequences in the region.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Saudi oil is a large part of what underlies dollar stability because you need dollars to buy their oil. This was the deal.

 

[gutter_trash]

Saudi Arabia is planet Earth's worst enemy

everyone talks shit about North Korea or Iran but Saudi Arabia is the biggest threat facing humanity

 

[Abinash117]

I think there's no way Europe would be sending a proper force by a host of issues, from our own inability to react on time to the population stepping out and showing the middle finger to the first politician to ever utter such an idea. Saudi Arabia is seen as incredibly toxic. The Iraq war was wildly unpopular and Lybian mess sealed the deal, IMO. Then there's Putin being an ass and tossing beer cans into our backyard.

As for America... I think that selling the idea of invading another Arab country (nay, Saudi Arabia) could prove problematic, not to mention that finding an ally to support could be incredible difficult given its potential fragmentation.

Even the distant possibility of the country turning into another Syria should be enough for everybody to start paying attention. This is one of these situations that can't go just merely "wrong" if they finally go off the rails.

I don't say anything about actual invading I left it vague though for a reason. If anything it'll some form of military assistance to whats left and provided whatever form of security and when I say some European countries I mean France and UK.

 

[womfalcs3]

People seem to only have short-term memories. Oil was 10 dollars in the past, and Saudi didn't have the 600 billion dollars in monetary reserves back then. Oil prices will rise this year. Calm down.

 

[LegendofJoe]

Saudi oil is a large part of what underlies dollar stability because you need dollars to buy their oil. This was the deal.

Thereby making the dollar more expensive, which increases the wealth and power of those with capital and decreases the cost of debt denominated in dollars. The flip side is that it decimates your export industries and makes labor more expensive. We knew all that going in though, but we went for it anyway. One of the reasons why I always laugh when elites act like they don't know why labor struggles in the US.

 

[Nivash]

Outside of the suffering for the people there when the tribal struggles will start, why should the world care too much?

Their money running out means that the oil is so low because of over supply or low demand that at least the US doesn't need it - it doesn't really need to right now also I think. What is the incentive to go there exactly?

Best case scenario, the people get more power. Worst case, we get a new rogue state that can't really project power outside its borders.

I think it's going to be difficult for the world to keep out completely unless we're prepared to watch the entire region go up in flames. If the Saud dynasty collapses and Saudi Arabia turns into a failed state, it's going to be a race between any and every remotely capable Muslim-majority country in range to get control of the holy cities. That's just way too big of a prize to go ignored during the current religious paradigm - it's going to be like the Islamic version of the Crusades. Egypt is going to swoop in more or less instantly due to geography alone, with Iran hot on their heels, and I'd be very surprised if Jordan and Turkey doesn't send whatever they have too. And then there's Pakistan and its nukes who probably can't involve itself directly, but will probably ally itself with at least some faction or the other.

A Saudi collapse has every chance of resulting in a Middle Eastern version of the 30 Years War and the destruction and refugees alone are going to drag a lot of global players into it, whether we like it or not.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I think it's going to be difficult for the world to keep out completely unless we're prepared to watch the entire region go up in flames. If the Saud dynasty collapses and Saudi Arabia turns into a failed state, it's going to be a race between any and every remotely capable Muslim-majority country in range to get control of the holy cities. That's just way too big of a prize to go ignored during the current religious paradigm - it's going to be like the Islamic version of the Crusades. Egypt is going to swoop in more or less instantly due to geography alone, with Iran hot on their heels, and I'd be very surprised if Jordan and Turkey doesn't send whatever they have too. And then there's Pakistan and its nukes who probably can't involve itself directly, but will probably ally itself with at least some faction or the other.

A Saudi collapse has every chance of resulting in a Middle Eastern version of the 30 Years War and the destruction and refugees alone are going to drag a lot of global players into it, whether we like it or not.

It will be a major mess, but the West getting involved will only increase that I think. At least with actual boots on the ground, air strikes, etc. Imagine a few American rockets hitting Mecca while supporting Egypt for example.

We'll probably ally ourselves with some party, but I hope stay out of it mostly if such a situation would occur.

 

[FStubbs]

Wouldn't it be a good thing, in the long run? Aren't they just corrupt misogynistic d-bags who spread a vile form of Islam?

Or is this a situation where there would be a vacuum filled by something even worse. Like, Iraq, Libya, soon Syria, etc...

Skyrocketing oil prices. Now to make matters even worse.

Imagine a Saudi national like Osama bin Laden running Saudi Arabia. Or a bunch of them fighting each othe across the Arabian peninsula with all of KSA's sophisticated modern weaponry. And if they have Pakistani nukes.

To make matters even worse, Mecca and Medina. Who controls it? Now we've just involved 1.5 billion people.

Iran aside, I don't think anyone wins if KSA should collapse. It would get propped up if it ever came down to it.

 

[gutter_trash]

the West is better off cutting Saudi Arabia off and resorting into developing their own sources of energy

it is time to cut them loose and move forward

 

[The Lamonster]

Saudi Arabia is planet Earth's worst enemy

everyone talks shit about North Korea or Iran but Saudi Arabia is the biggest threat facing humanity

Care to elaborate?

 

[JCX]

Planet Money podcast had an episode about SA that mentioned in less detail some of these problems - most everyone works for the government or an industry supported by the government, people don't work as often as other wealthy countries, and its struggles to diversify their economy.

 

[gutter_trash]

Care to elaborate?

didn't Dubya say that he will go after any country that harbors or aids terrorists?

but Saudi Arabia got off the hook with no sanctions or anything

why?

hmmm oh, I know why

 

[Kurdel]

With all the new taxes and price hikes on SA, shit is going to hit the fan quicker than the Sauds think.

News at eleven: Authoritarian country nr 234 has some internal problems.

Stunning analysis, thank you for sharing your insight

 

[Nivash]

It will be a major mess, but the West getting involved will only increase that I think. At least with actual boots on the ground, air strikes, etc. Imagine a few American rockets hitting Mecca while supporting Egypt for example.

We'll probably ally ourselves with some party, but I hope stay out of it mostly if such a situation would occur.

It's going to depend on the scope of it and the impact on global trade. If the Strait of Hormuz is still vital in this future, global powers could get dragged in similar to what happened during the Tanker War. If it really does devolve into a 30 Years War type scenario we could see Turkey and Egypt on opposite sides, with the eastern Mediterranean being turned into a battlefield. Then there's the refugee issue. Europe isn't even capable of dealing with the refugees from Syria, how are we going to respond to a situation where all of the Middle East goes to war and tens and tens of millions of people have nowhere to run but China. Russia and the EU - with the former not exactly having a history of accommodating refugees?

I don't think this is alarmism at this point, the entire region is already destabilized more than it has been in a long time due to Syria and the Sunni-Shia cold war. If Saudi Arabia - one of the major Sunni powers - suddenly goes belly up, all bets are off. There's way too many parallels with the major regional wars in Europe to ignore.

 

[RustyNails]

didn't Dubya say that he will go after any country that harbors or aids terrorists?

but Saudi Arabia got off the hook with no sanctions or anything

why?

hmmm oh, I know why

Still fucking that chicken?

 

[The Wall]

I always got the feeling this is what they've been waiting for, in some ways..

 

[Abinash117]

It will be a major mess, but the West getting involved will only increase that I think. At least with actual boots on the ground, air strikes, etc. Imagine a few American rockets hitting Mecca while supporting Egypt for example.

We'll probably ally ourselves with some party, but I hope stay out of it mostly if such a situation would occur.

Some countries will have to get involved in some form or another. Oil, western arms that SA have, and geographical locations are some of the things that will be at play here too. That also means terrorists groups, radicals, and possibly Saudi fundamentalists groups will arise to gain any sort of power. I wouldn't be surprised if the US doesn't get involved. This event possibly be a much bigger deal than anything to happen in generations and the consequences can be extremely worrying. Any country that has a good deal of influence collapsing is something that is worrying to a large degree.

 

[gutter_trash]

Still fucking that chicken?

or that chicken has been playing yall for suckers

 

[AuthenticM]

Twenty years from now the Obama administration is going to be looked back on as visionaries for their pivot towards repairing our relationship with Iran for this exact reason. In the long run Iran is much more likely to be stable and prosperous. Their people are better educated and their stance towards women, while still awful, is much more progressive than that of Saudi Arabia.

totally

 

[ApharmdX]

Interesting and fairly ruthless article from DefenseOne (Atlantic Media), penned by two well regarded researchers.



Chayes and De Wall pulling no punches. They talk big, but I don't think they are wrong.

The Arab Spring revealed that even the most developed Arab states remain deeply fragmented and clan-minded despite numerous attempts to spread some form of coherent nationalism to unite their countries. Religious and tribalistic lines remain as present as ever. Alliances are driven by economics instead political affinities, with large amounts of hard currency (being distributed among prominent families, chieftains and their numerous underlings in order to keep them in line) being the only common interest. This creates massive inefficiencies at all levels and rewards incompetence such as the one shown in Yemen, where the Saudi-led coalition keeps struggling against the Houthis despite its overwhelming technical and financial superiority.

While it doesn't look like the collapse of Saudi Arabia is set in stone yet, the risk is present and more nations should be taking precautionary measures. The fallout could be monumental when you consider the outflow of Saudi money (and thus influence) all over the region. Geopolitics abhors a power vacuum.

I'll read this later, but the premise seems correct to me. Some people believe that, if America aid and support falters even briefly, that Saudi Arabia's monarchy would be overthrown, and the country broken into warring groups of Islamic fundamentalists. SA seems like an artificial state, to me, propped up by America against the will of its people, and supported by unsustainable wealth.

The conclusion that democracy is the default model for emerging governments has been challenged by the post-Arab Spring ME, that's for sure. If it weren't for the loss of life and crazy oil increases that it would entail, or even despite those, I think that the United States should withdraw its support for the Saudi royals. To be allied with a government that treats its people so terribly, especially women, is unacceptable.

 

[RustyNails]

or that chicken has been playing yall for suckers

You just like to fuck it repeatedly like a robot despite being debunked countless times because it fits in your narrow, simplistic, child-like worldview. Every President has a picture with a Saudi Monarch dating back to FDR with King Faisal.

 

[GameAddict411]

I really hope it collapses and prosperity spreads in the region. The saudi government is as corrupt and evil as ISIS. The only difference is that the Saudi family has the money to hide and buy out the west which apparently is running out.

 

[Valhelm]

Care to elaborate?

Saudi individuals and the Saudi government are complicit in the spread of Wahhabism (aka "radical Islam") as well as much of the destabilization we're seeing in the Middle East. Last year, they invaded Yemen because they can't stand the idea of Shia Muslims possessing any power, and are currently building up for a conflict against Iran.

Saudi Arabia is socially one of the most right-wing states on the planet, depriving women, ethnic minorities, and non-Sunnis of privileges considered unalienable by developed democracies.

 

[Iorv3th]

the West is better off cutting Saudi Arabia off and resorting into developing their own sources of energy

it is time to cut them loose and move forward

We currently get around 13% of our oil from Saudi Arabia. The biggest supplier of foreign oil to the US is Canada. We actually export more oil than we import from saudi so we could just cut exports to replace that if needed.

 

[ZealousD]

You can't sustain a country on a single finite resource. The moment I learned how much money the government rains on their citizens from purely oil profits, I knew immediately that Saudi Arabia was going to explode in a massive way.

It's only a matter of time until the well dries up. When that happens, shit will get real.

 

[m_shortpants]

I despise the Saudi regime, but I do wonder what will happen to Mecca and Medina without then. Hajj would be a disaster, and I don't even know how it would be facilitated. Would be an international Muslim problem.

 

[G.ZZZ]

I don't think anyone want the collapse of the Saudi Kingdom. It will be the worst clusterfuck in ages if it ever happen. There are a tons of ideological extremists armed with nukes in the area, and the holy mecca would be the perfect opportunity for the diffent islamic sects to declare holy and total war to each other.

Just no.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I don't think anyone want the collapse of the Saudi Kingdom. It will be the worst clusterfuck in ages if it ever happen. There are a tons of ideological extremists armed with nukes in the area, and the holy mecca would be the perfect opportunity for the diffent islamic sects to declare holy and total war to each other.

Just no.

Outside of Israel and Pakistan, who has nukes in the neighborhood?

 

[Valhelm]

Outside of Israel and Pakistan, who has nukes in the neighborhood?

The United States, France, Britain, and Russia.

Iran and Saudi Arabia both desire nuclear weapons. Many American missiles are stored in Turkey and could potentially be seized by the Turkish government.