Posts
GOP Finds A Saudi Problem, Finally
Obama's choice of Charles Freeman to chair the National Intelligence Council has generated some criticism. Freeman is known as a devout realist which places him on the opposite end of the spectrum as the neoconservative scum that once lurked in the halls of the White House. John Chait opined in the WaPo editorial that an extreme realist approach has earned Freeman the ire of the pro-Israeli groups on the right and left.
The latest knock on Freeman comes from a group of newly enlightened GOP House members who are concerned about his ties to Saudi Arabia. John Boehner and nine of his colleagues have requested a review on the new chairman's affiliation with the Saudi Government. In their words:
Freeman's past and current commercial, financial and contractual ties to the Kingdom to ensure no conflict of interest exists in his new position.
Yes, Freeman ran a think tank called the Middle East Policy center that received money from Saudi interests. He was also the ambassador to the Kingdom from 1989-1992. Naturally his concentration in middle east policy has placed him in the same orbit as Saudi stakeholders.
Never mind that the guy who occupied the presidency for the past eight years had his head up the royal family's dishdasha. Never mind that his father and his father's father were tightly intertwined in Saudi business ventures involving oil. In fact entire books have been written on the Bush family's close ties to the House of Saud. As far as I know Freeman doesn't have an adoptive cousin named Bandar.
So why now is having an affiliation with the Saudis an issue? Is the GOP just trying to shore up its stance among Jewish voters. Did protecting Saudi hegemony through military and diplomatic maneuvering suddenly go out of style the minute W. left office? It looks like the GOP's foreign policy agenda is as spastic as it's domestic offerings as of late.
The latest knock on Freeman comes from a group of newly enlightened GOP House members who are concerned about his ties to Saudi Arabia. John Boehner and nine of his colleagues have requested a review on the new chairman's affiliation with the Saudi Government. In their words:
Freeman's past and current commercial, financial and contractual ties to the Kingdom to ensure no conflict of interest exists in his new position.
Yes, Freeman ran a think tank called the Middle East Policy center that received money from Saudi interests. He was also the ambassador to the Kingdom from 1989-1992. Naturally his concentration in middle east policy has placed him in the same orbit as Saudi stakeholders.
Never mind that the guy who occupied the presidency for the past eight years had his head up the royal family's dishdasha. Never mind that his father and his father's father were tightly intertwined in Saudi business ventures involving oil. In fact entire books have been written on the Bush family's close ties to the House of Saud. As far as I know Freeman doesn't have an adoptive cousin named Bandar.
So why now is having an affiliation with the Saudis an issue? Is the GOP just trying to shore up its stance among Jewish voters. Did protecting Saudi hegemony through military and diplomatic maneuvering suddenly go out of style the minute W. left office? It looks like the GOP's foreign policy agenda is as spastic as it's domestic offerings as of late.
Powered by ScribeFire.
No comments:
Post a Comment