War seems to make for strange bedfellows, and with the war of aggression that Bush so disasterously made on Iraq the bedfellows are strange indeed. Only a phenomenal screw-up like Bush and the neocons could have driven Saudi Arabia and Israel into each others arms.
According to Juan Cole (click here for the whole post, it's excellent as usual):
Meanwhile, a de facto Israeli-Saudi alliance appears to be building against Iran and the Shiites. Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz is now saying that the 2002 Beirut peace plan put forward by then crown prince--now King--Abdullah of Saudi Arabia must be the basis for going forward with an Arab-Israeli peace process. Abdullah got the Arab League to offer Israel full recognition and political and economic relations if only they'd go back to the 1967 borders and recognize a Palestinian state.
Wow.
More wows after the flip...
Juan continues:
At the time, then prime minister Ariel Sharon dismissed Abdullah's plan rather rudely. But now Israel has been bloodied by a Lebanon war that it lost on points to Hizbullah despite its clear military superiority. Bashar al-Asad of Syria pointed out that every generation of Arabs hates the Israelis more than its predecessors. Iran is emerging as a new hegemon in the eastern stretches of the Middle East.
Looks like the Israelis are more worried about Shiites than Sunnis, which makes sense since Hizbollah is, you guessed it, Shiite, and supported by, you guessed right again, Iran.
Looks like Israel is not to happy with Jimmy Baker's "Study" either:
I have been told that the Israeli leadership is extremely anxious about Iran becoming a nuclear power, and sullen about the outcome of the Lebanon war. They are further demoralized by the Baker-Hamilton Commission report, which calls for US talks with Iran. The Israeli leaders interpret this passage as a surrender by Washington to Iran's nuclear ambitions, and are preparing for the possibility that they might have to take on Iran themselves. This extreme anxiety about a nuclear Iran (which is at least 10 years away even if it is trying, according to the US National Intelligence Estimate) may have driven Olmert to make his gaffe of openly admitting that Israel has weapons of mass destruction. That gaffe has resulted in calls for his resignation. For one thing, in strict US law, it should result in sanctions by Congress. Olmert, battered by the outcome of the Lebanon War, and now accused of having loose lips of the sort that got Mordechai Vanunu an 18-year prison sentence, is desperate for a political breakthrough of the sort that might come from a realignment of Middle East politics.
Speaking of the recent Saudi threat to openly support the Sunni insurgency in Iraq if the US leaves, Juan notes:
Now the Saudis are openly saying that this new Cold War in the region could turn hot. If you don't own a bicycle, I'd buy one, because a regional war of the sort Saudi Arabia said it feared would potentially cut off 20 percent of the world's petroleum.
Uh oh.
Go read the whole thing at http://www.juancole.com/... - there's a whole lot more, including a discussion of the abrupt decampment of the Saudi ambassador to the US, who just left Washington with just a phone call of notification.
Btw, if you would like to see what Juan had to say a year ago about Iraq, you can watch my video interview of him here: http://RealityBasedTV.com - scroll down to the bottom of the page.
UPDATE: Juan just testified before the Kucinich-Paul Congressional hearing on civilian casualties in Iraq, and has a transcript here: http://www.juancole.com/... and the video is on the c-span archive here: http://www.c-span.org/... - scroll down to the bottom.