Skip to main content

Exploiting Khashoggi's assassination: the neoliberal predators hang over Saudi Arabia


A month ago we gathered some information to explain the sudden 180 degrees hostile turn by the Western neoliberal status quo against the current Saudi regime.

We discovered that the US corporate dictatorship and the Wall Street mafia heavily invested on the rapid neoliberalization of the Saudi Arabian economy, with the privatization of the state-owned oil company Aramco at the heart of this plan. Suddenly, Mohammed bin Salman decided to step back from the deal.

It would be worth to note that Aramco was standing at the top of the global list of the largest oil and gas companies for 2017 with a revenue of 465.49 billion US dollars.

It seems that the neoliberal regime didn't abort its plans concerning Saudi Arabia and silently seeks to "replace" bin Salman with a more faithful puppet, exploiting, of course, the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi.

Digging a little bit more, we found plenty of evidence in the Western mainstream media, in recent years, showing that this theory is quite plausible. Here are a few examples:

The neoliberal apparatus couldn't hide its enthusiasm for the big news as in July, 2016, Bloomberg reported:

           When news broke in January that Saudi Arabia was considering an initial public offering of its state-owned oil company, the first reaction on Wall Street was shock. Then calls began pouring into Dubai — the Middle East’s financial hub — from senior bankers in London and New York. Investment banks around the world are clamoring to join what promises to be a bonanza, and not just the IPO of Saudi Arabian Oil Co., or Aramco, which could be valued at upward of $2 trillion. The kingdom is planning to sell hundreds of state assets to bolster its finances and reduce its dependence on oil. That includes as much as $15 billion of bonds. Saudi Arabia looks even more promising with investment banking in a global slump and Britain’s vote to exit the European Union set to deter deal-making for months to come.

More than a year later, in September, 2017, the Guardian wrote:

           Saudi Arabia is lining up a privatisation of state assets that dwarfs the Thatcher “revolution” of the 1980s, and rivals the 1990s dissolution of Soviet assets in scale and significance. It has hung a “for sale” sign on virtually every sector of Saudi economic life: oil, electricity, water, transport, retail, schools and healthcare. Even the kingdom’s football clubs are due to be auctioned off. The sell-off programme is the central part of the economic transformation plan envisaged under the Vision 2030 strategy. With oil stuck around the $50 mark, Saudi budgets are creaking and deficits are widening. Around $75 is regarded as the break-even point for the national finances. But in 13 years, if all goes to plan, the kingdom will be financially stable, with a more dynamic economy and society, less reliance on oil and government spending, and with a thriving private sector that releases the pent-up entrepreneurial spirit of Saudi men and (whisper it in the kingdom) Saudi women.

Less than a year later, in August, 2018, the Saudi wet dream of the neoliberal predators was about to be spoiled by King Salman. The big agony of the neoliberal regime was expressed through Reuters:

           The king spoke, and a $2 trillion dream went up in smoke. For the past two years, Saudi Arabia has prepared to place up to 5 percent of its national oil company on the stock market. Officials talked up the Saudi Aramco initial public offering (IPO) with international exchanges, global banks and U.S. President Donald Trump. The planned listing was to be the cornerstone of the kingdom’s promised economic overhaul and, at a targeted $100 billion, the biggest IPO ever. It was the brainchild of 32-year-old Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, heir apparent of the world’s largest oil exporter. But after months of setbacks, the international and domestic legs of the IPO were pulled. The reason: the prince’s father King Salman stepped in to shelve it, three sources with ties to government insiders told Reuters. The decision came after the king met with family members, bankers, and senior oil executives, including a former Aramco CEO, said one of the sources, who requested anonymity. Those consultations took place during Ramadan, which ended in the middle of June. The king’s interlocutors told him that the IPO, far from helping the kingdom, would undermine it. Their main concern was that an IPO would bring full public disclosure of Aramco’s financial details, the sources said.

It is possible that the more experienced King Salman understood that such a brutal regime could not have a chance to survive without giving benefits and public jobs to the population. The fall of the biggest asset of the Saudi economy to the hands of the Western predators, as well as the subsequent neoliberalization of the economy, would deprive from the regime the advantage of giving benefits and keeping the population quiet.

On the other hand, we could not ignore the enormous hypocrisy of the Western media concerning Saudi Arabia and the war in Yemen. They almost buried the entire war and the war crimes by the Saudi coalition (in which the US participates) as long as the big plan for the big banks and corporations seemed to be going well.

At the beginning of the summer, the ruthless hypocrites in the Western media were even praising Mohammed bin Salman. In the midst of the war crimes in Yemen they presented him as a 'big reformer' who could bring some unprecedented liberties for the Saudi Arabian society, like, for example, the right for the women to drive. The news were circulated with the speed of light in all the major media outlets. Yet, not a single word about the war crimes in Yemen and the unprecedented humanitarian disaster.

But when Mohammed bin Salman decided to step back from the deal, following his father's decision, the war has started.

'Miraculously' the well-paid corporate media pundits suddenly discovered the atrocities in Yemen. However, it was a rather uncomfortable situation because it was impossible not to mention that the US supports the Saudi coalition in various ways.

So, the Western mainstream media grabbed the opportunity and focused on the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi. In the midst of continuing war crimes in Yemen - with thousands still dying from famine and cholera - the media turned all the lights to Khashoggi case for days, in order to use it as a more convenient 'tool' against Mohammed bin Salman. And they did it again. The story went viral.

Under these circumstances it would not surprise us if one day learn that Khashoggi's assassination was a CIA-type false flag operation.

In a latest move towards regime change in Saudi Arabia, some corporate puppets approved the advancement of a resolution to end the US support to the Saudi coalition.


But it seems that they exploited the sincere willing of some members, like Bernie Sanders, to end the disaster in Yemen. They left a loophole in the bill in order to permit any further US intervention under a more faithful puppet in the Saudi leadership. A successor of bin Salman who will revive the wet dream of the neoliberal predators.

The ringer tightens around Mohammed bin Salman. Lindsey Graham even lambasted him as “crazy” and said he would find it difficult to vote for future Saudi arms purchases. Graham had been an early critic of Trump, but then seemed to fall into line behind the president, but he is now bucking him on Saudi Arabia.

In the end, do you get the whole picture? Do you understand how ruthless these neoliberal predators are? It doesn't matter if you are their worst enemy, or, their most faithful ally. It doesn't matter if you are the most democratic government, or, the most brutal regime. Once you stop following their plans, once you demonstrate the slightest resistance, they will stab you in the back, they will turn the whole world against you, and, sooner or later, they will loot your country.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CIA had an agent at a newspaper in every world capital at least since 1977

Joel Whitney is a co-founder of the magazine Guernica, a magazine of global arts and politics, and has written for many publications, including the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. His book Finks: How the C.I.A. Tricked the World's Best Writers describes how the CIA contributed funds to numerous respected magazines during the Cold War, including the Paris Review, to subtly promote anti-communist views. In their conversation, Whitney tells Robert Scheer about the ties the CIA’s Congress for Cultural Freedom had with literary magazines. He talks about the CIA's attempt during the Cold War to have at least one agent in every major news organization in order to get stories killed if they were too critical or get them to run if they were favorable to the agency. And they discuss the overstatement of the immediate risks and dangers of communist regimes during the Cold War, which, initially, led many people to support the Vietnam War.
globinfo freexchange
James Jesus Angleton wa…

Former Pentagon official confirms: Trump prepares for war with Iran

globinfo freexchange
Right after Trump's sudden announcement that he will withdraw the US forces from Syria, we had some mixed reactions. Some liberals reacted angrily, but most of the reactions from the liberal machine were rather moderate, or at least not as intensive as someone would normally expect.
On the other hand, Trump's supporters and all those who had enough of the pro-war neoliberal establishment, felt a kind of vindication, as it appeared that Trump would eventually keep its promise for an 'anti-interventionist' policy.
But the blog wrote immediately a 'not so fast' article to explain that most of the Americans and all those who are tired of the US endless wars, should not rush to celebrate. We estimated that Trump's move is probably a sign that he is going to re-organize troops and go after the big target called Iran.
Indeed, shortly after the move, Trump, suddenly again, announced that he will also pullout troops from Afghanistan.
And then, about…

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 10 – How Margaret Thatcher systematically destroyed the British industry along with the trade unions
While there were many elements out of which consent for a neoliberal turn could be constructed, the Thatcher phenomenon would surely not have arisen, let alone succeeded, if it had not been for the serious crisis of capital accumulation during the 1970s. Stagflation was hurting everyone. In 1975 inflation surged to 26 per cent and unemployment topped one million. The nationalized industries were draining resources from the Treasury.
This set up a confrontation between the state and the unions. In 1972, and then again in 1974, the British miners (a nationalized industry) went on strike for the first time since 1926.
The miners had always been in the forefront of British labour struggles. Their wages were not keeping pace with accelerating inflation, and the public sympathized. The Conservative government, in the midst of power …

It’s the US imperialism that has been defeated in Syria, but it’s now gathering forces to go after Iran

globinfo freexchange
And all of a sudden, the US president Donald Trump decided to withdraw the US troops from Syria, declaring victory over ISIS.
No one, of course, understood why the ISIS was suddenly defeated now. So this must be a typical excuse by the American leadership to withdraw forces from a battlefield that it is no longer 'profitable' and affordable.
Comparing with other, relatively recent cases, in which even the liberal establishment was calling Trump to bomb Syria, the reactions from the US political status were rather moderate. We would expect the media pundits and the corporate puppets of the US political scene to fire back against Trump with much more anger. It didn't happen.
We will have to wait of course because the unpredictable Donnie may change his mind in the blink of an eye. And then, we will have to make a completely different discussion. Yet, if it's true, and the US troops will, indeed, leave Syria, it would be one of these very rare cases that …

The desperate efforts of the Western neoliberal establishment to build a new propaganda machine

globinfo freexchange
The UK government and other Western governments and the US in recent years have had increasing difficulties persuading enough of their populations as to the legitimacy of the foreign policies that they have been pursuing.
And at the same time, Western countries have been going through a period of political crisis and economic crisis.
Piers Robinson, Chair in Politics, Society and Political Journalism at the University of Sheffield, further explains:
I think a lot of this drive is as much about trying to shore up shaky official narratives and trying to shore up political systems in a situation of political crisis, as it is actually about countering Russian propaganda.
I would suspect that that's a little bit of an excuse here to really what's going on of problems much closer to home.
This is not just to do to UK, this is Europe-wide. And there are also indications from the documents that they are intending to start to have some kind of impact within the United…

Confirmed: Germany builds its own imperialist empire

globinfo freexchange
Almost two years ago we identified Germany's efforts to develop its military in the context of its ambition to build its own sphere of influence.
As we wrote, Brexit will give the chance to Germany to increase influence due to the change of power balance, especially now that France appears weak - crawling behind Berlin's austerity, sado-monetarism and neoliberal destruction. These conditions (created in the Greek experiment), are necessary to Germany in order to retain a model in favor of its surpluses. These could become the solid ground upon which Germany could build a strong, modern military machine.
Therefore, Merkel knows that the economic domination is not adequate for a country to become a major power. It is also important to have a strong military presence in its “sphere of influence”, or, its financial/debt colonies, if you prefer. The German military presence in Lithuania is a first step towards this direction as the Baltic countries have already be…

The difference between Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn and what the US elections won't allow you to decide

globinfo freexchange
A country that has been completely taken over by the banking mafia and the corporate power will never allow people to decide on the most important issue: the abolition of the dominant system that works against them.
Professor Richard Wolff explains:
Because of Bernie Sanders, particularly, we now have the word Socialism floating around, but typically it's about, more or less, really among Democrats. Like Mr. Sanders is ambiguously an independent but he's also a Democrat.
So, the ‘Socialists’ seemed to be the Democrats who want to do more for people. Social welfare, social supports, state supports, versus those who don't want to do quite so much - the centrist Democrats, like Clinton and Obama.
But the real question is a program of change. Socialism is a change of system it goes away from capitalism to do something else. It would be interesting if we could have an election ‘do we want that?’, ‘would we like a different system?’.
There are countries doing t…

WikiLeaks disturbing and hopeful findings on Tulsi Gabbard's path to progressiveness

The definite detachment from the Clintonian machine
globinfo freexchange
Searching the Podesta emails inside WikiLeaks we found a rather disturbing fact about Tulsi Gabbard who recently announced that she will run for the 2020 US presidency. Iraq War Veteran, Jon Soltz, chairman at VoteVets at the time, sent an email on Aug. 2012 to Hillary Clinton top lobbyist, John Podesta, in order to thank him for his contribution to Gabbard's campaign in Hawaii.
Soltz wrote (emphasis added):
This morning, we are one step closer to making history. In Hawaii, VoteVets PAC-endorsed Iraq veteran Tulsi Gabbard has won her primary, in a stunning come-from-behind victory. If she wins in November, she along with Tammy Duckworth (who we also feel very good about), would be the first female combat veteran ever elected to Congress in United States history! This is happening because of you. Your tens of thousands of dollars in donations for Tulsi's campaign, through VoteVets PAC, allowed her to run a fir…

The IMF is dismantling Argentina all over again

Part 1
In September, Argentine president Mauricio Macri accepted the 2018 Atlantic Council’s Global Citizen Award. In attendance were many of world’s neoliberal power players and policy makers, among them International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Christine Lagarde.
Facing the crowd, Macri gleefully admitted that “with Christine, I have to confess we started a great relationship some months ago,” referring to a series of loan agreements with the IMF amounting to $57.1 billion dollars. “I expect that this is going to work very well, and we will end up with the whole country crushing on Christine,” he continued.
This dynamic of chasing an improved image with the world’s big banks and the dominant economies in the West is emblematic of Macri’s priority to secure a relationship with the IMF and improve the country’s image with global financial institutions. But it comes at a devastating cost for the majority of the population who will suffer from neoliberal policy prescriptions of…

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 11 – The Reagan/Thatcher neoliberal legacy: a bizarre form of a sinister political doctrine from which it would be difficult one to escape
But Thatcher had to fight the battle on other fronts. A noble rearguard action against neoliberal policies was mounted in many a municipality –– Sheffield, the Greater London Council (which Thatcher had to abolish in order to achieve her broader goals in the 1980s), and Liverpool (where half the local councillors had to be gaoled) formed active centres of resistance in which the ideals of a new municipal socialism (incorporating many of the new social movements in the London case) were both pursued and acted upon until they were finally crushed in the mid-1980s.
She began by savagely cutting back central government funding to the municipalities, but several of them responded simply by raising property taxes, forcing her to legislate against their right to do so. Denigrating the progressive…