Add this to the long list of actions by the Saudis demonstrating that they are probably the most unambiguously evil government in the world. But they seldom get any criticism from mainstream US media and politicians because of the Saudis' vast oil resources. Imagine how much better off the world would be today had the US government chosen to topple the Saudis after 9/11 (for which everyone knows they were actually responsible) instead of pursuing irrelevant boondoggles in Iraq and Afghanistan. Funding for Sunni terrorists would have been disrupted which probably would have had a far greater impact to reduce global terrorism than anything else the US did. Hell, even the neocons just in it for oil would have been happy with that.
I’d agree that the Saudi Arabia does many bad things, but “probably the most unambiguously evil government in the world” is quite a stretch. Russia is currently throwing conscripts into an unprovoked war in Ukraine. Meanwhile, China has millions of people in ‘re-education’ camps, and supports North Korea, which is itself basically a slave-state. There are also a number of very troubling states throughout central Africa and Asia, such as Afghanistan, which is descending further into government-led disaster.
If you think Saudi Arabia doesn't rely on modern slave labor I would urge you to learn more about their treatment of immigrants.
And there is simply no comparing the status of women in China or Russia to Saudi Arabia.
Combine that with Saudi Arabia's barbaric public beheadings and you're talking about a modern dystopia that many in the US would rather ignore out of convenience. Another common response is to distract from their crimes by hyping up other bogeymen in more direct competition with the US.
Qualifying state-level evil at these scales is invitation for bickering and reductionism. Saudi Arabia is indistinguishable enough from the most evil regimes in power today that one can have a reasonable argument about whether it belongs there. That sets it apart in degree from America and, I would argue, China, and in kind from Iceland or Canada.
Your comment is a textbook example of the asymmetry of media coverage and framing around Saudi Arabia vs US foes.
See:
- saudis treatment of immigrant labor.
- saudis treatment of women.
- saudis war in Yemen.
- extrajudicial killings and imprisonment of journalists.
- etc.
For every criticism you cite against a US enemy/competitor, one can find an analogy in Saudi.
Every armed conflict is a threat to civilian lives. Had the Russians not invaded Ukraine in 2014, not long after failing to install a pro-Russian administration in Kiev, there would have been no armed conflict. Yes, minorities in Ukraine had rights and protections left over from the Soviet era that were revoked after the 2014 invasion. The radicalization of Ukrainian society happened precisely because of Russia's 2014 invasion and 2022 war. Any attempt on the part of Ukraine to join the EU would imply the reinstatement of minority rights and protections in a way that is compatible with EU legislation.
What do you mean by “failing to install a pro-Russian administration in Kiev”? The Maidan revolution (some call it coup) forced out the elected president which was perhaps pro-Russia but mostly just corrupt, as were most Ukrainian politicians. He at least had the right idea of having Ukraine act as a neutral country between two power blocs.
As for minority rights, Ukraine doesn’t seem to be in a hurry to restore them, as repeatedly criticized by Hungary and Romania. Ukraine is becoming a very nationalist, illiberal state, the odds of it joining the EU are slim to none.
Your link doesn’t reference any poisonings and the event you’re referring to is old history at this point, I’m not sure why you’re bringing it up. I thought you were talking about Yanukovich in your original comment, since you kept mentioning 2014 and now you’ve jumped back to 2004.
What 2014 invasion? The annexation of Crimea (which in historical terms has never really been part of Ukraine anyway) was certainly NOT an invasion. The referendum, which had some international observers, was overwhelmingly in favor of joining Russia. Russia took that step in response to Victoria Nuland and the US installing a puppet government.
> suppose that shelling civilians doesn’t equate with murder in your book?
No, war = murder hasn’t been a hot take for millennia, but I appreciate your throwing in the HRW link claiming “Russia-backed armed groups in Donetska and Luhanska regions continued to torture, arbitrarily detain, and forcibly disappear civilians” as purported evidence of Ukraine’s war crimes [1].
I’m not saying that the locals are innocent. They have done plenty of bad things, that’s usually how insurgencies go. The rest of that article clearly implicated the national government in worse, especially in terms of scale.
My question was: I heard claims that Ukraine was murdering Russian-speaking minority in Donbass before the Russian invasion and that this was the justification for the invasion. Are there serious independent sources that can prove or disprove this claim?
> My question was: I heard claims that Ukraine was murdering Russian-speaking minority in Donbass before the Russian invasion
Define 'minority' in context of Donbas. It's overwhelmingly Russian-speaking.
> and that this was the justification for the invasion.
Well, define 'murdering' then[0]. Both sides would claim the civilian deaths on the opposing side. If you are asking about specific actions of anyone actually murdering people (ie not from the direct circumstances of war) then I can't help you, too much to sift through, though OSCE reports would be the main 3rd-party resource to get this info, especially if you search for 'torture'.
After the US-backed coup of 2014, when the West ramped up weapons and training for the far right, especially the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion which now controls the central government and thwarted Zelensky’s initial attempts to make good on his peace platform that he was elected on.
You can be a woman and own land, drive vehicles, have a job, etc in those countries. You cannot do this in Saudi Arabia. You are under religious zealots whom will imprison and kill for saying anything against their beliefs/God. While Russia and china are somewhat along these lines, it's not to the same level.
One of the contradictions of Mohammed Bin Salman (the current Crown Prince of Saudi, known as MBS) is that while he is violent authoritarian that has been cracking down on civil rights/dissent he has been affording women more rights.
Driving ban ending doesn't mean the culture has. Saudis are not progressive, they spend a lot of money ensuring they look progressive. In reality we rarely if ever get to see what it's truly like.
Russia and China absolutely are not 'somewhat' comparable to Saudi Arabia, which did not even attempt to develop a legal system (almost all crimes were punished arbitrarily) until recently.
This is, as pointed out in the 13th amendment, not correct. Slavery is only conditionally banned, and it continues under official policy. Millions are still enslaved in the US.
So, do we agree that personal interests are more important than human rights for the US government? I don't agree with that view but at least it's honest to admit it.
> I don't like it but without SA, what allies does the US even have in the area?
> I wish Iraq would have turned out differently.
US doesn't have allies, like every empire it has interests. Sometimes this interests overlap with other entities (be it countries, or not). This interests can be long term, but sooner or later interests change and suddenly entities no longer have any support ( or become enemies). And US have no qualms doing so.
So is the claim that countries like the KSA are American vassals rather than its allies? I mean, as I understand it, an empire consists of multiple countries.
America does consist of multiple countries. Please consider that the United States acquired most of it’s territory at the expense of Native Americans¹ which are officially “domestic dependent nations”².
For me empire is a country that can easily project their ideology, political/economic will and military streanght outside of its boarders. And does it. For example selling cheap clothes or taxing tea and when people disagree they find their face on the reciving end of a rifle butt.
Better don't read why evangelicals support Israel so much. Or what evangelicals think will happen to Israel after their interest are meet. This interests are deranged and will never happen but people believe in them
and act to fulfill them.
I was wondering if five eyes could be counted as allies, but...
If you think Saudi the most evil government you should consider US itself somewhere on the same line for all the things it has been doing on lots of foreign soils.
I think any non-Muslim force invading Saudi Arabia would quickly find they are fighting most of the Muslim world, including parts of their own Muslim populations. Because Mecca is in Saudi Arabia and it would be very easy to spin an invasion into an attack on the religion itself.
Would the USD and by extension the USA even be possible (in their current powerful form) without SA creating a world wide artificial demand for the USD by selling oil denoted in USD?
Isn't that the essence of why Saudi Arabia gets to do whatever they want without the world police interfering?
> they are probably the most unambiguously evil government in the world.
Compared to the many US invasions and their support of the occupation in Plaestine or Russia and what they are doing in Syria, Libya and many other countries or China's brain washing Muslims, they are nothing.
Thats without talking about North Korea of course, which are on a whole new level.
Saudi Arabia being attacked by the west would be a disaster that would ignite the whole Muslim world. Al-Qaeda portrayed almost every western action, even the Red Cross being in the middle east, as an action by an invading 'crusader' force that wanted to destroy Islam.
Could you imagine the credibility this would give them, considering the location of Mecca?
74 comments
[ 4.1 ms ] story [ 191 ms ] threadAnd there is simply no comparing the status of women in China or Russia to Saudi Arabia.
Combine that with Saudi Arabia's barbaric public beheadings and you're talking about a modern dystopia that many in the US would rather ignore out of convenience. Another common response is to distract from their crimes by hyping up other bogeymen in more direct competition with the US.
See: - saudis treatment of immigrant labor. - saudis treatment of women. - saudis war in Yemen. - extrajudicial killings and imprisonment of journalists. - etc.
For every criticism you cite against a US enemy/competitor, one can find an analogy in Saudi.
I know I shouldn’t ask, but curious for a source painting what’s going on in the Donbas as Ukraine murdering its own.
https://www.crisisgroup.org/content/conflict-ukraines-donbas...
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/ukrai...
As for minority rights, Ukraine doesn’t seem to be in a hurry to restore them, as repeatedly criticized by Hungary and Romania. Ukraine is becoming a very nationalist, illiberal state, the odds of it joining the EU are slim to none.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-20120888
Please [1].
On a related note, Siberia wasn’t historically part of Russia and I think it’s fine time they separated [2].
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referend...
[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_Republic
No, war = murder hasn’t been a hot take for millennia, but I appreciate your throwing in the HRW link claiming “Russia-backed armed groups in Donetska and Luhanska regions continued to torture, arbitrarily detain, and forcibly disappear civilians” as purported evidence of Ukraine’s war crimes [1].
[1] https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/ukrai...
I will. This is Russia stirring shit.
> rest of that article clearly implicated the national government in worse
Where? Every paragraph that implicates Kyiv cites both sides. I suppose we’ll also ignore who gunned down MH17 with Kremlin-supplied weaponry?
So the people living in the Donbas aren't Ukrainians?
Define 'minority' in context of Donbas. It's overwhelmingly Russian-speaking.
> and that this was the justification for the invasion.
Well, define 'murdering' then[0]. Both sides would claim the civilian deaths on the opposing side. If you are asking about specific actions of anyone actually murdering people (ie not from the direct circumstances of war) then I can't help you, too much to sift through, though OSCE reports would be the main 3rd-party resource to get this info, especially if you search for 'torture'.
[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/07/25... Murder? Casualty of war?
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Countrie... p. 13
https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/ukraine07... p. 17
The name of the latter is quite telling.
Also: "enforced disappearance".
One of the contradictions of Mohammed Bin Salman (the current Crown Prince of Saudi, known as MBS) is that while he is violent authoritarian that has been cracking down on civil rights/dissent he has been affording women more rights.
More recently, access to Facebook and Youtube has mostly been restored. Schools have reopened in many cities.
Even president-for-life Trump was eventually removed from office in a relatively bloodless revolution.
This is, as pointed out in the 13th amendment, not correct. Slavery is only conditionally banned, and it continues under official policy. Millions are still enslaved in the US.
I wish Iraq would have turned out differently.
Saudi Arabia's GDP is worth double and quadruple those, respectively. However, that number isn't so far ahead as to be irreplaceable.
Relationships change, too. The movement in Iran now has the West's popular interest and support.
Yes? Is this in question? Obviously. That doesn’t make human rights irrelevant.
Egypt, Israel, Kuwait and Qatar. Less reliably: Jordan, the U.A.E. and Turkey. Not great, but not untenable.
> I wish Iraq would have turned out differently.
US doesn't have allies, like every empire it has interests. Sometimes this interests overlap with other entities (be it countries, or not). This interests can be long term, but sooner or later interests change and suddenly entities no longer have any support ( or become enemies). And US have no qualms doing so.
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/American_Empire
https://warontherocks.com/2015/08/is-america-an-empire/
There's lots of things pointing towards USA being considered an empire. It is of course open to debate.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Indian_Wars
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribal_sovereignty_in_the_Unit...
I was wondering if five eyes could be counted as allies, but...
I think you’ve learned the wrong lessons from the Iraq and Afghan wars.
Isn't that the essence of why Saudi Arabia gets to do whatever they want without the world police interfering?
Compared to the many US invasions and their support of the occupation in Plaestine or Russia and what they are doing in Syria, Libya and many other countries or China's brain washing Muslims, they are nothing.
Thats without talking about North Korea of course, which are on a whole new level.
Could you imagine the credibility this would give them, considering the location of Mecca?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2...
Note that the people jailed since 2020 are unpaid volunteers – not paid staff, as the headline implies.
https://dawnmena.org/saudi-arabia-government-agents-infiltra...