June 27, 2008

THE SIDES:

Feeding the Sectarian Frenzy (Mshari Al-Zaydi, 6/26/08, asharq alawasat)

According to the Lebanese newspaper Al-Nahar, Al-Musawi attacked Saudi Arabia without naming it, saying, "This Gulf country is financing the sectarian sedition in Lebanon". Al-Musawi added, "The problem is that this is a political battle that this Gulf country is waging and it should know that it cannot transform Lebanon into an emirate appended to the emirates that it controls" as he referred to the formula of Lebanese co-existence among its sects. This is what was said - from north of the Arabian Peninsula- by one of the leaders of the Iranian-Lebanese party whose master [Hassan Nasrallah] admitted that he was a follower of Waliyat el Faqih. So what was said from south of the Arabian Peninsula and almost in the same week?

In inconsistent remarks to the weekly Yemeni newspaper Al-Wasat (on 18 June) following the recent battles with the Yemeni army, Abdul Malik al-Huthi, the field commander of the Al-Huthist insurgents in the northern mountains of Yemen and the strongholds of Al-Zaydiyah in Sa'dah and elsewhere, said: "The Saudis are hostile to us although we are not their enemies. But their participation in the aggression against us with money and other things force us to treat them like enemies. We have many options and various files that we can revive and raise alongside other Yemeni files". Al-Huthi added: "But so far we have not declared war". In a statement to the Yemeni newspaper Al-Nida on 12 June, Al-Huthi accused Saudi Arabia of "involvement in shedding Yemeni blood to placate the United States". He warned that if Saudi Arabia's aggressive behavior continues, "We may be driven to classify it as an enemy". Abdul Malik al-Huthi also expressed to Al-Wasat his deep admiration for the Iranian state and its policies saying that he supports these policies.

The fact is that the criticism of Saudi intervention by Al-Musawi or Al-Huthi is like trying to block the sunlight with a sieve. Regardless of the true source of corruption and harmful interference - that is Iran - and even if we agree with them that Saudi Arabia is the biggest corrupter and interventionist in Lebanon and Yemen, why is Saudi intervention viewed as an evil deed of the devil while Iran's intervention is deemed sweeter than rainwater?


Because the Sa'uds are consistently opposed to consensual government?

Posted by Orrin Judd at June 27, 2008 8:29 AM
blog comments powered by Disqus
« FREE MARKETS REQUIRE INTELLIGENT DESIGN: | Main | WHICH MAKES CALLING IT AN EPIDEMIC A LIE: »