But even if I were to cede the political aspect, you can just as much make an economic argument. Thanks to western sanctions the Middle East are now the major suppliers of oil/gas.. If you control the supply, you control the prices. It doesn't need to be a complete shutdown in exports like the 70s, a simple reduction in production would have a bigger impact over a longer period.
That's very different from an embargo. Yes, that's feasible and it's very likely such cuts will be OPEC's policy going forward.
Arab governments. Religious fanaticism was fomented by these governments during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan to recruit
mujahideen. This was part of a broader American effort to use religion to attack the USSR and promote sedition within it. This support continued until very recently, when even the Saudi monarchy turned on their religious establishment. They finally understood that stoking Islamic fundamentalism won't get them any geopolitical results; it'll just nurture movements that want to overthrow them and drag their societies back to the dark ages.
Arab monarchies operate foreign policy for personal self interest only.
That's another of the myths I used to believe. The truth is that Arab monarchies and military dictatorships operate their foreign policy in the best interest of their states. Yes, they're corrupt and incompetent, but that doesn't negate the point that they're not running it for personal self-interest. The reason they're so authoritarian is that they "govern" populations that are stricken by religious fundamentalism, are poorly educated and economically useless, and entitled in the extreme. The Gulf monarchies can paper this problem over with money, the rest don't have that luxury.
That's why these states find the Muslim Brotherhood completely intolerable. Their brand of Democracy™ appeals to these populations because they're both extremely politically naïve and economically entitled. They believe liberal democracy is a magic wand that will transform their societies overnight from poverty-stricken dumps (at least the poor ones without the oil) to beacons of prosperity and progress. I often mock Indians for their delusion but the Arab "democrat" kind is on a different level.
They took the worst aspect of every system. All they got from capitalism was corruption and all they got from socialism was entitlement.
Either they are bribed to have relations with Israel (like Egypt and Jordan)
If I were Egypt or Jordan, would I rather have a stable, predictable, rational state on my border that I have an enduring peace that has lasted decades with or would I rather have
I think the answer is clear.
they are paranoid another Saddam will emerge among them and depend upon western arms and support.
Ultimately, they want peace and security which is a very legitimate aspiration. Too bad for them that they're in a bad neighbourhood.
the Mossad operative Epstein had a Saudi passport.
Interesting, this I didn't know. I'd like to see a well-sourced documentary about that guy instead of the usual rumourmongering, but I doubt anything like that will exist for some time.
There is a limit to what even dictators tolerate, every time Israel launches an operation against Palestinians it pisses off everyone in the Middle East.
Arab publics get more worked up over a football match than anything that happens to Palestinians.
