Follow us on social

google cta
49517942356_438c0185f1_k

Ilhan Omar wants MBS sanctioned under Magnitsky Act

The Minnesota Democrat doesn't think there's been enough done to punish the Saudi Crown Prince for Jamal Khashoggi's murder.

North America
google cta
google cta

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D–Minn.) has proposed an amendment that could expose Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman’s private businesses to sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act.

Omar’s amendment would strengthen the Khashoggi Accountability Act, currently up for consideration by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, to include potential economic penalties on Saudi officials.

In February, the Biden administration declassified a U.S. intelligence report on the assassination of Saudi-American journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The report points the finger at the crown prince, often known by his initials MBS, but the Biden administration has declined to impose sanctions on him, citing the need to preserve the U.S.-Saudi relationship.

In response, Omar and Rep. Tom Malinowski (D–N.J.) proposed bills that would force the administration to move against the crown prince.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee chose last week to move forward with Malinowski’s Khashoggi Accountability Act, which imposes a travel ban but not economic penalties on Saudi officials mentioned in the U.S. intelligence report on Khashoggi’s murder.

Omar’s amendment to that bill would require the U.S. State Department to issue a report within six months all private organizations and businesses owned in whole or in part by those officials, including MBS.

The State Department would have to certify whether those organizations played a role in Khashoggi’s murder or “any other gross violations of internationally recognized human rights,” and whether those organizations are subject to sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act.

The Global Magnitsky Act, passed in 2016 in memory of a lawyer who died in Russian police custody, imposes economic penalties and a visa ban on foreign officials “responsible for extrajudicial killings, torture, or other gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.”

As Responsible Statecraft had previously reported, two private planes owned by the Saudi government’s sovereign wealth fund were used to transport the kill team that eventually murdered Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

In addition to Malinowski’s bill, the Saudi government is also facing a lawsuit from Khashoggi’s widow and a human rights organization founded by Khashoggi before his death.

“In practice, this will be a way to create real consequences for MbS and other Saudi officials who were involved in the Khashoggi murder beyond what they’ve got so far,” Jeremy Slevin, a spokesperson for Omar’s office, wrote in an email to Responsible Statecraft.


Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) (Flicker/Creative Commons/Gage Skidmore)
google cta
North America
Colby: Israel is fighting a different war in Iran
Top image credit: Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby speaks at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee. (Screengrab via armed-services.senate.gov)

Colby: Israel is fighting a different war in Iran

QiOSK

The U.S. is pursuing “scoped and reasonable objectives” in its military campaign against Iran and is not seeking regime change through force, argued Undersecretary of Defense Elbridge Colby in a Tuesday Senate hearing.

When pressed about why the campaign began with the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Colby declined to comment directly. “I’m talking about the goals of the American military campaign,” he told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Those are Israeli operations.”

keep readingShow less
US missiles
Top photo credit: . DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Vince Parker, U.S. Air Force.

Trump: We have 'unlimited' weapons to fight 'forever' war

QiOSK

In a startling Truth Social post overnight on Monday, President Donald Trump defied reality and claimed that U.S. weapons were "unlimited" and the U.S. could fight "forever" with "these supplies."


keep readingShow less
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.