Follow us on social

google cta
Screen-shot-2022-06-03-at-12.14.47-pm

Biden plans visit to Saudi Arabia, hat in hand

MBS is playing hardball with the United States, and the White House is just letting him win. Why?

Analysis | Middle East
google cta
google cta

Last night, the New York Times broke the news that President Biden plans to travel this Summer to Saudi Arabia, effectively signaling the administration’s intent to end its paltry efforts to correct the Kingdom’s destabilizing behavior in return for limited promises on oil production. 

Traveling to Riyadh now, hat in hand, is akin to slapping a bargain bandaid on the gaping wound that the U.S.-Saudi relationship has become.

Clearly, America should be working to build a healthier relationship with Saudi Arabia, but that simply isn’t possible unless and until the United States confronts the deep dysfunction at the core of that relationship — a dysfunction defined by the blind eye the U.S. has turned to Saudi’s support for Jihadi terrorism, the spread of Wahhabism, and other reckless and inexcusable actions, like the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamaal Khashoggi.

Biden’s decision to meet with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) without first having secured an end to this destabilizing behavior significantly weakens the United States’ hand.

Applauding MBS’ “courage” for supporting a ceasefire in a war the Saudi Crown Prince himself started — and to use that as a pretext for the presidential meeting — speaks to Biden’s desperation to lower gas prices, as well as to our need to end this dependency on Saudi Arabia.

Let’s also be clear about one thing: This is not the victory of realism over values. Such an assertion erroneously presumes that realpolitik necessitates Biden prostrating himself in front of MBS to push down oil prices. It does not. If oil prices are really the driving force behind this, then Biden should have just gone back into the Iran nuclear deal through an executive order, instead of — for all practical purposes — continuing Trump’s maximum pressure strategy.

The combination of Iranian oil coming back onto the market as well as the immediate influx of more than 50 million barrels of oil that Tehran has in storage but hasn’t been able to sell because of U.S. sanctions, would cause both a better short-term and long-term reduction of oil prices. All Biden needed to do is to go back to the deal his former boss Barack Obama already negotiated.

Instead, Biden has chosen to play a self-defeating game with Iran which in turn has made him desperate enough to cave into MBS. (This would also have put Europe in a much better position as it is desperately trying to reduce its dependence on Russian gas and oil).

Rather than rebuilding relations with Riyadh, Biden’s approach will likely exacerbate the long-standing problems in US-Saudi relations. It will increase our dependence on the  kingdom, which has long given its rulers carte blanche to act against American interests in the Middle East and beyond. 

MBS is playing hardball with the United States—and Biden just let him win.


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

President Joe Biden (Shutterstock/Trevor Bexon) and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (US State Department)
google cta
Analysis | Middle East
Gaza tent city
Top photo credit: Palestinian Mohammed Abu Halima, 43, sits in front of his tent with his children in a camp for displaced Palestinians in Gaza City, Gaza, on December 11, 2025. Matrix Images / Mohammed Qita

Four major dynamics in Gaza War that will impact 2026

Middle East

Just ahead of the New Year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to visit President Donald Trump in Florida today, no doubt with a wish list for 2026. Already there have been reports that he will ask Trump to help attack Iran’s nuclear program, again.

Meanwhile, despite the media narrative, the war in Gaza is not over, and more specifically, it has not ended in a clear victory for Netanyahu’s IDF forces. Nor has the New Year brought solace to the Palestinians — at least 71,000 have been killed since October 2023. But there have been a number of important dynamics and developments in 2025 that will affect not only Netanyahu’s “asks” but the future of security in Israel and the region.

keep readingShow less
Sokoto Nigeria
Top photo credit: Map of Nigeria (Shutterstock/Juan Alejandro Bernal)

Trump's Christmas Day strikes on Nigeria beg question: Why Sokoto?

Africa

For the first time since President Trump publicly excoriated Nigeria’s government for allegedly condoning a Christian genocide, Washington made good on its threat of military action on Christmas Day when U.S. forces conducted airstrikes against two alleged major positions of the Islamic State (IS-Sahel) in northwestern Sokoto state.

According to several sources familiar with the operation, the airstrike involved at least 16 GPS-guided munitions launched from the Navy destroyer, USS Paul Ignatius, stationed in the Gulf of Guinea. Debris from unexpended munition consistent with Tomahawk cruise missile components have been recovered in the village of Jabo, Sokoto state, as well nearly 600 miles away in Offa in Kwara state.

keep readingShow less
What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?
Top image credit: Voodison328 via shutterstock.com

What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?

Global Crises

Earlier this month in Geneva, delegates to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty’s 22nd Meeting of States Parties confronted the most severe crisis in the convention’s nearly three-decade history. That crisis was driven by an unprecedented convergence of coordinated withdrawals by five European states and Ukraine’s attempt to “suspend” its treaty obligations amid an ongoing armed conflict.

What unfolded was not only a test of the resilience of one of the world’s most successful humanitarian disarmament treaties, but also a critical moment for the broader system of international norms designed to protect civilians during and after war. Against a background of heightened tensions resulting from the war in Ukraine and unusual divisions among the traditional convention champions, the countries involved made decisions that will have long-term implications.

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.