Follow us on social

google cta
Wald

Retired general's pro-Saudi op-eds didn't disclose financial incentives

Ret. Gen. 'Chuck' Wald regularly promoted a US policy favorable to Riyadh without disclosing his work for the kingdom's defense ministry.

Reporting | Washington Politics
google cta
google cta

Over four years, Ret. Air Force General Charles “Chuck” Wald published a series of op-eds with Reuters, NBC News, The Hill, and Newsweek in which he promoted weapons sales, U.S. security guarantees, and closer military cooperation with Saudi Arabia while simultaneously working as a security consultant for the kingdom’s defense ministry.

Readers were kept in the dark about this potential conflict of interest.

Over 500 retired U.S. military personnel, many of them, like Wald, high-ranking officers, were approved by the State Department to conduct work for foreign governments, according to recently released records obtained as a result of Freedom of Information Act lawsuits by The Washington Post and the Project on Government Oversight, or POGO.

Saudi Arabia, the focus of the Post’s reporting on 15 retired U.S. generals and admirals working as contractors for the kingdom’s defense ministry since 2016, reveals a stark example of how mainstream media outlets provide a platform for foreign policy hawks without disclosing their potential conflicts of interest when publishing op-eds whose arguments appear to benefit their foreign clients. 

The State Department approved Wald to work as an independent security consultant for Ironhand Security, LLC, in Saudi Arabia from March 2017 to September 2021.

The Post reported on October 18th that:

Wald, 74, spent 35 years in the Air Force, including as deputy commander of U.S. forces in Europe and as a forward air controller and F-16 pilot who flew in combat in Vietnam and Bosnia. He headed Jones Group International’s business in the Middle East until last year. In an interview, he said he felt it was important to help the Saudis improve their military so the United States didn’t have to act as their primary protector. “It’s time for the U.S. not to be doing all the defense of the Middle East,” he said.

In its account POGO also noted that:

Within months of receiving approval to work for Ironhand, Wald regularly published op-eds for various media outlets such as Politico, The Hill, and The Wall Street Journal, opining on U.S. policy in the Middle East. It is unclear if Ironhand paid Wald, how much he was compensated, or whether he disclosed the Saudi Arabian business relationship to media outlets seeking his opinion on U.S. foreign policy, though a review of his publications seems to suggest Wald was not forthcoming to his readership about this professional relationship. POGO contacted The Wall Street Journal, Politico, and The Hill to ask if these outlets were aware of Wald's foreign ties, but none replied prior to our publication deadline.

As reviewed by Responsible Statecraft, columns by Wald published by Reuters, NBC News, The Hill, Breaking Defense, and Newsweek appear to pose even more serious ethical issues as he explicitly promoted closer military cooperation and coordination with Saudi Arabia without disclosing his contract work with the kingdom’s defense ministry.

On November 1, 2017, for example, eight months after receiving authorization from the State Department to consult for the ministry, Wald co-authored an op-ed in Reuters with former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Eric Edelman, which argued that :

…Washington must take the lead in assembling a coherent regional coalition against Iran. This will require more concerted cooperation with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to develop robust missile defenses against Iran’s region-wide proliferation of advanced missiles.

A spokesperson for Reuters said that the company stopped publishing opinion pieces in 2018 but it “routinely asked columnists to disclose any conflicts of interest.” The spokesperson added that they have “found no records” for Wald and “no longer have anyone with first-hand knowledge of this at Reuters.”

Wald quickly repeated his calls for missile defense cooperation with Saudi Arabia in a December 6, 2017 oped, co-authored with Edelman and the president of the ultra-hawkish Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, Michael Makovsky in Breaking Defense:

In tandem, the United States should cooperate deeply with Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to interdict Iranian efforts to transfer weapons to Syria and its proxies, as well as build military bases and missile production facilities in Syria. This allied effort should involve integrating missile defense capabilities to counter the rising missile threat from Syria.

And again, in a September 19, 2018 op-ed co-authored with Edelman in The Hill:

The United States, Saudi Arabia and U.A.E. should also pursue integrated missile defense and shared early warning systems, including joint command and control centers, and Washington should articulate explicit military backing for Saudi Arabia and U.A.E. against direct Iranian attack.

Following the October 2018 murder in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul of Jamal Khashoggi by an assassination squad believed by the CIA to have acted at the behest of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, Wald and Makovsky took to the pages of Newsweek to argue that public and congressional outrage at the murder of the Post columnist risked obscuring the more seroius threat posed by Iran:

Iran’s recent nuclear-capable ballistic missile test exploded three myths popular in Washington: that missile development was forbidden by the 2015 Iran nuclear deal; that Saudi Arabia’s reckless and heinous killing of Jamal Khashoggi represents the most pressing regional threat to the United States; and that U.S. sanctions are addressing Iran’s growing missile threat. The United States should offer a more robust approach to addressing that threat, including developing a regional missile defense capability for our Middle Eastern partners.

And the following year, when Saudi Arabia and the UAE initiated a blockade of neighboring Qatar, Wald offered this advice in an op-ed published by NBC News:

In June 2017, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt all cut formal relations with Qatar because they recognized that their Gulf neighbor must make the choice that I am urging the U.S. to make as well.” He went on to urge Washington to consider moving U.S. forces based at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar to “other regional partners such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE or even Jordan.

Wald’s hawkish, pro-Saudi views on the U.S. role in the Middle East pre-date the op-eds published during the period when he was working as a contractor for the Saudi military. As early as 2009, Wald published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal urging the U.S. military to attack nuclear facilities in Iran, Saudi Arabia’s regional arch-rival.  

But the failure by a former top U.S. military officer or by a publication that publishes his opinions about issues of direct interest to the Saudi defense ministry to disclose his relationship as a paid contractor to that ministry would appear to constitute a significant ethical breach and a serious conflict of interest, particularly when the views expressed by the officer are largely consistent with the ministry’s views. 

Aside from Reuters, none of the other publications responded to questions about whether Wald had disclosed his work for Saudi Arabia to editors. Wald did not respond to a request for comment submitted to the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs where he serves as a Distinguished Fellow and Senior Advisor.


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!

Image: screen grab via c-span.org
google cta
Reporting | Washington Politics
Von Der Leyen Zelensky
Top image credit: paparazzza / Shutterstock.com
The collapse of Europe's Ukraine policy has sparked a blame game

They are calling fast-track Ukraine EU bid 'nonsense.' So why dangle it?

Europe

Trying to accelerate Ukraine’s entry into the European Union makes sense as part of the U.S.-sponsored efforts to end the war with Russia. But there are two big obstacles to this happening by 2027: Ukraine isn’t ready, and Europe can’t afford it.

As part of ongoing talks to end the war in Ukraine, the Trump administration had advanced the idea that Ukraine be admitted into the European Union by 2027. On the surface, this appears a practical compromise, given Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s concession that Ukraine will drop its aspiration to join NATO.

keep readingShow less
World War II Normandy
Top photo credit: American soldiers march a group of German prisoners along a beachhead in Northern France after which they will be sent to England. June 6, 1944. (U.S. Army Signal Corps Photographic Files/public domain)

Marines know we don't kill unarmed survivors for a reason

Military Industrial Complex

As the Trump Administration continues to kill so-called Venezuelan "narco terrorists" through "non-international armed conflict" (whatever that means), it is clear it is doing so without Congressional authorization and in defiance of international law.

Perhaps worse, through these actions, the administration is demonstrating wanton disregard for centuries of Western battlefield precedent, customs, and traditions that righteously seek to preserve as many lives during war as possible.

keep readingShow less
Amanda Sloat
Top photo credit: Amanda Sloat, with Department of State, in 2015. (VOA photo/Wikimedia Commons)

Pranked Biden official exposes lie that Ukraine war was inevitable

Europe

When it comes to the Ukraine war, there have long been two realities. One is propagated by former Biden administration officials in speeches and media interviews, in which Russian President Vladimir Putin’s illegal invasion had nothing to do with NATO’s U.S.-led expansion into the now shattered country, there was nothing that could have been done to prevent what was an inevitable imperialist land-grab, and that negotiations once the war started to try to end the killing were not only impossible, but morally wrong.

Then there is the other, polar opposite reality that occasionally slips through when officials think few people are listening, and which was recently summed up by former Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Europe at the National Security Council Amanda Sloat, in an interview with Russian pranksters whom she believed were aides to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

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.