Follow us on social

google cta
Signal-2023-08-21-110137_002

As US mulls security pact, Saudi Arabia accused of crimes against humanity

Human Rights Watch says Riyadh has killed hundreds of migrants at its border with Yemen since March 2022.

Reporting | Washington Politics
google cta
google cta

Saudi border guards have killed hundreds of asylum seekers at the country’s border with Yemen using bombs and live fire, according to an explosive new report from Human Rights Watch, which says the attacks would amount to a “crime against humanity” if they were part of official regime policy.

Survivors of the alleged attacks described their experience in harrowing terms. One migrant said only seven of the 150 people they crossed with survived shelling with heavy weapons. “There were remains of people everywhere, scattered everywhere,” they told Human Rights Watch.

“They were firing big rocket launchers at us,” remembered another survivor. “It was like a bomb. From the 250 people [in the group crossing], 150 died.”

Others accused border guards of firing on migrants, most of whom were fleeing unrest in Ethiopia, at close range. The report strongly suggests that the number of migrants killed since last year alone may reach into the thousands.

The accusations come at a particularly sensitive time for the Saudi monarchy, which has embarked on a massive public relations push in order to burnish a global image tarnished by alleged war crimes in Yemen and the grisly 2018 murder of Saudi journalist and Washington Post opinion writer Jamal Khashoggi.

“Spending billions buying up professional golf, football clubs, and major entertainment events to improve the Saudi image should not deflect attention from these horrendous crimes,” said Nadia Hardman of Human Rights Watch in a statement.

The report also raises uncomfortable questions for the Biden administration, which is considering giving “security guarantees” to Saudi Arabia in order to entice its leaders to normalize relations with Israel. Among the proposals on the table is a mutual defense treaty that would obligate U.S. troops to defend Saudi Arabia in case of attack. American officials are also mulling whether to help Riyadh develop a civilian nuclear program, a move that many experts worry could be a first step toward a Saudi nuclear weapons push.

The White House, aware that any new treaty would face an uphill battle in Congress, has already started briefing Democratic leaders about the talks in order to build support, according to the New York Times.

President Joe Biden, who once said he hoped to turn Riyadh into a “pariah,” may meet with de facto Saudi leader Muhammad bin Salman, or MBS, at next month’s G-20 Summit in New Delhi, India. The main topic of discussion at the proposed meeting would be a potential “mega deal” in which the United States would make a series of concessions to Saudi Arabia in order to encourage it to normalize ties with Israel, according to Axios. It remains unclear what the U.S. would get from the agreement.

Some analysts argue the Human Rights Watch report should serve as a reminder that working with the Saudi government often entails moral pitfalls.

“At a minimum this should trigger a [State Department] investigation into whether US law has been violated by US-trained Saudi forces or with US arms,” said Dylan Williams of J Street, a progressive pro-Israel advocacy group. “It’s also a horrific reminder of why the US should not bind itself [to] the Saudi autocracy with major new military commitments or arms sales.”

Sarah Leah Whitson, the executive director of Democracy for the Arab World Now, argued that Saudi actions on the border are a direct result of Washington’s continued support for Riyadh. “Saudi Arabia feels empowered to act as recklessly, inhumanely and unlawfully as it wants — including lobbing mortar attacks on desperate migrants seeking safety — because it knows it has U.S. support,” Whitson told RS.

“We can expect that its reckless belligerence will only increase with the added security of a U.S. security guarantee,” she added. “The Biden administration should take responsibility for its role in knowingly aiding and abetting Saudi security forces.”


Repatriated Ethiopians from Saudi Arabia queue to get registered, after disembarking from a Saudi Airlines plane, at the Bole International Airport, in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, April 1, 2022. REUTERS/Tiksa Negeri
google cta
Reporting | Washington Politics
Why Israeli counterterrorism tactics are showing up in Minnesota
Top photo credit: Federal police tackle and detain a person as demonstrators protest outside the Whipple federal building in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on January 16, 2026. (Photo by Steven Garcia/NurPhoto)

Why Israeli counterterrorism tactics are showing up in Minnesota

Military Industrial Complex

In the past few weeks, thousands of federal law enforcement officials have descended on Minneapolis. Videos show immigration officers jumping out of unmarked vans, tackling and pepper-spraying protesters, and breaking windows in order to drag people from their cars.

Prominent figures in the Trump administration have defended this approach despite fierce local backlash. When federal agents killed a protester named Alex Pretti on Saturday, for example, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem quickly accused him of “domestic terrorism.”

keep readingShow less
nuclear weapons
Top image credit: rawf8 via shutterstock.com

What will happen when there are no guardrails on nuclear weapons?

Global Crises

The New START Treaty — the last arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia — is set to expire next week, unless President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin make a last minute decision to renew it. Letting the treaty expire would increase the risk of nuclear conflict and open the door to an accelerated nuclear arms race. A coalition of arms control and disarmament groups is pushing Congress and the president to pledge to continue to observe the New START limits on deployed, strategic nuclear weapons by the US and Russia.

New START matters. The treaty, which entered into force on February 5, 2011 after a successful effort by the Obama administration to win over enough Republican senators to achieve the required two-thirds majority to ratify the deal, capped deployed warheads to 1,550 for each side, and established verification procedures to ensure that both sides abided by the pact. New START was far from perfect, but it did put much needed guardrails on nuclear development that reduced the prospect of an all-out arms race.

keep readingShow less
Trump Hegseth Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump, joined by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, announces plans for a “Golden Fleet” of new U.S. Navy battleships, Monday, December 22, 2025, at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump's realist defense strategy with interventionist asterisks

Washington Politics

The Trump administration has released its National Defense Strategy, a document that in many ways marks a sharp break from the interventionist orthodoxies of the past 35 years, but possesses clear militaristic impulses in its own right.

Rhetorically quite compatible with realism and restraint, the report envisages a more focused U.S. grand strategy, shedding force posture dominance in all major theaters for a more concentrated role in the Western Hemisphere and Indo-Pacific. At the same time however, it retains a rather status quo Republican view of the Middle East, painting Iran as an intransigent aggressor and Israel as a model ally. Its muscular approach to the Western Hemisphere also may lend itself to the very interventionism that the report ostensibly opposes.

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.