Follow us on social

google cta
Senators urge caution on potential Saudi deal

Senators urge caution on potential Saudi deal

Twenty Senate Dems tell President Biden they would need a 'high degree of proof' that committing the US to Riyadh's defense would align with American interests

Reporting | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Nearly two dozen U.S. senators sent a letter to President Biden on Wednesday expressing concern about reports of a potential American security guarantee for Saudi Arabia that has been reported to be part of a larger normalization deal with Israel.

“Peace between Israel and its neighbors has been a longstanding goal of U.S. foreign policy, and we are maintaining an open mind about any agreement that would potentially deepen the political, cultural and economic ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel,” says the letter, which was led by Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.).

But, the senators add, “We are concerned about reports that Saudi Arabia is requesting a security guarantee from the United States in exchange for normalization with Israel. Historically, security guarantees through defense treaties have only been provided to the closest of U.S. allies: democracies that share our interests and our values.”

Murphy has been particularly vocal about committing U.S. troops to Saudi Arabia’s security, wondering during a recent CNN interview, “Is this the kind of stable regime that we should commit American blood to defending?”

The senators said they would need a “high degree of proof” that such an arrangement with Saudi Arabia “aligns with U.S. interests,” given that the Saudi government is “an authoritarian regime which regularly undermines U.S. interests in the region, has a deeply concerning human rights record, and has pursued an aggressive and reckless foreign policy agenda.”

The letter also expressed concern about the possibility of a civilian nuclear program inside Saudi Arabia as part of any wider deal and said that any agreement “should include meaningful, clearly defined and enforceable provisions to achieve your stated objective of preserving the option of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to ensure that there be ‘equal measures of dignity and security’ for both Israelis and Palestinians.”

Concerns about any broad U.S.-Saudi-Israel agreement on these terms have reverberated outside Capitol Hill as well. The Biden administration “still has not explained how any such agreement would serve either U.S. interests or the cause of peace and stability in the Middle East,” said Paul R. Pillar, a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University. “In fact,” he added, “it would do neither, and instead would only prolong and even increase confrontation and instability in the region.”

The Cato Institute’s Jonathan Hoffman wrote in RS last week that Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman is exploiting American fears of growing Chinese influence in the region to extract big concessions from the U.S. “A security guarantee for Saudi Arabia would entrap Washington as Riyadh’s protector despite a fundamental disconnect between the interests and values of the United States and the kingdom,” he said.


Photo credit: Al Teich and Phil Pasquini via Shutterstock.com

google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Trump, George w. Bush, Bill Clinton
Top photo credit: President Donald Trump (Trump White House/public domain) ; George W Bush (National Archives/public domain); President Bill Clinton (Clinton presidential library/public domain)

All aboard America's strategic blunder train. Next stop: Iran

Washington Politics

With not just one — but two — carrier battle groups now steaming in circles somewhere off the coast of Oman out of the range of Iranian missiles, we are all left with the head-scratching question: what is it, exactly, that the United States hopes to accomplish with another round of air strikes on Iran? Trump hasn’t told us.

The latest crisis du jour with Iran illustrates the strategic swamp willingly stepped into not just by Donald Trump but his predecessors as well. The swamp is built on a singular and hopelessly misguided assumption: that the use of force either by stand-off, limited strikes from 12,000 feet or even invasions will somehow solve complex political problems on the ground below. The United States today sits shivering, gripped with this runaway swamp fever — with no relief in sight.

keep readingShow less
Tucker Carlson
Top image credit: Tucker Carlson, founder of Tucker Carlson Network, speaks during the AmericaFest 2024 conference sponsored by conservative group Turning Point in Phoenix, Arizona, U.S. December 19, 2024. REUTERS/Cheney Orr
Tucker escalates war with neocons over Iran

Are MAGA restrainers pulling their punches this time on Iran?

Washington Politics

The Trump administration appears to be moving closer to a U.S. war with Iran, and there are plenty on the right, including inside MAGA, rallying against it. Unfortunately, they seem much more drowned out this time around.

Marjorie Taylor Greene certainly does her bit. “Americans do not want to go to war with Iran!!!” the former Republican congresswoman shared on X Wednesday. “And they voted for NO MORE FOREIGN WARS AND NO MORE REGIME CHANGE.”

keep readingShow less
Arab and Gulf State leaders
Top photo credit: urkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoan arrived in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia, at the invitation of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, for a visit aimed at discussing bilateral relations and issues of common interest. February 3, 2026. (Reuters)

Why Arab states are terrified of US war with Iran

Middle East

As an American attack on Iran seems increasingly inevitable, America’s allies in the Persian Gulf — the very nations hosting U.S. bases and bracing anxiously for an Iranian blowback — are terrified of escalation and are lobbying Washington to stop it .

The scale of the U.S. mobilization is indeed staggering. As reported by the Responsible Statecraft’s Kelley Vlahos, at least 108 air tankers are in or heading to the CENTCOM theater. As military officers reckon, strikes can now happen “at any moment.” These preparations suggest not only that the operation may be imminent, but also that it could be more sustainable and long-lasting than a one-off strike in Iranian nuclear sites last June.

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.