Follow us on social

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

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

Reporting | QiOSK
USS Carl Vinson
Top image credit: 250410-N-FS097-1573 U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY (April 10, 2025) An F-35C Lightning II, attached to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 97, launches from the flight deck of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) during flight operations in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility. (Official U.S. Navy photo)

Deterrence or creep? US forces quietly surge back to Middle East

Middle East

Since October 7, 2023, the United States has quietly but significantly expanded its military presence across the Middle East, reversing the drawdown that followed its withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.

U.S. troop numbers in the region have risen from approximately 34,000 to nearly 50,000 as of late 2024, a level not seen since the height of the anti-ISIS campaign, in addition to a rapid increase in naval and aerial deployments. This shift reflects a strategic recalibration that appears driven less by long-term planning than by an improvised response to perceived Iranian threats, instability in the Red Sea, and domestic political pressure to “do something” without committing to a full-scale conflict.

keep readingShow less
Donald Trump
Top image credit: President Donald Trump speaks to the media following the White House Easter Egg Roll in Washington, D.C., on April 21, 2025. President Trump speaks about Secretary of Defense Hegseth, the Pope's death, and the situation in Ukraine and Iran. (Photo by Andrew Leyden/NurPhoto) VIA REUTERS

Ukraine and Europe can't afford to refuse Trump's peace plan

Europe

Most of the peace plan for Ukraine now sketched out by the Trump administration is not new, is based on common sense, and has indeed already been tacitly accepted by Kyiv.

Ukrainian officials have acknowledged that its army has no chance in the foreseeable future of reconquering the territories now occupied by Russia. Vice President J.D. Vance’s statement that the U.S. plan would “freeze the territorial lines…close to where they are today” simply acknowledges an obvious fact.

keep readingShow less
Michael O'Hanlon, Jack Keane, Michele Flournoy
Top photo credit: Michael O’Hanlon (DoD Photo by U.S. Army Sgt. James K. McCann), Ret. General Jack Keane (White House photo) and Michele Flournoy (CNAS/Flickr)

Could a Blobby enclave be sowing chaos at DoD?

Military Industrial Complex

UPDATE 4/24, 5:15 PM: The Defense Policy Board website has been scrubbed, as reported by The Intercept. The list of DPB members can still be viewed on an archived version of the website.


Discussing alleged Pentagon leaks with Tucker Carlson on Monday, recently ousted DoD official and Iraq war veteran Dan Caldwell charged that there are a number of career staff in the Pentagon who oppose the current administration’s policies. He then took particular aim at the the Defense Policy Board as a potential source of ongoing leaks to the press.

keep readingShow less

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.