Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
On Trump’s Saudi Arabia Speech
I’ve got about half a dozen posts sitting unfinished in my draft folder, because here’s what keeps happening to me. The day begins with news of Episode X of the Trump Presidency. I spend hours reading about it, trying to understand what really happen, trying to figure out who really said or did what and why, trying to separate fact from rumor. When finally I think I understand, I spend an afternoon writing a post about it, and in the end, I’m quite proud: I’ve got Episode X all sorted out!
Right before I press “publish,” though, I check the news to see if there have been any further developments in the story, just to be sure it’s up to date, and … Oh, no! Episode X is ancient history! The world has moved on to Episode Y! I missed Episode Y completely, I was too busy thinking about Episode X. So I end up feeling like Rip van Winkle, stunned and blinking in the sunlight, and can’t bring myself to press “publish,” because it will look as if I’ve been sleeping under a rock.
I had lots of thoughts about Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia and his speech, but they’ve already got that OTE flavor. So to heck with it. Today, I’ve decided to beat this problem by writing about Trump’s visit to Israel as it actually happens. You can watch it with me.
So here’s what I know so far:
The president landed about an hour ago. I have no idea what he’s about to do or say. (No, I don’t know what that photo is: I found it on Twitter. No more careful sourcing and fact-checking for me: I’m in a hurry.)
So far: Masada speech cancelled, delegation dinner cancelled. The flight was late. The ministers were impatient. The ministers are being forced to attend the reception. There a freakout about trying to match the Saudis in ceremonial bling. Something was decided at the last minute, but I’m not sure what.
The officials at Yad Vashem have been trying to figure out how to compress the story of the Holocaust to fifteen minutes.
Trump’s request to see Masada by helicopter were turned down for fear it would damage the antiquities.
MK Oren Hazan seems to have caused a national embarrassment at Trump’s reception by trying to take a selfie with him.
And that’s all I know so far: I’m going to hit “post” before checking the news, lest this, too becomes yesterday’s news.
Are you watching the visit? How do you think it’s going so far?
Oh! Trump is apparently going to propose the ultimate peace deal, details to be announced.
Published in General
That’s why so many journalists just go with the hand outs, official spin or just invent stuff if it fits their narrative. I don’t find these trips interesting, I dislike the speeches, and they almost never include substance, at least not on purpose. They help Presidents move stuff through the bureaucracies but sometime just invent stuff to sign or do. We’d all be better off if our Presidents stayed home. They are usually a huge waste of money but this one may be good for us and for Trump. It’s a chance for him to show he’s not the person our media and therefore the world portrays him and his foreign policy isn’t Obama’s. If he fails in that it will be a huge failure. If all the Democrats and the media can say is that it was just a distraction because of his domestic media blunders, it tells us it worked for him. I’ll lbe interested in your take and that will be a longer wrap up piece, so it’s ok to not keep up with the despicable press corps that travels with him. They aren’t journalists anyway.
Donald Trump Hails ‘Unbreakable Bond’ With Israel Ahead of Peace Talks
So true. Therefore, rather than focusing on speeches, read the body language …
You have my complete support to … Make Israel Great Again
Well, I still think you should post them. I was actually wondering what you were thinking. My limited free schedule has made my participation to Ricochet extremely scarce. But I was wondering what people thought about the Saudi part of his trip. That’s the only reason I snuck my head in here today. ; -)
I would like to hear what someone with a doctorate in International Relations thinks of Principled Realism. From Trump’s Saudi speech:
Is this textbook neoliberalism? (Let us not go down the rabbit-hole of discussing what Trump ‘really thinks’, or ‘really believes’, or ‘really knows’.)
Agree. We know Claire is not a Trump fan (understatement) but I am wondering, all that aside, what a professional journalistic outlook on the Saudi visit would look like from Claire.
Wouldn’t it be an interesting discussion to only debate these theme words for this trip and their meaning, ignoring who it was that uttered them. The man who said them is such a stumbling block for so many. They insist on over-analyzing the word “really” (thinks, believes, knows). Sad.
I think it is really simple. On the Member Feed, I believe that @gilreich has nailed it completely.
Trump’s Theological Stand
I have no idea what any of that means in practice. Your guess’s as good as mine, really.
I don’t know about a journalistic outlook, but here’s my academic verdict. I wrote my doctoral dissertation in (large) part about US arms transfer policy toward Saudi Arabia. Nothing we saw represented a change of policy. Trump is saying (as he’s apt to do) that his visit was “like nothing we’ve ever seen before,” but it was exactly like what we’ve seen before: a completely standard visit by a US president to Riyadh. It won’t change anything in any way. No matter who had been elected, it would have been pretty much the same trip. Our policy toward KSA has been the same since 1933.
Not even a change of policy towards Iran? It’s not news, but a solid line has been ruled under the failed Obama attempt to temper Iran’s actions by inviting it back into the world, no?
But the gist of the speech was not about a change in relationship with KSA. Why is that the line of thought you were on? If anything the gist of the speech was increasing ties with KSA. The gist of the speech was in gathering support for a religious reform of Islam so that holiest Islamic place in the world can theologically/ideologically counter with religious argumentation the radical Islamic terrorists ideology. If you missed that, then you didn’t get it.
Now I have my doubts whether Islam can be reformed, and there are doubts perhaps on whether Saudi leadership wants to or can reform Islam, but that was what Trump was up to.
I don’t think I’m being unfair in saying that, up to now, the President has shown himself woefully ignorant on many issues, not least geo-politics.
His speech on Sunday to the GCC was, nevertheless, strong and articulate.
Conclusion : this President, maybe all Presidents, is/are only as good as his/their speechwriters.
In this case, the Saudi speech appears to have been written by Trump’s (Jewish) advisor Stephen Miller. He seems to have been aided by an Arabic speaker, because some of the phrases (particularly the ‘Drive out…’ sequence) seemed designed to be dramatically delivered by the simultaneous interpreters.
It looks, however, as though the President might, against all expectations, prove himself a statesman.
We shall see.
How so? Do you mean by singling out Iran, specifically, for a tongue-lashing?
It sounded to me like it was written by the top folks at State.
So, back to Israel: The weird thing is that this story has sort of stayed static all day. Nothing huge breaking. Melania’s footwear is rightly making global headlines; those are great shoes.
The one thing I have enjoyed from the little bit I have paid attention to this trip is the hardline taken towards Iran. Not a new policy exactly for the US but seems to be quite different from the last 8 years of our entire foreign policy seeming to be aimed at not offending the Iranians in order to get the Iran deal done.
More or less. Although I’m a bit concerned to be in (partial) agreement with Le Monde‘s editorial:
Creating a coalition with the heads of state in the region asking that the funding be stopped and putting Iran in the middle as the fuel for the mayhem is something.
Let us be clear about this. The ‘traditional alliance’ with Saudi Arabia (hereinafter KSA) was originally dictated by the need for oil and the creation of Aramco, not for any preference for Sunni vs Shia dogma.
The situation has now changed. The US does not need Saudi oil, and needs to make a big decision on its role in the Mideast as a whole. Does it need KSA as an ally ? Is arming KSA to the teeth a good or a bad idea as far as avoiding a major armed confrontation between KSA and Iran is concerned.
This is a huge issue and I will weigh in with a new post, rather than encumber @claire‘s comments section with my views.
I’m not sure how a dissertation written 22 years ago is that relevant other than the argument that providing arms to various groups has been tried for decades, and that our main concern was keeping the communists out? (I just read the Amazon description). The jist of his speech is that nobody is winning here and they have to make a decision, which we’ll support, to eradicate terror in the region collectively and any and all strategies are open as solutions.
Well I am looking to you Claire and the rest of Ricochet to let me know what Trumps Israeli-Palestinian peace plan will be. From the little I have read about Trump’s approach it seems that tensions were growing between our administration and the Israeli one over settlements again.
Biggest news of all: . Haaretz reports Melania refused to hold hands with the Prez–beaucoup tension as they left the plane. Plus: Israelis appear to be fumbling arrangements.
Trump will leave Middle East with stronger relations with Israel and the Saudis than Obama ever did. MSM will need to work overtime to paint this as a failure.
The problem with that is the Wahhabi’s and ISIS have a nearly identical religious ideology. In fact ISIS uses Saudi textbooks to teach from in the schools they run.
I said I had my doubts, but the King of KSA could in theory break free from Wahhabism. He could influence the reform of their theology.
Having lived and worked in KSA I see no reason for the current or any future ruling member of the House of Saud abandoning Wahhabism.
This is one reason why I am sceptical about KSA’s ‘commitment’ to eradicating ISIS. The religious arm of the KSA ruling class does indeed share ISIS’s agenda. Only if an ISIS presence in KSA (unlikely) were to threaten directly the royal family would it dare to act.
Well, I’m sceptical too.
Doubt it. That would violate the founding of the Saudi state. It would trigger a civil war.
Correct me if I’m wrong, fidelio102 (I didn’t know you’d lived there!), KSA reached a pact with the Wahhabi’s a while back, didn’t they? If the Wahhabi’s were allowed to be in charge of religious teaching, they’d turn a blind eye to the misbehaviors of the rulers.
That was the original deal between the royal family even before king Saud took power. Goes back to the 19th century.
Claire,
I would love to hear your thoughts on the Turkish Embassy dust up if you get the chance.
I’ve been meaning to write about that, yes. Stay tuned. Did you see this?