Ikinyoma cyo gutina Foster Gen.Ogola Francis cyamenyekanye!

Ikinyoma cyo gutina Foster Gen.Ogola Francis cyamenyekanye!

  Umugabo mukuru w’ingabo za Kenya Gen. Ogola Francis ku wa kane yitabye Imana azize impanuka italimo kuvugwaho rumwe na batavuga rumwe n’ubutegetsi (oppositions) Azimio La Umoja One Kenya Coalition.Basabye Leta ya More »

Foolish people, foolish government. Abantu bibigoryi, n’ubutegetsi bw’ibibigoryi!!!

Foolish people, foolish government. Abantu bibigoryi, n’ubutegetsi bw’ibibigoryi!!!

Birashoboka yuko umuntu ashobora kuba afite uburwayi bukomeye isi itari yasobanukirwa, mu bisanzwe ubundi umuntu wese arushwa no gushaka kumenya akibazo afite kugirango ashakishe umuti wicyo kibazo.Nyuma yo kumenya ikibazo no gushakisha More »

Museveni na Kayumba Nyamwasa balimo kwirebera mu ndorerwamo

Museveni na Kayumba Nyamwasa balimo kwirebera mu ndorerwamo

  April 17,2024 ibiro ntaramakuru byo mu ijuru (Heaven News Media Agency) biratangaza Amakuru akurikira. Mu ijoro ryakeye Kampala muri Uganda bakoranye inama na Kayumba Nyamwasa, bamubwira ko adakwiye gutaha amanitse amaboko More »

The Destruction of Iran’s Terrorist Hub in Damascus Was Entirely Justified

The Destruction of Iran’s Terrorist Hub in Damascus Was Entirely Justified

The bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria was not, as the Iranians claim, simply an attack on a blameless diplomatic mission. It was a carefully targeted strike on the headquarters More »

European Union: Testing Election Ahead

European Union: Testing Election Ahead

Instead of moving towards a European super-state or a federal outfit, the EU’s current trajectory seems to be back to the nation-state model. The coming European Parliament elections will show whether that More »

 

Saudi Arabia’s New Oil Policy by Sabah Khadri

Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed’s vision for Saudi Arabia, the way he puts it, is as a country no longer dependent on oil; with a growing economy and transparent laws, which will consequently give it a strong position in the world.
The prince has already received negative blowback from conservative members of the Al Saud clan. They have been resistant to change in the past and may not appreciate new reforms which might threaten their authority in the country.
The status quo is that Saudis are raised with the conviction that the state will always provide for their needs, healthcare and security, in exchange for their loyalty to the ruling Al Saud clan. However, the recent oil crisis has witnessed many luxuries stripped away from the Saudi people, as the state prepared to deal with a growing budget deficit. The move to impose taxes, a concept alien to the country, is sure to create discontent among ordinary Saudi people.
Saudi Arabia, long associated with oil wealth and extravagance, has decided that time has come for it to revamp its image. Last year, King Salman, 80, ascended the Saudi throne, and since then has unleashed major reforms, introduced a more assertive domestic and foreign policy, and handed over the reins of some of the most significant posts of the Saudi leadership to a younger group of Saudi leaders.
The driving force behind these reforms is the 30-year-old deputy crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, otherwise known as MBS. Prince Mohammed’s vision for Saudi Arabia, the way he puts it, is as a country no longer dependent on oil; with a growing economy and transparent laws, which will consequently give it a strong position in the world. All of this may come across as appealing, but the ability of Prince Mohammed to deliver these reforms depends on several variables. To succeed, Prince Mohammed, although he enjoys a broad mandate, still needs the support of the rest of the country.

Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman meets with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on May 7, 2015. (Image source: U.S. State Department)
Mohammed’s economic vision for Saudi Arabia, more commonly referred to in Saudi Arabia as “Vision 2030,” essentially intends to introduce major policy and economic reforms by turning its focus towards investments; creating more jobs; privatization; increased exports and creating a sustainable business environment.
Coming amid the oil price crunch in the region, Vision 2030 aims to move away from a dependence on oil and increasing private sector contribution towards the GDP from a current 40% to 65% by 2030, by investing more in sectors such as tourism, healthcare, education and manufacturing; increasing women’s participation in the workforce; reducing the youth unemployment rate, and privatizing major industries, such as the state owned oil company, Aramco.
The Saudi leadership apparently now wishes to turn Aramco into a conglomerate and sell 5% of its share in 2017 simultaneously in the London, Hong Kong and New York stock exchanges. The kingdom has also announced plans to cut subsidies on basic commodities such as water and electricity, in addition to introducing sales and transportation taxes.
As a part of these reforms, King Salman has also reshuffled various ministries, announced new ministers and ousted older ministers. A recent, much talked-about change has been the dismissal as Oil Minister of Ali Al-Naimi, whose name is synonymous with the Saudi oil economy, and who drove the country’s oil policy for the last two decades. He was replaced by the head of Aramco, Khalid Al Falih, who happens to be a close ally of the Crown Prince and relatively new to oil diplomacy.
These reforms are a clear indication that the Saudi government is coming to terms with the reality that, although oil revenues have been a great source of wealth, they have restricted Saudi economic growth and development in other sectors, while turning the country state into a rentier state — a condition that induced systemic and institutional problems in the country, such as lack of transparency, ingrained bureaucracy and growing corruption.
Is it possible, however, for Saudi Arabia, which derives 80% of its revenue from oil income, to break the dependence on oil?
The Saudi manufacturing sector has remained relatively small, with demand driven by limited domestic needs. Furthermore, the lack of an established prominent Saudi industry or alternative manufactured products that could appeal to foreign markets only makes it harder to consider venturing into other manufacturing.
Despite all the developments promised by Prince Mohammed, one question that lingers is the possibility of any of these reforms actually seeing the light of the day. Their success depends on support from Saudi society, which has heretofore provided strong allegiance to the leadership — royals, elites, the Wahhabi religious sect — and most importantly, the Saudi youth. Vision 2030 may call for comprehensive economic reforms, but might be perceived as insensitively turning a blind eye to the political, social, cultural and legal traditions with which it would be tampering. Prince Mohammed has already received negative blowback from conservative members of the Al Saud clan. They have been resistant to change in the past and may not appreciate new reforms which might threaten their authority in the country.
Another concern is how these reforms would be received by the ordinary Saudis. The status quo is that Saudis are raised with the conviction that the state will always provide for their needs, healthcare and security, in exchange for their loyalty to the ruling Al Saud clan. However, the recent oil crisis has witnessed many luxuries stripped away from the Saudi people, as the state prepared to deal with a growing budget deficit. The move to impose taxes, a concept alien to the country, is sure to create discontent among ordinary Saudi people. It is still unclear how reforms might affect and perhaps reinvent the social contract in the country.
Reforms to diversify the economy while an environment for growth, development and transparency, are much needed. Yet, while Prince Mohammed’s vision seems ambitious, it seems to lack concrete plans to achieve that vision. It may require years for change on the social, economic, cultural and political fronts. Until then, new reforms will be pitted against age-old partnerships, as Saudi Arabia rebuilds itself from scratch.
Sabah Khadri, a specialist in international economics, is based in Doha, Qatar.

Saudi Arabia’s Connection to Radicalizing British Jihadis by A. Z. Mohamed

  • The probe was to be conducted by the newly established “extremism analysis unit” of the Home Office, then headed by Theresa May, and its findings were due to be published in the spring of 2016. However, more than a year later, the investigation has yet to be completed.

  • Moreover, its contents might not be released to the public, due their “sensitive” nature, rumored to center on Saudi Arabia, Britain’s key ally in the Gulf. Since the U.K. recently approved £3.5 billion-worth of arms export licenses to Riyadh, it is possible — even likely — that any revelations about Saudi promotion of terrorism in the country could be problematic.
  • Mounting evidence suggests that British jihadis are not only groomed in Wahhabi mosques in the U.K., but many visit Saudi Arabia, where they work or study.

In the wake of the London Bridge attack on June 3, which came on the heels of the Manchester Arena bombing, Britain’s approach to combating terrorism has come under scrutiny at home and abroad. Judging by man-in-the-street interviews, it played a significant role in the June 8 general election, the outcome of which — a victory for Prime Minister Theresa May against Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, yet a hung parliament — reflected a split in voter perception over whom was to blame for the country’s precarious security situation and which party is better suited to rectify it.

Although Corbyn has called terrorist groups, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, his “friends,” May not only has been holding the reins since the resignation of former Prime Minister David Cameron in September 2016 — after the Brexit referendum — but she had also served as Home Secretary for six years before that.

A few months earlier, in January, Cameron authorized an investigation into the foreign funding of radical Islamist groups inside Britain. According to a recent report in The Guardian, Cameron agreed to the inquiry, requested by the Liberal Democrat party in exchange for its support for British airstrikes against ISIS to Syria. The probe was to be conducted by the newly established “extremism analysis unit” of the Home Office, then headed by May, and its findings were due to be published in the spring of 2016.

However, more than a year later, the investigation has yet to be completed.

Moreover, its contents might not be released to the public, due their “sensitive” nature, rumored to center on Saudi Arabia, Britain’s key ally in the Gulf. Since the U.K. recently approved £3.5 billion-worth of arms export licenses to Riyadh, it is possible — even likely — that any revelations about Saudi promotion of terrorism in the country could be problematic.

During his election campaign, Corbyn attacked May for “suppressing” the report, and called for “some difficult conversations” with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, which have “funded and fueled extremist ideology.”

In a letter to Prime Minister May just over a week ahead of her re-election, Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Tom Brake urged that the inquiry be finished and its findings released:

“It is no secret that Saudi Arabia in particular provides funding to hundreds of mosques in the U.K., espousing a very hardline Wahhabist interpretation of Islam. It is often in these institutions that British extremism takes root.”

Brake was correct. Mounting evidence suggests that British jihadis are not only groomed in Wahhabi mosques in the U.K., but many visit Saudi Arabia, where they work or study.

One example is Khalid Masood, the British convert to Islam killed while perpetrating the terrorist attack on Westminster Bridge in March, and which left five innocent people dead. Masood, it emerged, had taken three trips to Saudi Arabia — two of them year-long stints to teach English and a third short visit to the country’s Islamic holy sites. Each time, he was given a visa by the Saudi authorities in Britain, despite having been convicted at least twice for violent crimes and lacking the required academic qualifications and experience for the job he was doing.

Although Saudi consulates require background checks of all visa applicants, Masood was ushered through the process, which is known to be strict. By way of explanation, the Embassy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in London claimed that the reason Masood passed its vetting was that he did not have a criminal record in Saudi Arabia. This is, of course, a complete lie, which raises the question of whether Masood fell through the cracks through incompetence or collusion. Either way, the broader issue of Britons being radicalized both at home and abroad by Saudi Arabia urgently needs to be thoroughly examined and exposed.

The Embassy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in London (pictured) claimed that the reason Westminster Bridge terrorist Khalid Masood passed its visa vetting was that he did not have a criminal record in Saudi Arabia. This is, of course, a complete lie, which raises the question of whether Masood fell through the cracks through incompetence or collusion. (Image source: prebano66/Wikimedia Commons)

A.Z. Mohamed is a Muslim born and raised in the Middle East.

Saudi Arabia’s ‘Lavish’ Gift to Indonesia: Radical Islam by Mohshin Habib

Prior to Saudi Arabia’s attempts to spread Salafism across the Muslim world, Indonesia did not have terrorist organizations such as Hamas Indonesia, Laskar Jihad, Hizbut Tahrir, Islamic Defenders Front and Jemmah Islamiyah, to name just a few. Today, it is rife with these groups.
A mere three weeks after the Saudi king wrapped up his trip, at least 15,000 hard-line Islamist protesters took to the streets of Jakarta after Friday prayers, calling for the imprisonment of the capital city’s Christian governor, who is on trial for “blaspheming the Quran.”
In a separate crisis, crowds were demanding that Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (known familiarly as Ashok) be jailed for telling a group of fishermen that, as they are fed lies about how the Quran forbids Muslims from being governed by a kafir (infidel), he could understand why some of them might not have voted for him. If convicted, Ashok stands to serve up to five years in prison.
Accompanied by a 1,500-strong entourage, Saudi King Salman bin Abdul Aziz arrived in Indonesia on March 1 for a nine-day gala tour. He was welcomed warmly not only as the monarch of one of the world’s richest countries, but as the custodian of Islam’s two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina.
While appearing to be taking a holiday rather than embarking on an official state visit — the 81-year-old sovereign spent six days at a resort in Bali — the king had some serious business to attend to. In what was advertised as an effort to promote “social interaction” between Saudi Arabia and Indonesia — with His Majesty announcing a billion-dollar aid package, unlimited flights between the two countries and the allotment of 50,000 extra spots per year for Indonesian pilgrims to make the hajj to Mecca and Medina – it seems as if the real purpose of the trip was to promote and enhance Salafism, an extremist Sunni strain, in the world’s largest Muslim country, frequently hailed in the West as an example of a moderate Islamic society.

President Joko Widodo of Indonesia (foreground, left) meets with King Salman of Saudi Arabia (foreground, right), at Halim Perdanakusuma Airport in Indonesia. (Image source: Indonesian Presidential Palace)
Jakarta-based journalist Krithika Varagur, writing in The Atlantic on the second day of the king’s visit, describes Saudi efforts in Indonesia:
“Since 1980, Saudi Arabia has devoted millions of dollars to exporting its strict brand of Islam, Salafism, to historically tolerant and diverse Indonesia. It has built more than 150 mosques (albeit in a country that has about 800,000), a huge free university in Jakarta, and several Arabic language institutes; supplied more than 100 boarding schools with books and teachers (albeit in a country estimated to have between 13,000 and 30,000 boarding schools); brought in preachers and teachers; and disbursed thousands of scholarships for graduate study in Saudi Arabia.”
This Saudi influence has taken a serious toll on Indonesia, 90% of whose 250 million people are Sunnis. Despite its pluralistic constitution, which says, “The state guarantees each and every citizen the freedom of religion and of worship in accordance with his religion and belief,” Indonesia — which declared independence in 1945 — has grown increasingly intolerant towards Christians, Hindus and Shiite Muslims.
Prior to Saudi Arabia’s attempts to spread Salafism across the Muslim world, Indonesia did not have terrorist organizations such as Hamas Indonesia, Laskar Jihad, Hizbut Tahrir, Islamic Defenders Front and Jemmah Islamiyah, to name just a few.
Today, it is rife with these groups, which adhere strictly to Islamic sharia law, Saudi Arabia’s binding legal system, and which promote it in educational institutions. Like al-Qaeda and ISIS, they deny women equal rights, believe in death by stoning for adulterers and hand amputation for thieves, and in executing homosexuals and “apostate” Muslims.
The most recent example of the way in which this extremism has swept Indonesia took place a mere three weeks after the Saudi king wrapped up his trip. On March 31, at least 15,000 hard-line Islamist protesters took to the streets of Jakarta after Friday prayers, calling for the imprisonment of the capital city’s Christian governor, who is on trial for “blaspheming the Quran.”
This paled in comparison to the crowds — numbering about 200,000 at each violent rally — which flooded the city last November, December and February. The crowds were demanding that Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (known familiarly as Ashok) be jailed for telling a group of fishermen that, as they are fed lies about how the Quran forbids Muslims from being governed by a kafir, an infidel, he could understand why some of them might not have voted for him. If convicted, Ashok stands to serve up to five years in prison.
Sadly, such a jail term is nothing, when one considers the Islamist prison that the country as a whole has become — courtesy of King Salman and his lavish “gifts.”

Saudi Arabia will pursue nuclear weapons if Iran does

As Israel has warned, the deal with Iran will send the Middle East spiraling into a dangerous nuclear arms race.  


By: JNS.org and World Israel News Staff

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir hinted that his country would keep all options open, including pursing the acquisition of  nuclear weapons, if Iran obtained a nuclear weapon despite the newly implemented nuclear deal with world powers.

Saudi Arabia would do “whatever we need to do in order to protect our people,” al-Jubeir told Reuters.

“I don’t think it would be logical to expect us to discuss any such issue in public, and I don’t think it would be reasonable to expect me to answer this question one way or another,” he said.

Al-Jubeir’s comments come following the announcement that Iran sanctions would be lifted as part of the Islamic Republic’s compliance with the nuclear deal that was signed with world powers last summer.

 

Saudi Arabia, like Israel, has been strongly critical of the nuclear deal, which it fears could embolden Iran’s regional ambitions and boost their support of their terror proxies in Syria, Yemen and Lebanon. Iran is set to receive nearly $150 billion in sanctions relief as part of the deal.

“It depends on where these funds go. If they go to support the nefarious activities of the Iranian regime, this will be a negative and it will generate a pushback. If they go towards improving the living standards of the Iranian people then it will be something that would be welcome,” al-Jubeir said.

Israel has repeatedly warned that the nuclear deal has made the Middle East a more dangerous, and that Iran billions on thawed assets will significantly boost their regional belligerence.

Sanction Iran’s Regime, Add IRCG to Terrorist List by Majid Rafizadeh

  • It would seem that sanctions should be enforced and the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) placed on the U.S. list of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations — to show that the U.S. stands for human rights, protects the innocent and tries to save the lives of those sentenced to death by Iran’s corrupt government.

  • Bills to sanction Iran that are being presented in Canada or other Western countries are, in fact, receiving scant attention. Canada has been talking about reopening its Iranian embassy, and pro-Iran advocates, such as the Iranian Canadian Congress, are pushing back against legislation that condemns Iran.
  • Would any modern Western country really wish to appear to be on the side of this barbaric regime, or in any way to assist it?

A subtle, but dangerous force is spreading throughout the West. It has been seeping into the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, the Middle East, the United States, South America and much of Europe.

Who are they?

They are pro-Iran regime advocates. They appear to be Westerners, but pursue a unique agenda. Under the guise of being average Western citizens, they have been infiltrating the social, political, economic and religious sectors of most Western societies.

These are not my words. They came directly out of the mouth of Iran’s Minister of Intelligence, Mahmoud Alavi. In a rare, recent interview on Iran’s state media, he stated that many Westerners with a dual citizenship “have a lobby group for the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

“We should not accuse them and say things that discourage them about the ancestral homeland, this is not good, and losing this capital is not good for the regime… It is wrong to say that all dual nationals are traitors, spies, or foreign agents; many of these dual nationals love Iran, and are a capital for Iran.

“Many who live in Canada, London, or the United States [are devoted] to the [Islamic] revolution and the supreme leader … In those places some attend religious ceremonies. [Those people] love the [Islamic] Revolution.”

Mahmoud Alavi, Iran’s Minister of Intelligence, recently stated that many Westerners with a dual citizenship “have a lobby group for the Islamic Republic of Iran… Many who live in Canada, London, or the United States [are devoted] to the [Islamic] revolution and the supreme leader.” (Image source: Mohammad Ali Marizad/Wikimedia Commons)

Not long after Alavi’s remarks came to light, an Iranian-born Canadian was arrested in Washington state.

“An Iranian-born Canadian arrested in a Washington city on the U.S.-Canadian border has been charged with conspiring to ship a piece of testing equipment used to calibrate missile guidance systems into Iran.

“Federal prosecutors claim Ghobad Ghasempour and two other men smuggled restricted items out of the United States to Iran through China. Ghasempour was charged Tuesday by federal prosecutors in Washington, D.C.”

This is not an isolated incident. It has been part of an growing trend.

Is it fair to eat the fruit of the West, while at the same time promoting the Iranian regime that keeps repeating “Death to America“?

Those who appear to pursue appeasement policies toward Iran seem to focus on two issues: preventing any new sanctions on the Iranian government and maintaining the nuclear agreement (JCPOA) that will enable Iran soon to have nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them.

In Canada, for example, the Senate is currently taking into consideration the Bill S-219, “An Act to deter Iran-sponsored terrorism, incitement to hatred, and human rights violations” (to be named the “Non-Nuclear Sanctions Against Iran Act”). If the bill is passed, it would impose at least some economic sanctions on the Iranian regime for its unspeakable human rights abuses.

Iran still boasts pride of place as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, according to according to the U.S. Department of State.

Iran is also the number one country, per capita, when it comes to executions.

The Iranian regime executes children, gays, lesbians, human rights activists, and, it seems, anyone who disagrees with it. Its abuses go beyond murdering its own citizens. The Iranian regime suppresses every freedom of its people, by torturing, imprisoning, beating and killing them. Iran persecutes religious and ethnic minorities, and leaves only one choice when it comes to religious belief, which is the same as no choice at all. The country in the grasp of an iron fist; because of this, the majority of its people are silenced.

It would seem that sanctions should be enforced and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Coprs (IRCG) placed on the U.S. list of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations — to show that the U.S. stands for human rights, protects the innocent and tries to save the lives of those sentenced to death by Iran’s corrupt government. One would think that such bills would pass easily in any Western government that hails about human rights and freedoms. Right? Not so fast.

Bills to sanction Iran that are being presented in Canada or other Western countries are, in fact, receiving scant attention. Canada has been talking about reopening its Iranian embassy, and pro-Iran advocates, such as the Iranian Canadian Congress, are pushing back against legislation that condemns Iran, explaining in a recent statement:

“Global Affairs Canada states its position that Bill S-219 (Non-Nuclear Sanctions Against Iran Act) would hinder the re-establishment of diplomatic relations with Iran. The Iranian Canadian Congress has expressed its concerns about Bill S-219 since the bill was first introduced to the Senate….We have also consistently asserted that this bill directly contradicts the Government’s stated intention to re-engage with Iran by placing legislative and diplomatic hurdles before this process. In a recent letter to members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, Global Affairs Canada has agreed with our position regarding S-219.

“With the opposition already formed in the Senate against S-219, we have a golden opportunity to block this bill at the Senate Chamber. Currently we are contacting all Honourable Senators to once again ask them to take into account all evidence and expert advice provided in opposition to the bill and vote against Bill S-219 when it comes for a vote at the Senate Chamber. We need all supporters of peace and diplomacy to help us and take action against these proposed sanctions on Iran. In the next few days we will issue an announcement about next steps that can be taken by community members.”

It is critical to understand that the Iranian government needs these appeasement policies, including the so-called “nuclear deal”, and that it needs the West to turn a blind eye to Iran’s human rights records and military expansionism.

Those who appear to pursue policies of appeasement toward Iran often attempt to justify them by arguing that they will benefit the West. Or they will argue that sanctions against Iran’s human rights violations will harm the West. On the contrary, continuing the nuclear agreement and the appeasement policies are what have harmed the West, by providing the Iranian regime with billions of dollars in extra revenues as well as enhanced global legitimacy.

And what does the Iranian regime do with this Western favor? It has been transforming this gift from the West into funds for promoting anti-Western sentiments, anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism; for suppressing and murdering its own people, sponsoring terrorism around the globe, and promoting Islamist ideals.

As Iran continues to flaunt its determination to engage in human rights violations, cruelty, terrorism, torture, and murder, Western governments should act; Western funds should at least stop flowing into Iran, lending its militia legitimacy and supporting actions that should not be tolerated. Would any modern Western country really wish to appear to be on the side of this barbaric regime, or in any way to assist it?

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, a world-renowned businessman, political scientist and Harvard University scholar, is president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He is also the author of “Peaceful Reformation in Iran’s Islam“. He can be reached at Dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu.

Skip to toolbar