Bandar policies created havoc for US: Analyst

Press TV has conducted an interview with Ralph Schoenman, political analyst from Berkeley, about Saudi King Abdullah replacing spy chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who spearheaded the kingdom’s mission in the Syria crisis, with Youssef al-Idrisi.

What follows is an approximate transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Mr. Schoenman, despite the change of the person in charge of Saudi intelligence, just how much change would there be in Saudi Arabia’s policy towards the situation in the region?

Schoenman: Well it appeared that what we have here in the removal of Prince Bandar is repudiation of the dependence upon these al-Qaeda, al-Nusra … mercenary groups that were being deployed by Bandar and the Saudis throughout Syria and Iraq and indeed the region. They were involved as well in the overthrow of Morsi in Egypt.

But it should be understood that with the clear loss of control over these … units that were fighting amongst themselves and seeking to take over in Iraq and starting a series of terrorist blood running across both Syria and Iraq, US officials in the wing of the ruling class in the United States considered that the policy was becoming risky and not successful. Those are the underlined issues.

On February 9-16, the Interior Minister of Saudi Arabia Prince Mohammed bin Nayef paid an official visit to Washington and in that visit it is important to know as it was reported by New Eastern Outlook that people familiar with Saudi policy know that until recently Mohammed bin Nayef had not been the figure … in addition to matters of internal security in the kingdom, he also oversaw the Yemeni and Bahraini dossier, formally under the responsibility of the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia, Saud al-Faisal.

It was only with him that the leadership of the State Department, the CIA, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Security met and behind closed doors on the territory of the Saudi Embassy.

Those were the circumstances in which Bandar was effectively removed as the US rulers were giving indication that he had been linked to the policies of the neocons and Bush and that set their foot on the path that was clearly creating havoc for US policy in the region – even with the intent of overthrowing the regime of Bashar al-Assad and with the intent to destabilize any opposition to Zionist policies in the region.

So, these are the elements that gave rise to the decision to remove Bandar as they were reported. As the New Eastern reports stated the two reasons that Prince fell into disgrace, not only were the king but also … that he proposed the foreign policy of Saudi Arabia influenced by US neocon circles that put it through bankruptcy.

If we do not take into account the overthrow of President Morsi that Bandar contributed to the other political military operations in which the Saudis were recklessly involved through Bandar had become a liability and disaster for the Saudi regime itself and as their policies were reportedly opposed widely and broadly and the stability of the regime itself was being called into question.

Bandar had equally disastrous policies. This report continues in Lebanon and Iraq and it states that Bandar provided military and financially to all the desperate Sunni groups in Iraq and in the region that were seeking the overthrow of the government and create havoc.

Press TV: Mr. Schoenman, just how likely can Bandar bin Sultan be prosecuted for what many call his role in supporting and masterminding terrorism in Syria, Egypt and Lebanon?

Schoenman: Well, I frankly doubt that because Bandar was carrying out a policy that the entire Saudi ruling group had embraced.

It should be reminded that the regime now in seeking to distance itself from Bandar is reacting to the fact that Bandar accused the US of betraying the commitment to overthrow the regime in Syria and all of these issues and the Saudis are now coming to the conclusion that they are not on a successful course.

It should be also mentioned here that the Saudis have finally realized the fatality of betting on … radicals as a tool to achieve its foreign policy goals and they are electing, removing from the chessboard the unnecessary figure of Prince Bandar.

So, we have here essentially a shift. It is true but it is a shift towards American imperialism and their intent is to create a coalition between …, forces in Saudi Arabia, forces in the region to stabilize imperial policy to set on a footing that would be more liable and more successful. Those are the underlined dynamics here.

The conditions under which this shift is being made are that of collusion across the board whether from within Iran or from the Saudi Arabia itself to stabilize imperial rule in each respective country and in the region at large.