“Just mine the straits of Hormuz”? That’s like saying in case of some disagreements in Europe, the Russians will just nuke Berlin… something that is not going to happen at all without heavy repercussions. Never mind extra-regional actors, its going to piss off Iran’s neighbours like Pakistan, India.
[QUOTE=silensus]
Yeah, no. Since nobody in the region ahs nukes except Israel, it’s unlikely this will escalate to that extent. But what might happen is some serious skirmishing. OPEC is really pissed that the Saudis have been pumping so much oil, and they have little support in the region. If the US would grow a pair and realize that the Saudis ARE NOT ON OUR SIDE, it would help.
[/QUOTE]
Firstly, Israel is on the Med; not on the Persian Gulf, where this fight is occuring, so irrelevant. (The only local power there with nukes is Pakistan). Secondly, whats with the playground butthurt? Nation states are never on anyone’s side, except their own; they have interests not friends. For some reason many posters seem to be unable to grasp this fact.
I’m aware of the seriousness of doing that, but its vastly more likely to happen in the first few weeks of an open conflict with saudi arabia than a land invasion.
Israel and Saud fly the same equipment, in exchange for picking some of the strike packages into Iran, and end Iran’s nuclear ambitions once and for all, I would say that you can’t rule Israel out, even if its loaning out pilots and munitions, and perhaps fire support from Israeli submarine cruise missiles.
And WW I was about some nobility getting knocked off. The roots of this go considerably deeper than the execution of one cleric. But I agree it will pass.
Lailaith: From your source “Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil producer, needs to sell oil at around $106 to balance its budget, according to IMF estimates.” This is not the cost of production. In other words out of $106/barrel it may cost them $36/barrel to produce the oil and they spend $70/barrel profit on general government expenditures.
Saudi Arabia has some of the lowest extraction costs in the world. Much, much lower than Iran. In fact, lower oil prices is a weapon in SA arsenal against Iran.
Both countries are already knee-deep in proxy wars in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, and such places are where all frustration and disagreement (sectarian, political or otherwise) are put into effect on the battleground. The gravity of executing a top Shia cleric in Saudi Arabia is in that it was more a straightforward move than characteristic to the long-term conflict between the two nations. The animosity goes back a long way, and it’s surprising that they had until yesterday maintained any diplomatic ties to begin with.
There has always been a war of words, and accusations by Iran that Saudi finances terrorism in Iraq, Syria and Yemen just as Saudi accuses Iran of the same. And they’re both right, too.
I don’t see this row going anywhere or causing an alarming deterioration into a direct armed conflict, since there are active battlegrounds where this matter can be settled. I don’t see a possibility of an all-out war between the two countries. Absolutely not.
What will the severing of diplomatic ties mean for Iranians going on Hajj? Will they revert to the boycott of '88-'90 (the last time they severed diplomatic ties, IIRC)
No it shows they are in a very difficult situation, with the strategy of the oil pricing forcing them to cut the domestic subsidies.
as in
The reserves of the Saud are not so large against their spending that this is a forever strategy and already cuts to the domestic spending and subsidies, like the petrol subsidy are announced. These things are unpopular.
to it you add they have tried to crack down on the DAESH networks, which their devils bargain with the Wahhabite movement makes difficult.
For a domestic strategy to distract the population from the combined crackdown and the reduction in the advantages to the national population, with Sunni supramacism and anti Shiasm as their version of nationalist fervor, the execution and provocations to the Iran make fine logic.
But it is funny how westerners write ‘tamper’ about the Saudis making decisions on production with their own Saudi oil…
It is a strange generic, I guess it means “muslims and people I know nothing about doing political things I do not understand.” If the term had any meaning, it meant popular uprising against the aged dictatorial regimes. The idea of some outsider of another religious tendency ‘sponsoring’ does not fit in any way (besides being laughably ridiculous as a idea.
This makes literally no sense at all. The Jordan has no love for the Israelis and not any real thing to do with a Saudi-Iranian conflict in any case. And the Egypt, they have no love for Iran, there is no ‘proxying’ - the very idea shows gross and basic ignorance of the region and the even existing alliances and tendencies. but in keeping with the misuse of the arab spring term.
But from this following it can be guessed it is an understanding taken from the video games fantasies, as of course no rational Saudi government could ally with the Israelis and stand, and the idea of only some airstrikes ending the Iranian program is silly