New York-The political discourse and personal chemistry between Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz and US President Barack Obama will anger extremists in many camps: the ruling camp in Israel and the right-wing Jewish-American lobby on the one hand, and the camp of Islamist destruction and outbidding on the other. Indeed, Israel's leaders, and most prominently Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, do not find suitable for them the language of goodwill, esteem, “shared vision” and praise between the US and Saudi leaders and strengthening the bonds of the strategic relationship between the two countries, particularly at this point in time when the US-Israeli relationship has been deteriorating. On the other hand, extremist Islamists do not like the language used by Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques with the US President, describing Obama as “an honorable and good man”, nor Obama saying that he “always valued [his] Majesty's values and insights”, and their discussing their “joint interest and work together in combating violent extremism”, as Obama told the press with King Abdullah by his side. Indeed, the expression “combating violent extremism” used today by the Obama Administration is the alternative to the expression “war on terror” used by former President George W. Bush – yet the conclusion remains the same, as does the battle and as do the players. Barack Obama made sure to “welcome Saudi Arabia's successful counterterrorism actions against Al-Qaeda”, as stated in the concluding statement given by the White House over the meeting between the two leaders early this week in Washington. The concluding statement also listed the most prominent topics addressed by the two leaders in discussing their strategic vision, the partnership between them in the Middle East peace process and in Iraq, regional security, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon. Yet equally important is the fact that the Saudi-American relationship has taken, as a result of this visit, a different direction, as the language of consulting, discussing and listening became prominent, as did also the necessary mentality needed by the renewed relationship resulting from King Abdullah's unique vision at the political level, as well as at the level of the dialogue of religions. No one believes that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has completed its political, economic and social reforms, but rather that the progress of social reforms still lags far behind economic and political reforms. Yet this does not negate that what is taking place within the KSA indicates boldness, vision and cohesive steps towards necessary change. Indeed, King Abdullah is the greatest supporter of “thinking outside the box” and of removing the massive obstacles to social reform, particularly with regard to women. It also does not negate the fact that the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques has spoken in the language of mutual respect between all religions, particularly between the Muslim, Christian and Jewish religions, and he is not afraid to discuss the pre-Islamic period. There are different points of view regarding Saudi Arabia's regional politics. In Iraq, for example, Saudi Arabia was for long absent before it revived its necessary role there. And in Lebanon, there are those who believe that the Saudi rug was pulled extremely quickly from under the feet of its Lebanese allies. In Yemen, the KSA awoke to the sound of grave danger for Yemen and for itself, and in fact such danger nearly became imminent had it not been averted. Regarding Iran, the KSA has so far not been able to draft an alternative comprehensive policy in case US or Israeli surprises were to arise concerning the Iranian issue, whether understandings or confrontations. Yet in spite of all this, there are broad outlines defined by King Abdullah's decisions, most prominently the Arab initiative for peace between the Arabs and Israel, inter-Arab reconciliations and initiatives of dialogue between religions and cultures. Furthermore, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is nearly the only Arab country to have massive natural resources, a large number of inhabitants, and exceptional weight at the regional and international levels, in addition to being the country that has succeeded at rupturing the spine of terrorism and Al-Qaeda on its soil and at preventing its spread in the Gulf region. It is the only Arab country to belong to the Group of Twenty (G-20), which includes the world's most prominent countries in terms of economy and international weight. For all these reasons, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia represents a common denominator between Iran, Israel and Turkey, knowing that those three countries seek to alone be the three centers of the balance of power in the region. Indeed, these three countries meet over seeking to exclude the fourth center in the balance of power, the Arab center which is no longer in Egypt or Iraq, but is now in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Saudi-American talks this week focused on efforts to drive the peace process forward, as it is being repeatedly confronted with the Israeli wall impeding progress, either due to Israel's insistence on moving forward with building illegal settlements, or to its attack against the flotilla of ships in international waters and its rejection of an independent international investigation into the incident. Benjamin Netanyahu will visit Washington next week. Barack Obama has heard from the Saudi monarch the Arab stance, baffled at what to do if Israel continues to pay no heed to the peace process and if measures continue to be taken by the occupation without any US or international pressures to ward off Israel. In principle, the fact that the Arabs cling to the Arab peace initiative with Israel may be the factor which will tighten the grip on the Israeli side that refuses all peace offers. In other words, this initiative remains a precious asset, as it exposes Israel, contributes to its isolation and helps pave the way for serious US or international pressures when the time is right. Nevertheless, this is insufficient from a Saudi point of view or an Arab point of view in general, as there is restlessness at the popular level towards carrying on with the peace process, promises and waiting to no avail. This is why the US Administration has heard from the large Saudi delegation in Washington that the time has come for it to “impose” its vision, its plans and the measures necessary to implement the two-state solution. The US Administration would like for its efforts to be successful and fruitful without a confrontation with Israel. Its leaders speak of “clinging to achieving the two-state solution and comprehensive peace”, which includes the Syrian and Lebanese tracks of negotiation together with the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Yet the difficulties being faced by the Obama Administration are not only Israeli, but also come from the US Congress, which is in its majority subjected to the dictates of the Israeli lobby. Netanyahu's visit to the White House will be a serious test for Barack Obama as much as it will be an exercise in political jugglery for Benjamin Netanyahu. Indeed, Obama and his political and military team realize how central resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to winning the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as to addressing the Iranian issue, its consequences and its derivatives which stretch into Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon. Obama and his team have made clear to the American people that resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is integral to the US's national interest, and this is why Netanyahu's visit is the main test for Obama, particularly at such a decisive phase for US interests in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as towards Iran. Netanyahu has failed to drive the United States to a military battle against Iran as a precondition for progress in the peace process with the Arabs. Iran today is besieged with harmful sanctions, international unanimity and cohesive pressures. This takes away the pretext from the mercurial Netanyahu, who is in effect evading the requirements of peace and the two-state solution. The Saudi delegation spoke to the US delegation in a language of economic and diplomatic pressures on Iran through UN resolutions. Indeed, the sanctions are mandatory for all countries, and Saudi Arabia has pledged to implement them. The 2012 conference which the United Nations has called for to implement turning the Middle East into a region free of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, is a regional security conference in which the major powers are participating, and which both Israel and Iran are supposed to join. This conference gained prominence in US-Saudi talks as the diplomatic language for regional security with Israel and Iran included. The two delegations discussed Iraq and the importance of consensus over a government that would include everyone and over fruitful relations between “a unified sovereign Iraq and its neighbors”. They discussed the roles played by Saudi Arabia and the United States in Iraq in a phase of the utmost importance for restructuring the US-Iranian relationship in Iraq. They discussed Afghanistan and the necessity of further activating Saudi Arabia's role. Indeed, after the changes witnessed by the war in Afghanistan, Barack Obama has become subject to monitoring and accountability in the wake of his dismissing General Stanley McChrystal and replacing him with General David Petraeus, who has effectively been removed from US Central Command. They also discussed Lebanon from the perspective of “their support for the Lebanese government as it seeks to preserve its sovereignty”, as well as “the importance of a secure and prosperous Yemen”. In other words, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has made clear its desire to hold a central position in US decisions regarding the future of the Middle East, and the Obama Administration has made clear that this would require developing the traditional Saudi mentality so they it may emerge a little from the bonds that shackle it. Indeed, the second meeting of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques with the US President has resulted in a clear and declared pledge of engagement and strategic partnership in all issues. This in itself represents a noteworthy qualitative shift that deserves following up and perseverance.
