Is This What the War Wagon Deal Is Really About?

Could the House of Saud be in danger of sharing the fate that befell Iran's former monarch, Shah Pahlavi? Do they sense a revolt coming their way? Are the Saudi royals arming themselves to the teeth to crush their own people? Is that why they ordered such a massive number of armoured fighting vehicles from Canada? As part of the deal have the bought our silence?

At The Globalist web site these very questions are being raised in the context of dealings between the Washington and Riyadh:


In 1979, when the Shah’s regime finally fell in Iran, official Washington was very perplexed. The U.S. government, with all its departments, including the intelligence apparatus, had steadfastly stood by its client.

The shock when it all came crashing down was palpable. So was the regional upheaval, with consequences visible to this day.

Why the surprise? Why the preceding ignorance? Because official Washington was far too invested in the continued presence of the Shah. He was the linchpin of U.S. strategy for the region.

Under those circumstances, the mere thought of him no longer being in power was too painful to bear.

...as much as official Washington had bought into the Shah and his regime four decades ago, to the point of casting a blind eye, so it is now with the Saudis.

Whatever the telltale signs of the Saudi royals’ decrepitude, it is stunning to see how few in Washington worry about that.

Does This Sound Familiar?

...the old Washington rule of doing business – better to deal with the devil we know than the one we don’t – applies.

In addition, since we live in times when the policymaking process is more monetized than it has been ever before, the Saudis are very skilled investors in buying a lot of silence in the American capital.

...What also helps the silencing of any proper American discussion of scenarios for Saudi Arabia’s future is that the country is somehow – and quite perversely – seen as Israel’s best partner in the region.

If Globalist editor Stephen Richter is correct, and I can think of nothing that contradicts his assumptions, then Canada's war wagon deal is perfectly explained and in that explanation we get a disturbing glimpse of the extent to which Canada's foreign policy, Conservative and Liberal, has been "monetized."

The whole deal is murky - by design. Dion made utterly unconvincing claims that Canada had the assurances of the Saudis, the monarchy, that our wheeled death wagons would never be used against the Saudi people. What other purpose would the Saudis have for so many of these armoured fighting vehicles?