Just yesterday, the senate voted to withdraw military support from Saudi Arabia in their war on Yemen. It was strong majority of 63-37, even with a Republican majority senate.
This comes directly after the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi journalist who was murdered in the Turkish embassy by members of the Saudi government for criticizing the prince, Mohammed bin Salman. After Khashoggi's murder and the subsequent exposure of the culprits, President Trump defended Bin Salman, leaving much of the senate dissatisfied.
Apart from the murder of Khashoggi, Saudi Arabia has also been on thin ice with the Legislative Branch for years for their ruthless actions in their war with Yemen. Republican senators who voted against the withdrawal claimed that Saudi Arabia needs our support so that they will help us contain the "Iranian threat."
The last straw that triggered the vote was when Trump, his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and his Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, excluded new CIA Director Gina Haspel from a meeting on Saudi Arabia. Subsequently, frustrated senators Bernie Sanders and Mike Lee drafted a proposal to withdraw support for the Saudis.
Questions:
1. Is Trump in the right for defending Bin Salman?
2. Is Iran as big of threat as its so often made out to be?
3. Does this prove that non-partisan legislative action is possible in the Trump era?
by Graham King
I'm glad that the senate did the right thing in this matter by withdrawing support for Saudi Arabia in Yemen. The Yemen civil war has only been fueled by American support for Saudi Arabia in their proxy war with Iran that has created a humanitarian crisis in Yemen. I'm glad that the senate exercised its independence of the president in doing the right thing and making sure that the United States is not aligned with nations committing human rights violations and killing journalists.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there is no conclusive evidence that MBS actually directed the murder of a journalist. I think that Iran isn't necessarily a big part of this story, but it is a continuing issue that Trump views as an enemy. I believe that this issue is non-partisan because everyone should agree that the murder of a journalist (who was a resident of the US) is outrageous and cruel. There should be consequences for these egregious actions, to send a message to Saudi Arabia that we don't support these types of incidents anywhere in the world.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Iran is as big of a threat as its meant to be. Iran is supporting the Houthi rebels in Yemen, Assad's regime in Syria, and is the number one state sponsor of terrorism. Saudi Arabia is an important ally in combatting terrorism. However, Trump is wrong for wholeheartedly supporting Bin Salman, because it encourages attacks on American residents on foreign soils. While withdrawing support may result in backlash from an important ally, sending an message that we do not tolerate such attacks is more important.
ReplyDeleteI think there is both good and bad aspects to Trump defending Bin Salman. Firstly, Trump could be wrong, and this could have been Bin Salman's doing which would mean it foolish for him to wrongly defend him. Secondly, it is possible that Trump just wants to maintain a good relationship with other countries in order to have more allies. I think he said something along the lines of, "If we react this way to every country then we would have no allies in the world." This does prove non-partisan legislative action is possible in the Trump area because the vote won with an overwhelming majority even though there are more republicans in the senate. Additionally, Iran is a threat which is why we had troops in there in the first place, but due to the newly formed tension we felt that they no longer deserve our support.
ReplyDeleteObviously Trump is not right in defending the Saudi Prince. What he did was a direct contradiction of american ideals and should not be condoned or defended by any US President. Iran can certainly present a large threat, but I maintain they are a threat because of our undoings and will continue to be so as we continue to mess with their proceedings. Yes this certainly proves the viability of non-partisan action, but this is a clear cut moral and isolationist move, so it seems like kind of a given for congress. I'm not sure other proposals will be this easy to pass.
ReplyDeleteTrump was not making the right decision when it came to defending, Bin Salman as it is encourages that the doing of Salman were justified. Trump probably wanted a more solid relationship, so that might be why he was on the said of Bin Salman. During the Trump era it is more about getting majorities than having nonpartisan decisions. I believe that the reason he was defending Salman came from that eh was trying to get more allies on his side, and right now he is not friendly with some countries.
ReplyDeleteI do not think that Trump was right to defend Bin Salaman after the death of Khashoggi since he is failing to hold him to the consequences of his actions. Although I understand that Trump was trying to preserve a good relation to Saudi Arabia, he signaled to Bin Salaman a weak image of our government, and that he would be able to get away with otherwise violent and unacceptable actions. Therefore, I think it is very beneficial and important that the Senate voted against military support in Saudi Arabia, since it sends a clear message to Trump that he cannot violate fundamental American ideals.
ReplyDeleteThis proves that non-partisan legislative action is possible in the Trump era when the issue of concern affects all parties and the United States as a whole. I think Trump should not defend Bin Salman, especially since there is a lot of evidence suggesting that he was involved in the death of Khashoggi. I believe he is acting as too much of a business man trying to maintain relations with Saudi Arabia, then the President who is suppose to fight for against the wrong. I do not think Iran is as big of a threat that the media portrays it to be. I think that those who support sending troops to fight Iran are just interested in a show of American military power.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone that it is more important to take out troops from Saudi Arabia than to maintain business relations with them. There is a lot of evidence that leads Salman to the death of Khashoggi and the fact that Trump wants to maintain troops despite this fact is concerning. It is somewhat of a relief that at least the Senate is less partisan when it comes to decisions of such magnitude.
ReplyDeletei believe the decision of the senate to take out our troops in the Saudi Arabia war was avery smart one. After the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, we see that the prince Bin Salman is serious and will take extreme actions, so it was a very smart decision to protect our troops at all cost. In response to Trump defending Bin Salman, as Marc stated, although I do not agree with his decision to support the prince. Trump could be doing this to maintain good relationships and allies. However even if Trump was doing that as a business decision. I still agree that Trump was not right in defending Bin Salman, just as Marie stated, it doesn't set a good example of the American fundamental ideas.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Trump may think he is justified in defending Bin Salman since he believes that praising the prince or defending him protects Saudi Arabia from Iran’s criticism. However, this is definitely not the case as Trump should not be defending the prince. If this action was performed by the government, it was most likely condoned by the prince meaning that the prince is at stake and he is a bigger threat to making the world “safe for democracy” in comparison to Iran being the major threat. The acts of the prince limit the freedom of speech of journalists leading to their inability to speak against the government. Therefore, although Iran may seem like a big threat in the situation, I believe that it is not the biggest threat. Even though Iran may be a threat to the Saudi’s, it may be an exaggeration in order to justify keeping troops, which fuel the Yemen War, in Saudi. Nevertheless, I believe that the proposal to withdraw troops from Sanders and Lee should have been done long ago in response to Trump’s ignorance and bad leadership. Moreover, the strong majority decision also portrays that even though polarization exists, non-partisan legislative action is a possibility in times of dire need like this one so that the US does not appear to be supporting the “bad guy”. Ultimately, removing troops from Saudi Arabia is the right proposed call as it demonstrates that the US is not attached to poisonous and corrupted countries.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I understand that Trump wants to maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia, it does not mean that he can turn a blind eye to such outrageous violations of human rights. When dealing with China, North Korea, and even former members of NAFTA, Trump was not afraid to speak his mind, despite knowing the consequences. The same should be in this case, as it is much more serious, and the US has the power to calm down the situation.
ReplyDeleteWhile it may have been important to maintain good business relations with Saudi Arabia, but I think that it was the right decision for the Senate to remove our troops in Saudi Arabia. After all, the conflict in Saudi Arabia is partially fueled by the presence of American troops in the country. Furthermore, while Trump wants to maintain good relations with Bin Salman and has defended the prince from Iran's criticism. However, Trump should not be defending the prince when he could be taking actions as the prince has violated some human rights
ReplyDelete