[Salon] Oil, arms and corruption: the three pillars of the US-Saudi alliance

[Chas Freeman <cwfresidence@gmail.com>]

Oil, arms and corruption: the three pillars of the US-Saudi alliance

Summary: the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the West evolved from economic and military patronage to a system in which military contracts became the primary means for Western wealth recovery. Shrouded in "national security” and reinforced by shared anti-Islamic sentiments and corruption, this arrangement continues to shape regional politics.

In the early 20th century Britain maintained stability and influence in the Persian Gulf, supporting local rulers in order to protect its interests, especially the trade route to India. Following the pivotal meeting between US President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ibn Saud aboard the USS Quincy in February 1945 Saudi Arabia began transitioning towards the US instead, a move solidified in the 1960s and 1970s. After the 1973 Arab-Israeli war and the subsequent oil prices boom, the relationship between the Gulf states and the West experienced another fundamental change when it became stark that unless special measures were undertaken the world was about to witness the largest wealth transfer in history.

In an attempt to forestall this, western governments’ initial solution was selling Saudi Arabia and other major Arab oil exporters large volumes of expensive consumer goods and infrastructure. It soon became clear, however, that there were simply too few Saudis and too much oil money for this to serve as a practical means to reverse the vast sums being spent. A new mechanism was quickly sought and found: military contracts. This proved ideal for all concerned, firstly because military equipment is inherently expensive and needs constant upgrades which means it can be used to justify any amount of expenditure and, secondly, it means all business can be conveniently shrouded under the rubric of ‘national security’, opening the door to immense corruption. ‘National security’ remains the sine qua non of the Saudi-Western relationship to this day as the details are highly politically toxic for both parties.

Selling Saudi Arabia vast quantities of military hardware has been one of the central pillars of the Kingdom's relationship with the West ever since. Even though much of it is strategically useless or completely unsuitable for the desert environment, the West got its money back and Arab dictators got to enrich themselves beyond the dreams of avarice, because military contracts with western defence firm typically include more than 50% commission payments and then they can be inflated a second time when the materiel is distributed to the armed forces inside the country. This enduring relationship exists between Al Saud as a family and the White House, transcending individual presidencies and resisting any alteration by members of the Saudi royal family. The only losers have been ordinary citizens, long reduced to humiliated onlookers at the flagrant looting of their patrimony.

Last week President Trump’s three-country tour of the Gulf continued this long-standing tradition. Like his predecessors, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman continues to regard the United States as an omnipotent entity, a paramount power whose sphere of influence is indispensable. Continued political, military, and economic alignment remains a Saudi strategic imperative, precluding any shift in allegiance towards other global powers such as Russia or China, or the adoption of an independent decision-making posture. National security priorities such as oil, foreign affairs, intelligence, and politics all remain fully entrusted to the United States, with the Saudi military having only a minimal protective role.

President Donald Trump, who dodged the draft for the Vietnam War, sparked controversy after returning a salute to Saudi military officials during a formal reception on his visit to Riyadh

Under MBS, this framework of subordination has extended even further. The Crown Prince, who regards traditional Arab social kinship and tribal structures as potential sources of opposition, desires even to assimilate American cultural norms which he considers superior. This is manifested in the importation of American food, beverages, cinema, and various forms of entertainment, like wrestling, tennis and golf, with the United States always serving as the primary reference point. Saudi Arabia’s investments are also predominantly directed towards the United States, a policy widely held within the Al Saud family and emphasised under the current Crown Prince.

What is new in the US-Saudi relationship is the impulsive, mercurial, ignorant and clinically narcissistic character of Donald Trump. He possesses qualities to which Arab leaders are magnetically attracted, above all his propensity to accept bribes, often facilitated through intermediaries such as Jared Kushner or the Crown Prince's brothers. Significant Saudi financial resources are channeled through these avenues for the personal benefit of the President and as a result Trump has continuously offered the Crown Prince political protection, for example by vetoing resolutions passed by Congress that sought to end US military support for Saudi Arabia or disputing the CIA findings over Jamal Khashoggi's murder. "I saved his ass," Trump said, according to US journalist Bob Woodward. "I was able to get Congress to leave him alone. I was able to get them to stop."

Besides corruption, the other tie binding Arab dictators to the US President is their mutual hostility towards Islam, both as a religion and in politics. Both the Saudi Crown Prince and the UAE’s MBZ regard Islam and Islamism as the leading threat to their authority and so seek to undermine its ideological foundations and diminish its influence, particularly targeting the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and the Salafi movement known as Wahabism. Regionally and globally, MBZ and MBS combat Islamic activism, support anti-Islam entities, and hinder the growth of Islamic movements. Both exhibit a strong disinclination towards religious observance and exclude religious individuals from their inner circles. Any outward displays of religious endorsement are purely for public consumption. Their engagement with certain religious figures, such as the Saudi regime’s favourite Islamic scholar Sheikh Dr. Mohammed bin Abdul Karim Al-Issa, is part of an effort to distort the image of Islam and neutralise authentic Islamic forces by fostering cooperation between pro-regime “Islamic” elements and Zionist and Western powers. Their relationship with Syria is contingent on Ahmed Al Shara’a’s abandonment of political Islam and jihadist projects.

Donald Trump's tour of Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and Doha, fueled by greed and underwritten by betrayal, was no peace mission and it made no mention of the Palestinian children being starved and bombed just a few hundred miles away. The billions invested will go directly into the US and Israeli genocide machine. Ironically, however, in the long run it might just end up inadvertently serving Palestinian interests. As the President's political standing strengthens from his triumph in the Gulf, his reliance on Saudi, Qatari and Emirati financial support could outweigh concerns related to Zionist interests, potentially leading to a divergence from traditional U.S. policy frameworks, a completely unintended benefit for the Palestinian cause.

Members can leave comments about this newsletter on the Arab Digest website.

follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook
Copyright © 2025 Arab Digest, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email as you are subscribed to the Arab Digest. Our mailing address is: Arab Digest 3rd Floor 207 Regent Street London, W1B 3HH United Kingdom
To unsubscribe from this list email editor@arabdigest.org