Who was Khashoggi?
See UPDATE at end of post.
[NOTE: I use the past tense for Khashoggi because the consensus is that he is dead. This is certainly more likely than not. But I am not convinced of it, because it has not been proven. In fact, no evidence has been offered at all except the word of unnamed Turkish officials. That’s not nearly good enough. I have stated before that I doubt we’ll ever know the truth about this, and so far that continues to be my opinion. The groups relating the tale so far—the Turks and the Saudis—both have reasons to be lying, and very clear agendas that have to do with their own power and the forms of Muslim extremism they each espouse: Muslim Brotherhood for the Turks, and Wahabism for the Saudis.]
A helpful reader has called my attention to this article in the NY Post, which I think presents a very plausible picture, one that has been corroborated by other news reports previously. But I think that this particular article pulls it all together in a very clear and succinct manner, as well as a very alarming one:
…characterizations of [Khashoggi] in the media are not fully accurate. He’s depicted as a “reformer,” a “democracy advocate” and a “journalist.” Yet these are half-truths that obscure the political role Khashoggi played.
Before anything else, he was a regime insider. He was a close associate of senior members of the royal family who were eclipsed by the new crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman.
Khashoggi was not merely a pen for hire. He represented a particular political perspective. An Islamist, his views on major issues consistently tracked with those of the Muslim Brotherhood…
“Saudi Arabia,” Khashoggi said, “is the mother and father of political Islam.” But the Saudi government was forsaking this tradition. “Today,” the kingdom has turned against its very nature and is “fighting political Islam.” As a consequence, its “compass is lost.”
A Turkophile, Khashoggi hoped instead that the new crown prince would follow in the footsteps of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who supports the Muslim Brotherhood across the Arab world. Khashoggi envisioned a grand alliance between Riyadh and Ankara.
…Like Erdogan, Khashoggi was hostile to the Sisi regime in Egypt and opposed Mohammed bin Salman’s rapprochement with Israel…
The picture is pretty clear: friend of Erdogan and the Muslim Brotherhood, enemy of Israel and the Saudis in power, although a friend of some Saudis who used to be in power. In other words, allied with the Turks and out to destroy the current Saudi rulers, and in favor of Islamic rather than secular rule. The only disagreement is which form of Islamic rule will come out on top.
And using the WaPo as a bully pulpit from which to write his pro-Turk anti-Saudi propaganda:
Khashoggi found an influential perch at The Washington Post, from which he launched attacks on the crown prince. One of his recent columns, for example, calls for the end of the war in Yemen, which he portrays as an abject failure. He presents the Saudi government as an indiscriminate killer of fellow Muslims and blames the failure of peace talks on its obstinacy and incompetence.
These arguments hit the crown prince where it hurts most: They implicitly attack his Islamic legitimacy, essentially placing him in the same category as slaughterers of Muslims, such as the Syrian and Russian leaders, Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin.
Why was he allowed to have this “perch” at the WaPo? It’s not too hard to figure out the probable reasons:
In presenting himself to his American friends, Khashoggi fashioned himself less the Islamist and more the democratic reformer. He made a tactical alliance with former Obama officials who seek to depict Trump’s pro-Saudi and anti-Iranian policy as a disaster.
Trump, in this view, is the enabler of a young, impetuous crown prince. Conflicts such as Yemen result from Saudi recklessness rather than Iranian expansionism.
Far from erasing this picture from the US media, Khashoggi’s disappearance has strengthened it. Given the opposition of former Obama officials to Trump’s strategy, they have an interest in stoking outrage at Khashoggi’s death. Their goal is to harness it in order to resurrect Obama’s outreach to Tehran.
Obama and his helpmates are eager to undermine Trump’s policies as much as they can, and they would not hesitate to use any means possible to do so.
If you wonder why Khashoggi was writing for the WaPo in the first place, or why the Khashoggi incident has become a cause célèbre (after all, governments kill people and even journalists in that part of the world rather often, and Khashoggi was not an American), this article describes a situation that makes more sense than anything else you might have read so far.
It still doesn’t tell us whether the whole thing is a scam or whether Khashoggi really was murdered—and, if the latter, who actually did it. There are certainly a lot of possible candidates.
ADDENDUM: Pompeo denounces US media’s “fake news” on many aspects of the Khashoggi story. A must-read, but here’s part of what Pompeo has said:
More blind leaks via Turk, Qatari & pro-Muslim bros state media cited by US outlets w/ zero confirmation & no context. Turkey is the world’s #1 jailer & attacker of Journalists & sponsor of Al Qeda Al Nusra.
This story isn’t the media’s finest moment
?@SecPompeo? goes off: pic.twitter.com/PQ8Agrdjv3— Josh Block (@JoshBlockDC) October 19, 2018
Curiouser and curiouser.
UPDATE 11:59 PM:
The Saudi government has made an announcement:
The case of the disappearance of the citizen Jamal bin Ahmed Khashoggi drew the attention of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia at the highest levels…[which dispatched] a security team to Turkey on 6 October 2018 to investigate and cooperate with counterparts in Turkey.
That was followed by the formation of a joint security team between the Kingdom and the Republic of Turkey, with a permission given to the Turkish security authorities to enter the Consulate of the Kingdom in Istanbul and the residence of the Consul, for the Kingdom’s keenness to clarify all the facts…
The Public Prosecutor has already investigated a number of suspects on the basis of information provided by the Turkish authorities…the preliminary investigations conducted by the Public Prosecution showed that the suspect had traveled to Istanbul to meet with the citizen Jamal Khashoggi as there were indications of the possibility of his returning back to the country.
The results of the preliminary investigations also revealed that the discussions that took place with the citizen Jamal Khashoggi…did not go as required and developed in a negative way led to a fight and a quarrel between some of them and the citizen Jamal Khashoggi, yet the brawl aggravated to lead to his death and their attempt to conceal and cover what happened.
The source added that while the investigations are still ongoing into the case with the 18 Saudi detainees, the Kingdom expresses its deep regret at the painful developments that have taken place and stresses the commitment of the authorities in the Kingdom to bring the facts to the public opinion, to hold all those involved accountable and bring them to justice by referring them to the competent courts in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
So the Saudis are saying that they have worked together with the Turks on solving this. Strange bedfellows, indeed.
The Saudi claim is that unnamed “suspects” traveled to Turkey in order to get Khashoggi to come back to Saudi Arabia alive (abduct him? convince him? beat him senseless and then transport him back unconscious?), but then some sort of accidental death occurred as a result of a brawl. Or perhaps, as a result of this brawl escalating (was Khashoggi just trying to defend himself and/or escape from this team of “suspects”? or was this an actual fistfight that wasn’t planned?), he died or was murdered by an overzealous “suspect.”
Very murky indeed. It doesn’t have the ring of truth, either, but it has the possible ring of semi-truth. Reading between the lines, my leading theory at the moment is that some Saudi elements decided to drag Khashoggi back to Saudi Arabia to either be questioned or to face some sort of other music, didn’t intend to kill him or didn’t intend to kill him quite yet, and he resisted in some way and they (or one of them) killed him either purposely or accidentally.
It’s not impossible that a person dies accidentally during a fistfight, by the way. I actually knew two people who did. One was a student at my junior high school; he was fighting with another boy on the sidewalk, and fell and hit his head, which caused his death. The other was a friend of my parents’ who owned a store and tried to fight off an irate customer, and had a fatal heart attack in the process. So although I’m well aware that such things can happen, I don’t actually think it very likely that Khashoggi’s death was an accident.
As for the Crown Prince’s involvement or lack thereof, I haven’t a clue.
To paraphrase Hilary Clinton, at this point what does it matter?
Very curious indeed. He may have been a friend of the Erdogan regime, but if they determined he was about to undermine them in some way, they would not hesitate to murder him and make it into an anti-Saudi talking point.
The Saudis under MbS are attempting to be slightly less Islamist than they have been. An actual liberal reform is not in view. And Erdogan is an Islamist and neo-Ottoman. The Turkish alliance with Iran makes me lean towards the Saudis, but of course as a Western Christian I don’t agree with either.
Hostile to the Sisi regime. Seems I remember Sisi doing some cleanup both in Egypt and the Sinai. Maybe he’s extending his reach. Though why he’d antagonize the Saudis (sp?) I don’t know. Strange things happen in that part of the world, though.
I am not sure why everyone seems to be assuming Khashoggi is actually dead. I think it likely that he is, but by no means certain.
Was he ever part of his uncle’s gun-running?
“Saudi Arabia has said the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who disappeared after visiting the country’s consulate in Istanbul on 2 October, is dead.
The news, which cited preliminary findings from an official investigation, was announced on state television on Friday. It said a fight broke out between Khashoggi and people who met him in the consulate, leading to the death of the reporter.
Khashoggi was a US permanent resident who wrote for the Washington Post.
It was also announced that Gen Ahmed al-Asiri, an intelligence official linked to the case, had been dismissed. Eighteen Saudi nationals were said to have been arrested.
More details soon …”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/19/jamal-khashoggi-dead-saudi-arabian-state-television-confirms
As you mentioned, Neo, none of the players in this drama are choir boys.
Yes, MBS had a motive for having Khashoggi killed. Are his thugs this clumsy? Maybe so, but one would think they were as cunning as most Arabs, as demonstrated by bin Laden and al Qaeda.
Who else might have a motive to kill Khashoggi? The enemies of MBS inside the Saudi royal family are a possibility. Making Khashoggi’s disappearance/murder look like the doing of MBS could drive a wedge between the U.S. and MBS. This might diminish his power and allow his enemies in the royal family to unseat him. Since Khashoggi disappeared from the Saudi embassy, it looks like the Saudis of one faction or another could be involved.
Would Khashoggi conspire with someone to fake his death? He was a Turkish ally. Would they work with him to spirit him away to safety after he left the embassy by a back door? Again, the Turks would like to drive a wedge between the U.S. and the Saudis. A log shot, but possible.
So, there are several motives for Khashoggi’s apparent death. Having him silenced by MBS is the most apparent, but there are others. Maybe some motives that aren’t apparent to us. We may never know why or even how Khashoggi has disappeared. I believe Trump is correct to be quite cautious in placing blame or doing something rash.
Ken:
Thanks for the update.
I’m out, and just using my phone right now and am busy with other things, so I’ll plan to read and write further when I get home.
The Saudis are now saying he was killed in a fistfight at the embassy, which also seems highly improbable but I suppose at this point anything is possible. The Saudis have supposedly fired a whole bunch people as a result.
So at this point it appears his death has been confirmed by both sides in the fray. The question—and it’s one I’m not sure we’ll ever get a straight answer to—is exactly who did it, and why.
Here is a piece with considerable background over at FrontPageMag. Referring to Khashoggi,
Isn’t that a hoot. He moved permanently to the U.S. so that he could criticize Trump; without being jailed I presume.
While the author claims Khashoggi was a reformer of sorts, he also states,
Yeah, “democratic means” like Mohammed ‘I-only-need-to-be-elected-once’ Morsi, then I’ll be a dictator for life.
The explanation seems to be that the killing occurred accidentally. Thus, the Prince knew nothing. Could be, but I doubt it.
Still, this puts Trump in a hard spot. Our alliance with the Saudis is a big part of our Middle East strategy. Let’s hope Pompeo, Bolton, and other advisors can steer Trump safely through these dangerous waters.
Funny how well Neo actually integrates many sources to nut out what is going on in this kind of situation where all the ‘official’ sources of information are so polluted with Astroturf that you can’t take any at face value. Go Neo!
I don’t think this is clear. Thomas Friedman wrote this 12 days ago:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/opinion/jamal-khashoggi-missing-saudi-journalist.html
Friedman has been sympathetic to MBS, and criticized for being an apologist. Khashoggi informed his views on this matter. According to Friedman, Khashoggi became more anti-MBS as the latter became more unhinged and repressive.
I can’t say I’m familiar enough with Khashoggi to know for sure, but this contrasts with the picture being painted by what are now very common pro-Trump talking points, such as what we see in the NYPost opinion piece.
He’d figure to be plugged into Qatar… which is a RED HOT item for Riyadh at this point in time.
If he was not forthcoming that would’ve been a death sentence.
Riyadh set the wet team and they went Postal.
Keep in mind that as a jihadi, he’d WANT to die in such a visible manner.
It’s entirely likely that he provoked the hit team.
One is reminded of “True Romance” when Dennis Hopper tells Christopher Walken what he REALLY thinks about Sicilians. “I’ll have that cigarette, now.”
If the team exceeded its mission, killed Khashoggi, and embarrassed MbS, then the team is probably in trouble. It seems to be an interior Saudi struggle, and just because MbS is the designated Crown Prince, it doesn’t mean he will survive. Saudis are known to be brutal with their own.
An odd part about this is the Turks appear to have leaked some truth about the team killing Khashoggi and cutting him up to hide the fact. When do we hear truth from the Erdogan regime? On the other hand, they thought it was to their advantage to do so.
I prefer President Trump’s realpolitik approach to this matter, as opposed to the more temperamental reactions from other quarters. The Middle East is a rough neighborhood, with a lot of ins and outs, and a lot of players with varied motives.
So why was Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in the first place? He was there to get documents to allow him to marry his fiance, Hatice Cengiz (a Turkish name). Hatice is the Turkish equivalent of the name Khadija, which is that of the first wife of the Prophet Muhammad, thus its popularity. And Cengiz comes from that other major historical figure, Genghis Khan (uh-oh).
Apparently, they did not meet until May of 2018 (as Jamal Khashoggi did not leave for Turkey until September 2017), which does make for a rapid courtship. Hatice Cengiz is a PhD student in Istanbul, with her as 38 (born in April 1980), to him as nearly 60 at the time of his demise.
Jamal Khashoggi should have known better, and should never have gone into that consulate. This is especially true after what happened in Saudi Arabia in November of 2017, with the anti-corruption purge, with hundreds detained (including Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal), and billions of assets confiscated.
One thing, to me, is crystal clear: Were it not for the fact that the WaPo considered him to be one of their own, this story wouldn’t be “news” in the U.S.
The media continues to insert itself into the national narrative as one of the principal protagonists, rather than the unbiased observers they are supposed to be.
Roy Nathanson on October 20, 2018 at 11:40 am at 11:40 am said:
One thing, to me, is crystal clear: Were it not for the fact that the WaPo considered him to be one of their own, this story wouldn’t be “news” in the U.S.
The media continues to insert itself into the national narrative as one of the principal protagonists, rather than the unbiased observers they are supposed to be.
* * *
Indeed.
It remains to be seen whether their concern was over Khashoggi the journalist, or Khashoggi the Islamist activist.
NOTE: saw a commenter somewhere wondering how it was that the Turks were able to find photos of and identify the 15 members of the Saudi group within 24 hours of the missing persons reportage.
I think we are going to get a report from “Yalta” cooked up by the Turks, Saudis, and US to satisfy all of the principals (to some extent) with only as much bearing on the truth as is necessary to satisfy the rubes (including WaPo, until someone on the inside leaks).
To date, this is the most rational discussion I’ve seen of why we should care what happened to Khashoggi, and what the Saudis should do about their system of government to foster better international relations (that is, to satisfy the US, pearl-clutchers and serious watchers alike), without going off half-cocked ourselves.
https://www.weeklystandard.com/elliott-abrams/the-kingdom-and-the-power
This is a good report also. It doesn’t go into the Saudi face-saving attempts, but does high-light the inanity of US pundits & pols making their foray into tv-crime-drama a make-or-break issue for foreign policy.
Some stupidity is obvious – grabbing a guy out of a hostile country! – but I have also wondered why MbS (or whoever actually ordered the grab) didn’t have a “resisting arrest” story ready in case the arrest/rendition accident/murder ever became public, because he had to know that was a possibility.
Much as WaPo may hate the idea, the head of the Kingdom’s police had the authority to order the arrest of a Kingdom national on the Kingdom’s sovereign “territory” at the consulate, and return him to SA for trial if he wanted to do that. Such an arrest would not be rendition or kidnapping; those all involve other nations or unauthorized detention.
If Khashoggi resisted arrest (and he would not be so stupid as to go willingly to SA after having spent much effort in leaving the Kingdom), he could well have been accidentally killed during attempts to subdue him (US examples alone are too prolific to bother linking). A “gun drop” story would be even better, where they could accuse Khashoggi of threatening them during their peaceful attempts to persuade him to come home willingly for a little chat.
But is was very stupid not to have story ready to counter the Turks expose, which happened remarkably quickly (and they still haven’t released the audio “proving” the crime happened as they described).
https://thefederalist.com/2018/10/19/khashoggi-made-defining-issue-u-s-foreign-policy/
* * *
Yes, ‘gun drop’ stories are real things, and one of the sad evidences of corruption in law enforcement, although I do believe most LEOs are as honest and well-meaning as the populace in general.
It’s the story you give the judge to explain that the perp pulled a gun on you and had to be shot in self defense, but the gun is one you surreptitiously carried yourself, just in case you need an out for using excessive force.
I don’t have a link because this was a personal communication from a lawyer friend.
When you live in a palace, you get palace intrigue.
So, do I understand this correctly? The progressive media in the US is defending a Muslim Brotherhood apologist, critical of the reforms of the transitioning Saudi regime with its modest secularization. Khashoggi was critical of the ‘repression’ of MBS because he was clamping down on the status quo, hard-line Islamists in the palace and country.
Bizarre, but not unexpected. In the great tradition of yellow journalism, the press is attempting to direct foreign policy, forcing the administration to distance themselves with anti-Iranian governments, leaving the influence of the Iranians in the region in place.
Sebastian Gorka puts the story in perspective.
https://amgreatness.com/2018/10/20/why-the-media-couldnt-care-less-about-khashoggi/