Secrets behind Obama's negotiations in Saudi Arabia

The US president did not go to the funeral. He was there to promote terrorist Iran

Obama expressed his reservations about what happened in Egypt after June 30

The importance of supporting political Islam in reference to the Muslim Brotherhood

Gulf security is a mainstay of US-Iran negotiations

The first message: the situation in Egypt

The White House presses for dialogue and reconciliation with the Muslim Brotherhood... and Sisi refuses

Saudi Arabia confirms: We will not take a position that contradicts the position of the Egyptian leadership... Fayza Abul-Naga teaches the American delegation a lesson they will never forget

American sources leaked information to Qatar and Turkey that there is a change in the Saudi position towards Egypt

The meeting with Fayza Abul-Naga, advisor to the president for national Security affairs, and the US delegation was devoid of all diplomatic rules, as it witnessed a sweeping attack on Obama's unfair vision towards the situation in Egypt

Obama's visit to Saudi Arabia, to offer condolences on the death of King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz carried several messages that the US president wanted to convey to the new Saudi leadership. 

Obama went to Riyadh on January 27, heading a large delegation that included former ministers and members of Congress belonging to the Republican and Democratic parties. 

The delegation also included John Brennan, head of the CIA.

Obama clearly referred to the American vision of the situation in Egypt, talking about the election experience and its outcome, in reference to the 2012 elections that brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt. 

He addressed the treatments that took place after those elections, as a kind of undemocratic exclusion of political forces.

Nevertheless, the American president ignored the revolution of the Egyptian people on June 30, and what happened throughout the entire year of the terrorist group’s rule. He expressed his administration's reservation about what happened, also in reference to the July 3, 2013 announcement that ended the era of Brotherhood rule and drew a new roadmap that the Egyptian people accepted, as a logical consequence of the glorious June revolution.

Addressing the new Saudi leadership, Obama said that whatever the results of democracy, in another reference to the 2012 elections, they must be respected, as they are the key to resolving all crises. 

He said what happened in Egypt had encouraged a broad base of the Egyptian people or others to support terrorism and had created an incubating environment for it.

Obama came out with a logical result of the US administration's vision, which was the need to open an inter-Egyptian dialogue to get out of this impasse. 

The strange thing was that Obama's calls were followed by many voices that the US administration had secretly contacted. They spoke in the same tone about the alleged reconciliation, ignoring, as Obama and his administration did, the blood that shed and continues throughout the country, by the terrorist operations carried out by the terrorist organization and its allies.

Obama clearly asked the Saudi side to help the American effort in this regard, warning against the Gulf countries slipping, as he put it, into the equations of providing support to one party and confrontation with another, calling on the new administration, represented by King Salman bin Abdulaziz, to be conciliatory. 

He asked the Saudis to support a national dialogue in Egypt that leads to a settlement acceptable to all, stressing that this is the only way that contributes to confronting terrorist and extremist political Islam.

None of the attendees commented on what Obama said, which made the American side explain this silence, that the Saudis agreed with the view put forward by the American president.

It must be noted here that some of those who adopted this interpretation based it on previous conversations that Prince Muhammad bin Nayef, the current deputy crown prince, made when he was minister of the interior, during his visit to Washington on December 12, 2014. 

The Saudi interior minister, who was alone in meeting Obama that day for three full hours, depended on a security philosophy, which says that Saudi Arabia has enough terrorist groups, and that its war on terrorism, should be confined to its internal arena.

The American position with regard to Egypt was clear: to stop Saudi Arabia’s support for the Egyptian regime, and for the Kingdom to support Washington’s position which sought to find an internal settlement in Egypt through which the Brotherhood returns to the Egyptian political scene.

This is the crux of the point, then, to block the way to any victory of the Egyptian will, against the Western American scheme aimed at dividing the region, the scheme that the new Saudi administration learned.

American sources leaked to Qatar and Turkey that there is a change in the Saudi position regarding what is happening in Egypt, as analyses began to follow that Saudi Arabia has changed its policy towards Egypt, and that the new Saudi leadership has largely retreated from its support for the regime of President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi.

Unfortunately, senior Egyptian and Arab media professionals swallowed the bait, without examining this information and studying its source. 

Saudi media sources close to the new authority have absolutely denied everything that was leaked, but the weak point in these statements is that no Saudi official has come out to officially deny it.

These leaks worried the political leadership in Egypt to a certain extent. As a result, after Obama left the region, Sameh Shoukry, the Egyptian foreign minister, and Khaled Fawzy, the head of the General Intelligence Service, arrived in Riyadh on a lightning visit, to see the contents and results of President Obama's visit to Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis informed the Egyptians that there was absolutely no change in the Saudi position regarding support for the Egyptian regime, and that their position was clear and explicit that they support everything that the Egyptians accept.

The Egyptian delegation was pleased with this Saudi position in support of the Egyptian leadership, but it did not hide its fear of two things:

- The potential success of the Americans to convince the Saudis of the idea of ​​internal dialogue in Egypt

- The possibility that the Americans would continue to bet on a fundamental and important role for the Muslim Brotherhood in the region

After the return of the Egyptian delegation, Egyptian diplomacy was active at all levels, especially the Gulf states (Emirates, Kuwait, and Bahrain) to clarify its position rejecting any reconciliation with the murderous terrorists.

The US responded blatantly, when it received the Brotherhood delegation at the US State Department from January 25-29, which was a message to everyone, that the Brotherhood is still a primary option for Americans, and that their presence as part of the Egyptian political scene is a consistent choice for Washington, regardless of the rejection of the Egyptian government and people.

Accompanying that situation was the frantic Brotherhood activity in Turkey, which became an operations room clearly managing events against Egypt. 

Acts of violence and bombings in Egypt, and statements and directives are issued to motivate events, in the light of the deafening American silence, without which Turkey would not have dared to play this role in destabilizing Egypt.

Abul-Naga and the unofficial US delegation

Accompanying all of these moves was the arrival of an unofficial US delegation, on an investigative visit to Egypt that supported Obama's vision on the Egyptian-Egyptian dialogue, in reference to a dialogue between the authority and the Muslim Brotherhood, to reach a compromise solution.

The declared goal of the visit was to straighten US-Egyptian relations, which would prevent them from slipping to a point that is difficult to repair. 

The delegation included former National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, Anthony Zinni, former commander of the US Central Command, and Daniel Kurtzer, the former US ambassador to Egypt, Ms. Wendy Chamberlain, president of the Middle East Institute, and Paul Salem, advisor to the Vice-President of the Middle East Institute.

It was understood from the visit of this delegation and its numerous meetings that preceded its members' meeting with President El-Sisi that it complemented Obama's vision of the situation in Egypt, which stresses the need for dialogue between the two sides, in an incomprehensible and misleading equality between the rule of law and legitimate authority, and blind terrorism that wants to impose its authority on Egyptians by force of arms.

Therefore, the meeting with Abul-Naga, advisor to the president for national security affairs, was devoid of all diplomatic rules, as it witnessed a sweeping attack on Obama's unfair vision towards the situation in Egypt.

The delegation clearly also provided them with some documents that the terrorism that strikes Egyptian security at the time was made by the Muslim Brotherhood itself through its secret organization.

In this meeting, Abul-Naga clarified that the description of the scene in Egypt has a strategic difference between the American and Egyptian point of view, which is based on facts and events, and that Egypt, in order to preserve its security and stability, will continue its war against this terrorism, which, if victorious in Egypt, will reach all countries in the region.

Abul-Naga expressed her absolute rejection of the distinction between Islamist movements in the region, and considered that their origin to be the same, namely the terrorist Brotherhood.

Abul-Naga told the American delegation: "We are surprised and deplore the American silence on the Turkish role, and Turkey's allowing the Brotherhood's satellite channels to wage war on Egypt without a clear American position on that."

She cited the manner in which the US dealt throughout the past period, as it was monitoring the Egyptian media (state and private media), and was sending through the US State Department many complaints demanding the cessation of what it called bypassing the Egyptian media.

She asked: How does Turkey declare war on Egypt and in the absence of an American position that condemns this behaviour?

"We know in advance that whatever Turkey's position is, the Americans are able to restrain them if they want," Abul-Naga said.

Egyptian diplomacy speaks clearly and frankly that if it were not for the silence and the hidden American support for the position of the Brotherhood, it would not have dared in this way to escalate the bombings against military and civilian targets as well.

Obama said clearly, "Those who think that the war on terrorism is limited to military effort are mistaken. This is a long, exhausting and costly war, and the military effort must be supported by other efforts".

He added: "Unless we dry up the terrorism-incubating environment in the region, the military effort may score some points, but it cannot deal a fatal blow to terrorism".

Obama spoke, for the first time, explaining his administration's vision of the situation, rejecting the idea of putting all political Islam, as he put it, in one basket, and stressing the importance of supporting moderate Islam, in reference to the Brotherhood, in the face of Islamist terrorism, considering that this strategy is the basis for defeating terrorism.

Obama also said, "When we absolutely fight political Islam that is a huge support for ISIS and others." 

Obama forgot that ISIS and al-Qaeda are an American industry par-excellence, and that his crying over the Brotherhood is nothing more than crocodile tears for the Trojan horse that Washington tried to use to invade and break up the region. 

Obama wanted to settle this issue once and for all. He informed His Majesty King Salman of the following:

The security and stability of the Gulf is an important part of the Iranian-American negotiations, and that the US cannot sacrifice its historical and strategic relations with the Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia, in the Iranian-American negotiations bazaar, and that the path the US is taking in this regard converges with the security of the Gulf and stability of Gulf states. 

Obama said that US cannot finally sign any agreement with Iran if the Gulf countries have any reservations about any of the terms of the agreement.

He added, that the absolute rejection of any Gulf-Iranian negotiations is not in the interest of the Gulf states, as Iran is a reality that must be dealt with in accordance with the laws, international relations and the sovereignty of each party, without interfering in the affairs of the other party.

Obama raised this position with the new Saudi leadership, at this particular time, after news leaked to Saudi Arabia through one of the Arab foreign ministers that the US-Iranian agreement was under final completion at the end of March or the beginning of April.

Those were Obama's messages during his recent visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and this is Washington's position.

We have to choose between our interests and the interests of America, between the blood of our sons from soldiers, army and police officers, and between the settlement between the two parties, as their ousted president before, the kidnapper and kidnapped, said. 

I like to conclude with this:

Do not reconcile, even if they give you gold,

See when I close your eyes,

Then put two jewels in their place,

Do you see?

Are things you can't buy.