The Current Canadian-Saudi Dust-Up

[Dawes]

So the Canadian government wants to cancel a $15 billion dollar LAV contract with the Saudis, and which may cost them $1 billion in cancellation penalties. And which may put hundreds of jobs in jeopardy. All this is due to the death of the reporter Kashoggi (sp?).

 

How do our Canadian brethren think this this will play out? Is there another way to maintain the contract and appease the masses?

 

[R011]

On the Canadian side, it depends on how many votes the Liberals think they will lose by going forward with this deal compared to how many they will lose by giving up such a big contract and all the jobs it involves. The second number is one or two seats in London Ontario and area. The first number is hard to say as while no one likes the Saudis, there isn't really much actual public outrage about doing business with them except among the chattering classes. It depends on how vulnerable they look in the polls. If they could find another, uncontroversial buyer to replace the Saudis, then the problem would be solved.

 

On the Saudi side, if our virtue signalling gets too bothersome, they'll buy from whoever will sell to them, France, for instance.

[urbanoid]

On the Saudi side, if our virtue signalling gets too bothersome, they'll buy from whoever will sell to them, France, for instance.

Or, more likely, from the US.

[glenn239]

So the Canadian government wants to cancel a $15 billion dollar LAV contract with the Saudis, and which may cost them $1 billion in cancellation penalties. And which may put hundreds of jobs in jeopardy. All this is due to the death of the reporter Kashoggi (sp?).

 

How do our Canadian brethren think this this will play out? Is there another way to maintain the contract and appease the masses?

 

 

I think Trudeau is wrong to cancel the contract and that the head foreign affairs in cabinet (Freeland) is too argumentative, rigid, and idealistic for the job and should be replaced, (we're getting into avoidable clashes with various countries such as China and Saudi Arabia over ideology).

[Stuart Galbraith]

Murdering reporters isnt Ideology. Murdering reporters is directly interfering with freedom of speech. If you dont endorse it abroad, sooner or later you will tolerate it being done at home.

They dont want to live by our rules, dont trade with them. Same goes with China.

 

 

Yes, its very sad there are going to be lots of canadians out of jobs. It would have been far smarter not to have traded with Saudi Arabia at all IMHO.

[Josh]

Sadly, the US will gladly take up the slack. I've less problems with the one guy the KSA killed in Turkey and more of an issue with the unending war they have in Yemen. I think the first issue drew a lot of attention to the second. It's sad that so much time is spent talking about Syria and no one seemed to care about Yemen until the KSA managed to step out of bounds killing someone with a US residency on someone else's territory.

Edited December 18, 2018 by Josh

[glenn239]

Murdering reporters isnt Ideology. Murdering reporters is directly interfering with freedom of speech. If you dont endorse it abroad, sooner or later you will tolerate it being done at home.

They dont want to live by our rules, dont trade with them. Same goes with China.

 

 

Yes, its very sad there are going to be lots of canadians out of jobs. It would have been far smarter not to have traded with Saudi Arabia at all IMHO.

 

For a guy that doesn't love Putin, you do seem to want to hand Russia an easy victory here.

 

Josh Sadly, the US will gladly take up the slack.

 

 

I'm sure the Saudis would piss themselves laughing at the idea that if Canada cancels the US will just step in and get the contract.

Edited December 18, 2018 by glenn239

[Stuart Galbraith]

Glenn, for someone whom cares so much about values, you sure dont seem to have any.

 

 

Sadly, the US will gladly take up the slack. I've less problems with the one guy the KSA killed in Turkey and more of an issue with the unending war they have in Yemen. I think the first issue drew a lot of attention to the second. It's sad that so much time is spent talking about Syria and no one seemed to care about Yemen until the KSA managed to step out of bounds killing someone with a US residency on someone else's territory.

 

Yemen in pure bodycount is far more important, for sure. But we supposedly value free speech. We supposedly uphold the values of journalists questioning authority. We roll over on a Journalist being murdered, and Google and every other multinational rolls over for China in censoring free speech. During the cold war we stood for something. Now, its just becoming a pure parody of everything we fought the cold war for. Unless we stand by these values, we may as well have just rolled over in 1945. It would have saved lots of money and bloodshed.

 

A west that doesn't stand by its values, isnt a west anymore. Its bad enough the Americans are increasingly in love with the idea there are no values, only costs. As if the free market ever actually was a torch holder for freedom.

[R011]

During the Cold War, the West supported people as bad as the Saudis are today. Nations dont have principles, they have interests.

[Colin]

Canada could apply the same metrics to China but won't. China is far to important a customer and the Liberals have a love affair with the ruling class there.

Edited December 18, 2018 by Colin

[Dark_Falcon]

Sadly, the US will gladly take up the slack. I've less problems with the one guy the KSA killed in Turkey and more of an issue with the unending war they have in Yemen. I think the first issue drew a lot of attention to the second. It's sad that so much time is spent talking about Syria and no one seemed to care about Yemen until the KSA managed to step out of bounds killing someone with a US residency on someone else's territory.

 

No we won't, because the Senate would block the deal. I don't really see the Saudis being able to sign any major new contracts for AFVs in North America in the near term unless the Crown Prince MBS is smacked down visibly for having Khashoggi killed. He ruffled too many people's feathers and they're not going to simply forget it overnight.

 

My own bet is that deliveries of AFVs from North America to the KSA will be halted for a period of a few months to a year or two. I think MBS will get his toys eventually, but that won't happen next week or even next month.

[Dawes]

I think it's fair to say that the average American simply isn't interested in this whole affair. Of course, the average American probably can't find Saudi Arabia on a map.

[Stuart Galbraith]

During the Cold War, the West supported people as bad as the Saudis are today. Nations dont have principles, they have interests.

 

They supported people as bad as the Saudi's, with the understanding they would become better as economic development occurred. Look around the globe, whether its the Phillipines, Panama, South Korea or Chile, it all came true. Compare and contrast with the middle east, whether its Mubarak for us, or Gadaffi for the Soviets, it just hasnt happened. Every tax dollar put into Saudi Arabia just seems to make them more decadent and intractable.

 

As for the second part of what you write there, that keeps being touted, but its ridiculous. Its the morally absent foreign policy cooked up by sociopaths like Kissinger. Yes, there are inherent advantages occasionally in behaving that way, but were it true the US would not have remained engaged in Europe for so long. There was no real economic reason why we gave the Irish Republic an 8 Billion pound float at the time of the financial crisis. Friendship is but one explanation for it.

 

Democratic nations all need each other right now. The ones that arent? Let them be the millstone of the unfree world. Because that is essentially what the Saudi's are becoming as their oil becomes less and less important.

[urbanoid]

They supported people as bad as the Saudi's, with the understanding they would become better as economic development occurred. Look around the globe, whether its the Phillipines, Panama, South Korea or Chile, it all came true. Compare and contrast with the middle east, whether its Mubarak for us, or Gadaffi for the Soviets, it just hasnt happened. Every tax dollar put into Saudi Arabia just seems to make them more decadent and intractable.

 

It's the other way around.

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

They supported people as bad as the Saudi's, with the understanding they would become better as economic development occurred. Look around the globe, whether its the Phillipines, Panama, South Korea or Chile, it all came true. Compare and contrast with the middle east, whether its Mubarak for us, or Gadaffi for the Soviets, it just hasnt happened. Every tax dollar put into Saudi Arabia just seems to make them more decadent and intractable.

 

It's the other way around.

 

 

Maybe it is now, but whom bought their oil? Whom was instrumental in setting up the oil industry they have? The Americans subsequently learned the lesson and looked elsewhere for their oil, not least at home. The rest of us have not.

[JasonJ]

Canada could apply the same metrics to China but won't. China is far to important a customer and the Liberals have a love affair with the ruling class there.

 

It's pretty similar situation for all countries, even Japan, which has a huge trade relation with China, which goes in great contrast to anyone that watches the geopolitical and geo-economical competition between the two.

 

So I think for business to continue with China that doesn't result in a geopolitical strategic disadvantage in the long term are economic blocs like how the EU helps protect individual EU countries being out competed in negotiations with other bigger countries like Russia or China. So for Canada, Australia, and Japan, that's the CPTPP. It makes for an economic based foundation to tug geopolitical interests of these countries to align more with each other and make it harder for a country like China make better arrangements for itself on a 1 to 1 basis.

 

I think economic and diplomatic policies based just on liberal ideals of freedom of speech/press/religion etc. is enough when dealing with small countries that are not of that nature but not enough when dealing with China. An economic incentive is also needed to steer policies towards alignment between the smaller democratic countries, hence CPTPP. The US not in it is still quite big on its own or within the new USMCA.

[urbanoid]

 

 

They supported people as bad as the Saudi's, with the understanding they would become better as economic development occurred. Look around the globe, whether its the Phillipines, Panama, South Korea or Chile, it all came true. Compare and contrast with the middle east, whether its Mubarak for us, or Gadaffi for the Soviets, it just hasnt happened. Every tax dollar put into Saudi Arabia just seems to make them more decadent and intractable.

 

It's the other way around.

 

 

Maybe it is now, but whom bought their oil? Whom was instrumental in setting up the oil industry they have? The Americans subsequently learned the lesson and looked elsewhere for their oil, not least at home. The rest of us have not.

 

There weren't many other options than Saudi & Co and there aren't that many now for that matter. Unlike Russia or Iran, which are other big producers, Saudis aren't a threat to Western-backed regional/international order, they actually welcome it. We need that oil anyway, better to buy it from ME kingdoms that are dependent on the West than from those who compete with the West.

 

If we kick them in the ass because of some human rights and shit they will find another 'daddy', maybe in Moscow, maybe in Beijing, maybe both. It will be others influencing the oil market, it will be others selling them shit worth hundreds of billions, as they can't do shit by themselves.

 

For now we simply need to wait for technological breakthroughs that will give us cleaner AND cheaper source of energy. Lots of nasty states will suffer because of it.

 

 

[glenn239]

Glenn, for someone whom cares so much about values, you sure dont seem to have any.

 

 

 

 

I value Canadian jobs in London. And you don't.

 

One day you want to oppose Russian influence, the next you seem to want to hand Putin a 15 billion dollar Saudi APC contract and influence over half the Middle East. Consistency like that is a bit of the chicken with its head cut off variety.

 

 

Democratic nations all need each other right now.

 

 

For Canada the biggest current problem is a serious rift between the provinces (BC and Alberta in particular) and some of the provinces and the Federal government. On the foreign front, China is the big one right now - our principled government is not going to play ball, so we're all worried more Canadians overseas might get arrested.

Edited December 19, 2018 by glenn239

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

 

 

They supported people as bad as the Saudi's, with the understanding they would become better as economic development occurred. Look around the globe, whether its the Phillipines, Panama, South Korea or Chile, it all came true. Compare and contrast with the middle east, whether its Mubarak for us, or Gadaffi for the Soviets, it just hasnt happened. Every tax dollar put into Saudi Arabia just seems to make them more decadent and intractable.

 

It's the other way around.

 

 

Maybe it is now, but whom bought their oil? Whom was instrumental in setting up the oil industry they have? The Americans subsequently learned the lesson and looked elsewhere for their oil, not least at home. The rest of us have not.

 

There weren't many other options than Saudi & Co and there aren't that many now for that matter. Unlike Russia or Iran, which are other big producers, Saudis aren't a threat to Western-backed regional/international order, they actually welcome it. We need that oil anyway, better to buy it from ME kingdoms that are dependent on the West than from those who compete with the West.

 

If we kick them in the ass because of some human rights and shit they will find another 'daddy', maybe in Moscow, maybe in Beijing, maybe both. It will be others influencing the oil market, it will be others selling them shit worth hundreds of billions, as they can't do shit by themselves.

 

For now we simply need to wait for technological breakthroughs that will give us cleaner AND cheaper source of energy. Lots of nasty states will suffer because of it.

 

 

 

 

I dont see that as a problem. Yes, it might shock the economy, but it would convince us to get off our butt and start investing in renewable energy. Which even if you dont believe in environmental change, makes sense from a purely economic point of view.

 

If they want to form an axis of evil with Russia and China, good luck to them. They might want to reflect on what happened to Syria and North Korea.

Edited December 19, 2018 by Stuart Galbraith

[urbanoid]

We are investing in it anyway, we are looking for solutions and sooner or later we'll find them. Might just as well earn a few bucks in the meantime. A buck earned by the West and not earned by West's competitors at the same time makes two bucks.

Edited December 19, 2018 by urbanoid

[Josh]

Saudi Arabia can't realistically re-align with Russia or China, because to do so would threaten most of their existing military infrastructure and their ultimate guarantee of defense against Iran. Plus lets face it; Russian customer service likely wouldn't work for the KSA. Anecdotally I've heard things that would be crew level maintenance on a tank is handled by US contractors. That would have to go double for their airforce, which would likely be a costly museum in a matter of months without US support. Exactly how many planes can Russia and China supply them with how quickly, with what level of service and parts, and how much are they willing to pay for them at this juncture? And if something goes wrong with Iran, which side would Russia or China help? The US can put pressure on the KSA, and I think the Fresh Prince Of Riyadh has amply demonstrated he is a destabilizing force not consistent with US goals. I don't see a down side to putting pressure on the Saudies to find another choice; indeed most of the royal family would probably have his head put on a stick at this point if they can manage to get away with it.

[Stuart Galbraith]

I completely agree.

[glenn239]

Saudi Arabia can't realistically re-align with Russia or China, because to do so would threaten most of their existing military infrastructure and their ultimate guarantee of defense against Iran. Plus lets face it; Russian customer service likely wouldn't work for the KSA. Anecdotally I've heard things that would be crew level maintenance on a tank is handled by US contractors. That would have to go double for their airforce, which would likely be a costly museum in a matter of months without US support. Exactly how many planes can Russia and China supply them with how quickly, with what level of service and parts, and how much are they willing to pay for them at this juncture? And if something goes wrong with Iran, which side would Russia or China help? The US can put pressure on the KSA, and I think the Fresh Prince Of Riyadh has amply demonstrated he is a destabilizing force not consistent with US goals. I don't see a down side to putting pressure on the Saudies to find another choice; indeed most of the royal family would probably have his head put on a stick at this point if they can manage to get away with it.

 

 

The Saudi-Iranian tensions are not existential for either side. So this is a point of leverage only insofar as the Iranians and Saudis permit it to be. Also, don't forget we need the Arab infrastructure to fight Arab extremists more than the Saudis need us to fight Iran, and it goes without saying that if the Saudis and Iranians reach an accord the American strategy in the ME - already a bit of a joke - completely collapses.

 

In terms of Russian or Chinese mediation in the Iranian dispute, the precedent in Syria suggests that both countries are strongly inclined to play the role of fair broker in reaching an accord. The West, meanwhile wants as much Saudi-Iranian conflict as possible...but will withhold military equipment at the same time? Not sure that's going to work.

Edited December 19, 2018 by glenn239

[Nobu]

Japan's diplomatic recognition of the People's Republic of China occurred in 1972, on the heels of Nixon's visit and at a time when China and Chinese were violating the rights of their own people to a far greater extent than today in various ways, including by killing them by the millions according to the Holocaust Memorial Museum.

 

The reasons for both events had less to do with the question of non-existent Japanese and American moral angst over relatively non-existent trade volume levels with Beijing, and much more to do with what Japan and Washington wanted relative to what Beijing wanted at the time. Nations having their own interests indeed.

 

Give Erdogan and the Turks their due. They have mastered this particular situation and may end up leveraging Washington into acting against its own interests.

 

Interestingly, Washington may have done the same to Canada relative to the female executive's arrest by using it to kick the legs out from underneath a possible Canada/China trade accommodation.

Edited December 19, 2018 by Nobu

[glenn239]

Speaking of the Chinese executive, a third Canadian has been arrested in China today. It's going to get worse....