Trump on terror-firma

His speech is unlikely to encourage peace in West Asia

Donald Trump has earned relieved plaudits for delivering a relatively moderate speech to 50 leaders on the second day of his visit to Saudi Arabia. In place of the anti-Islamic screeds that marked his campaign and his travel ban on six Muslim-majority nations, twice overturned by courts, Mr Trump sought cooperation with West Asia’s leaders to confront “the crisis of Islamic extremism”. This meant “starving terrorists of their territory, their funding, and the false allure of their craven ideology”. Mr Trump was careful to clarify that cracking down on terrorism was a common agenda. “We are not here to lecture — we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do, who to be, or how to worship. Instead, we are here to offer partnership – based on shared interests and values – to pursue a better future for us all,” he said. In terms of intellectual substance, this speech may not compare with the brilliance of Barack Obama’s 2009 speech at Cairo University, which briefly raised hopes of a reset in US-West Asian relations. But Mr Trump undoubtedly delivered a message that needed to be stated upfront; with the US enjoying self-sufficiency in fossil fuels, this is as good a time as any to tell it like it is to West Asian rulers. 

The doubts lie in the credibility of the message. Mr Trump spoke of his concern for the safety of American citizens and “the humanitarian and security disaster in this region that is spreading across the planet”. These concerns sit oddly with several facts. The first is the feted $110-billion defence deal with Saudi Arabia. It is an open secret that the kingdom is, and always has been, the biggest sponsor of Islamic terrorism worldwide, and that its Salafist Islam has deepened doctrinal schisms in the region. Al Qaeda was bankrolled by the kingdom, as are the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Yemeni civil war is its proxy war with Shi’ite Iran. If the kingdom has refrained from supporting the Islamic State, the uber-extremist organisation that grew from Al Qaeda, it is because this organisation harms other Muslims. It is strange, then, that the US should facilitate the arming of the world’s principal terror sponsor (even if the objective is to create American jobs). Mr Trump applauded Gulf countries for eliminating sources of terror financing, though there is no evidence that they have done so. 

Finally, even as Mr Trump spoke of healing divisions between Shia, Sunni, Jews and Christians, he chose to single out Iran, the Shia-majority nation with which a nuclear accord was signed in 2015, as the purveyor of regional terrorism via its support of the Hezbollah and for Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. These are indisputable facts, but Iran’s transgressions are scarcely different from those of US’ Saudi client. Besides, emphasising the Sunni-Shia cleavage is unlikely to promote West Asian peace. Mr Trump’s Riyadh performance is notable for being uncharacteristic of the man. As a means of encouraging the peace process in the region, which demands a careful and nuanced approach, its falls far short of what is needed.