Conflagration has long been a noun applied to the Middle East, a nexus of vast oil supplies, national rivalries, and clashing religious ideologies. Such bloody incidents as the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) and the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (1990) certainly contributed to the reputation of instability the region has earned. But this weekend’s attack on the Saudi Arabian oil processing facilities in Abqaiq and Khurais, besides its literal correspondence with conflagration, also contributes in the metaphorical sense of the word.
Once again we see competing claims, and, at least for myself, the mendacity the Trump Administration has displayed since before Trump became President makes it very difficult to understand the true nature of the attack, and that uncertainty leads to a more generally elevated concern over what might happen next.
Here’s a CNN-provided summary of some of the competing claims:
Yemen’s Houthi rebels have attacked Saudi Arabia’s oil facilities with drones, the Houthi-run Al-Masirah news agency said Saturday.
A Yemen armed forces spokesman was quoted by the agency as saying the Houthis successfully carried out a “large-scale” operation with 10 drones targeting Saudi Aramco oil facilities in Abqaiq and Khurais.
But preliminary indications are that the attacks Saturday that disrupted about half of the kingdom’s oil capacity did not originate from Yemen and likely originated from Iraq, according to a source with knowledge of the incident. The same official said the damage was caused by an armed drone attack.
Which official? Is s/he trustworthy? Was it Mike Pompeo?
We call on all nations to publicly and unequivocally condemn Iran’s attacks. The United States will work with our partners and allies to ensure that energy markets remain well supplied and Iran is held accountable for its aggression
— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) September 14, 2019
Source: Wikipedia
There’s no shortage of players motivated to cut the Saudis off at the knees. The Yemen Houthis are in an active war with the Saudis, which makes the Aramco oil processing plants legitimate targets, and so if the Houthis are, in fact, responsible, then this is simply another tactic designed to drive the Saudis out of the war. Given that the Saudis, under the leadership of Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman (MBS), plunged into this war (or “intervention”), began this particular incident in March 2015 under the premise that it would quickly resolve in their favor, it would be clear that the Houthis, using cheap technology and innovative tactics, are practicing asymmetrical warfare to great effect.
If the Houthis did, in fact, effect this attack.
Despite Secretary Pompeo being a member in good standing of the untrustworthy Trump Administration, his assertion that Iran is responsible is not unbelievable. Iran, after all, is laboring under American sanctions designed to bring the Iranians to their knees, renounce all nuclear arms and energy, and, in a probably unstated aim, cause regime-change in Tehran. Oil is Iran’s primary export, and the American’s primary target for sanctions. Reducing the world oil supply would certainly return the pressure on the Americans to ease up on those sanctions.
It’s worth noting that this may be an unofficial Iranian act. Iranian politics are polarized in a way that would be familiar to Americans; while both the Reformists and the hard-line Conservatives are deeply religious, the former believe that talks with the West, and in particular the United States, are necessary, while the latter believe defiance, particularly through meddling in Mideast politics, is a necessity. The two sides spend a lot of time bemoaning the moral degeneracy of the opposition. I could easily see a Conservative entity, either private or the Revolutionary Guard or allied agency, supplying the weaponry and expertise required for the attack, as a gambit to pressure and discredit the current Reformist government.
And that leads to thoughts about entirely private, pan-national terrorist organizations. Guns help level the playing field between large and small groups; drones are another element that can level the playing field, amplifying the importance of military intelligence and technological skills to damage and destroy targets with little risk to those employing them. These successful attacks on the Saudi oil processing facilities may be the work of a terrorist organization, either directly or by supplying the Houthis, stirring up mischief in hopes of taking advantage of the chaos to accomplish their private ends. Without more information, though, speculation on this possibility is pointless.
Finally, while some might proclaim this to be the proof that drones can be used by the oppressed to rise up against their oppressors, drones are, like most weapons, agnostic tools. That is to say, their efficacy is not dictated by the ideology of their users, but the situation in the field, and the skills of their operators. And the latter may shrink if they are equipped with strong artificial intelligence, a possibility that does not fill me with feelings of wellness, as I’ve mentioned before numerous times on this thread.
