Nawaf Obaid is an adjunct fellow with the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at CSIS, as well as managing director of the Saudi National Security Assessment Project, a consultancy based in Riyadh. He is also the private security and energy adviser to HRH Prince Turki Al Faisal, the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

With that background, I don't think he was merely opining on his own regarding the future course the Saudis will take in Iraq should the US "re-deploy" its troops, despite his carefully worded disclaimer to the contrary. I'm speculating here, but my guess is that his friend the Saudi Ambassador to the US asked him to write this, either to provide political cover for a Bush decision to leave US troops in Iraq, or as a warning shot across Iran's bow. Probably both.

As previously noted, this isn't the first time in recent memory that someone connected to the Saudi government has issued a statement that reasonably could be taken as an implied threat directed at Iran. For example, not so long ago I wrote about this statement, attributed to the Saudi ambassador to Kuwait, in which he said that the Saudi government was engaged in nuclear energy research:

Saudi Arabia is experimenting with nuclear technology for peaceful purposes but is not interested in acquiring nuclear weapons, the Saudi ambassador in Kuwait said in remarks published Wednesday.

Ambassador Abdul-Aziz al-Fayez said the experiments were taking place at the King Abdul-Aziz City for Science and Technology in Riyadh.

"But the kingdom is not seeking to possess nuclear weapons," he was quoted as saying in an interview with Kuwait's Al-Qabas daily.

Al-Fayez said the experiments were in "the field of nuclear energy," without elaborating.

Clearly the Saudis are very nervous about Iran's increasing power and influence in the region, and the prospect for a Shi'ite government in Iraq beholden to Iran which would sanction (or turn a blind eye toward) Bosnian style "ethnic cleansing" directed at the Sunni minority there. The Saudis have nowhere near the military might of Iran, but they do have deep financial pockets, and it isn't far fetched to conceive of them funding a proxy war in Iraq to keep that nation destabilized. In all likelihood they are already providing funding to some Sunni insurgents but that level of support could increase astronomically in the event of a US pullout. In addition, and in the event a "cold war" breaks out between the Iranians and the Saudis over Iraq, a covert Saudi program geared toward acquiring nuclear arms also becomes a very real possibility.

This highlights the need for a regional conference on the Iraq question, one in which the Saudis and Iran are among the participants. Both regimes, in Saudi Arabia and Iran, have legitimate concerns regarding the future of that poor nation. which thanks to us now lies broken into a million little shards of chaos, hatred and sectarian violence. It only makes sense for both countries (with or without US involvement) to engage the issue of Iraq's future in order to forestall a wider regional conflict between Shi'ites and Sunnis and to address their various security concerns.

Of course, you can rest assured that such an intensive diplomatic effort to limit the damage we have done in Iraq will be the last thing to which President Bush will agree. To paraphrase Atrios, it will be two more years of Bush's folly before any chance for real change can occur .

Iraq Iran Saudi Arabia US policy in Iraq Saudi policy in Iraq President Bush