BL

JP Morgan dumping Mideast Gulf Country loans at a discount. Writing is on the wall.

Recommended Posts

(edited)

Oil Price's Paraskova wrote a good article on JP Morgan bailing out of ME. 

Just 6 months ago every bank was beating a path to Saudi Arabia to be on their Aramco IPO syndicate and be the banker to the ME Oil States.  Not any more.

Now JP is saying GET ME OUT !

 

"JPMorgan has recently tried to sell at a discount loans it holds of the sovereign wealth funds of the two major oil producers in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, Reuters on Thursday, citing sources and a document it has seen."

What is troubling is this type of unsecured commercial paper is usually short term to cover expenses such as say payroll, etc.

Sovereign Wealth Fund has no payroll to speak of.  What is scaring JPM ?  The Fund running short of funds to pay the stipend due to its 20,000+ royals ?  The coming flood of stock that it must buy to support the Aramco stock price once lockup comes off in June ? 

Something has spooked them.  

Does this mean no more " Neom the City of the Future"  with flying cars in Saudi Arabia ? 

Some believe the oil industry will never be the same and will see oil prices no higher than the upper $50's.  And those are the good projections.

Others predict a more volatile and dangerous region than we've ever seen before. That's saying something.

Is JP Morgan the only Investment bank to get the heck out of there .   .   .   .   or just the first.

U.S. military should take JP Morgans lead and hightail it out of there.  U.S. does not need to be stuck in another quagmire. Get out while you can. 

Saudi Arabia is dumping oil on the U.S. market ?  Screw them.  

Side note: Group of U.S. Senators paid a visit to the Saudi Ambassador to the United States Friday.  I think the ambassador is another one of the Salman Bros.  I hear the discussion became rather heated.  The Saudi ambassador started screaming, " why blame us (KSA) , how about the Russians".  Reportedly a Senator named Ted Cruse shouted back, "Russia is our enemy, we expect that of them , you're supposed to be our friend and you are trying to destroy our oil industry ?"

I hear the good Senators threatened to withdraw troops and close bases.  Seems the Saudis came to their senses. 

Edited by BLA
  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the big banks and Hedge Funds, Buffet like after 08 are going to cash in on this pandemic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

11 minutes ago, RichieRich216 said:

All the big banks and Hedge Funds, Buffet like after 08 are going to cash in on this pandemic!

Buffet was holding $140 billion in cash.  He will have a good year.

This is not about the pandemic.  It's about the Banks assessment of the future of the ME.  It's their job . 

JPM dumping ME loans.  What might that tell you.  

 

Edited by BLA
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BLA said:

JPM dumping ME loans.  What might that tell you.

It suggests that traders inside JPMorgan Chase Bank anticipate that ME loans, or "commercial paper," or "sovereign paper," is going to become illiquid.  Illiquid paper is not fungible; it cannot be converted into cash, as it has no market of buyers and sellers.  For a bank, that is anathema. 

The interesting question is:  who is the counter-party doing the buying?  And why? 

P.S.:   Do you anticipate that Tesla paper will become illiquid? 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 4/12/2020 at 9:27 PM, Jan van Eck said:

It suggests that traders inside JPMorgan Chase Bank anticipate that ME loans, or "commercial paper," or "sovereign paper," is going to become illiquid.  Illiquid paper is not fungible; it cannot be converted into cash, as it has no market of buyers and sellers.  For a bank, that is anathema. 

The interesting question is:  who is the counter-party doing the buying?  And why? 

P.S.:   Do you anticipate that Tesla paper will become illiquid? 

Paraskova's article said they were attempting to sell the loans.  Don't know if they did .

Note the JPM loans were to the Sovereign Wealth Fund.  Not the Saudi Government or Aramco.  That fund is going to be drained if the price of oil stays below $50 bbl for any length of time. 

First the fund has been buying up any Aramco stock for sale to support  (prop up, painting the tape) the stock at the offering price of 32. I hear when the stock comes off lock up in June they will have to buy the flood of stock that will be for sale.  Aramco also guaranteed their IPO stock s $75 Billion dividend/year for 5 years. At these oil prices will Aramco be able to come thru with dividend.

Then there is the yearly stipend payout for the 20,000+ royalty.  I do not know that number, but it's big.  

ALL these expenses combined are a big nut to carry.  

Yes, the paper will become illiquid (it slready has) but they also could default. COMMERCIAL PAPER IS UNSECURED.

UAE, Qatar and Oman have each been able to float some bonds recently albeit at higher rates and stricter covenants. Bonds are secured. 

Tesla ? Don't follow them. 

Edited by BLA
  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

P.S.:   Do you anticipate that Tesla paper will become illiquid? 

I'm dense. One fellow today already told me I couldn't pour piss from a boot without reading the instructions on the heel. What exactly did you mean by that comment above? Thanks!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

I'm dense. One fellow today already told me I couldn't pour piss from a boot without reading the instructions on the heel. What exactly did you mean by that comment above? Thanks!

It was purely rhetorical question.   

Corporations have two ways to raise additional cash:  one by capital, by issuing new shares and/or by selling other claims on assets such as bonds, and he other being "commercial paper," basically a corporate IOU, where the company goes into the market and sells a term note due at some future time with an interest coupon.  That "paper" is then bought and sold among traders (and speculators) with the price varying according to the perception of risk, and the perception of interest rates available or anticipated to be available from alternative paper from others.  Commercial paper is a huge marketplace, and is routinely accessed by corporations to provide short-term funding.   One typical use for the proceeds of such paper sales would be to fund inventory and accounts receivables, for example. 

Some corporations get into trouble with Paper as they become unable to meet the redemption.  If the marketplace gets the perception that the paper cannot be redeemed, or will be defaulted, then there are no Buyers, and the paper becomes "illiquid."  Tesla autos use no fuel, which makes them marginally attractive during times of high fuel prices; in markets where gasoline is abundant, then the cars become less attractive and sales will suffer. The world is drowning in gasoline, and I suspect that gasoline in the USA will drop to below $1/gal   (except in California, where the lunatics have created these choke-points in distribution)  and that makes expensive Tesla cars relatively unattractive, and would lead to some future default on whatever commercial paper they may have floated.   It is such a weird company that for all I know Tesla cannot even access the paper market, and is left to sell stock to the dreamers that have been financing them for years now.  

That said, apparently in China the Tesla car sales are through the roof.  Or, so it is said to be.  Can Tesla float paper with only one booming market for their product?  That provoked the rhetorical question above.  The point I was seeking to illustrate is that markets are all screwed up, they are defying ration or reason.   Who would have anticipated that Wyoming Light would go to minus-$1.75/bbl?   You have to pay someone to take your well production?   What kind of craziness is that? 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RichieRich216 said:

All the big banks and Hedge Funds, Buffet like after 08 are going to cash in on this pandemic!

How? Buy the stock market back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Who would have anticipated that Wyoming Light would go to minus-$1.75/bbl?   You have to pay someone to take your well production?   What kind of craziness is that? 

Sort of like negative interest rates, eh?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ronwagn said:

How? Buy the stock market back?

More like buying large companies for a fraction of their recent valuations.  Done properly, this can give a very small number of people, or funds, virtual control of an industry.  Think about that over your corn flakes....

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

13 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

It was purely rhetorical question.   

Corporations have two ways to raise additional cash:  one by capital, by issuing new shares and/or by selling other claims on assets such as bonds, and he other being "commercial paper," basically a corporate IOU, where the company goes into the market and sells a term note due at some future time with an interest coupon.  That "paper" is then bought and sold among traders (and speculators) with the price varying according to the perception of risk, and the perception of interest rates available or anticipated to be available from alternative paper from others.  Commercial paper is a huge marketplace, and is routinely accessed by corporations to provide short-term funding.   One typical use for the proceeds of such paper sales would be to fund inventory and accounts receivables, for example. 

Some corporations get into trouble with Paper as they become unable to meet the redemption.  If the marketplace gets the perception that the paper cannot be redeemed, or will be defaulted, then there are no Buyers, and the paper becomes "illiquid."  Tesla autos use no fuel, which makes them marginally attractive during times of high fuel prices; in markets where gasoline is abundant, then the cars become less attractive and sales will suffer. The world is drowning in gasoline, and I suspect that gasoline in the USA will drop to below $1/gal   (except in California, where the lunatics have created these choke-points in distribution)  and that makes expensive Tesla cars relatively unattractive, and would lead to some future default on whatever commercial paper they may have floated.   It is such a weird company that for all I know Tesla cannot even access the paper market, and is left to sell stock to the dreamers that have been financing them for years now.  

That said, apparently in China the Tesla car sales are through the roof.  Or, so it is said to be.  Can Tesla float paper with only one booming market for their product?  That provoked the rhetorical question above.  The point I was seeking to illustrate is that markets are all screwed up, they are defying ration or reason.   Who would have anticipated that Wyoming Light would go to minus-$1.75/bbl?   You have to pay someone to take your well production?   What kind of craziness is that? 

Pump price in Michigan on Friday $.89.

Edited by Rouster1
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pump price in Micigan on Friday, $.89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

JvE, 

you asked who the counter party may be, the issuers would benefit if they believed prices would rise going forward.  Certainly the Saudis have an idea of their tolerances and can project going forward.  Whether you believe they are competent or not is a different story.  If they hedged at a decent price this could be a windfall for them.

waltz

Edited by waltz
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2020 at 12:12 PM, BLA said:

Oil Price's Paraskova wrote a good article on JP Morgan bailing out of ME. 

Just 6 months ago every bank was beating a path to Saudi Arabia to be on their Aramco IPO syndicate and be the banker to the ME Oil States.  Not any more.

Now JP is saying GET ME OUT !

 

"JPMorgan has recently tried to sell at a discount loans it holds of the sovereign wealth funds of the two major oil producers in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, Reuters on Thursday, citing sources and a document it has seen."

What is troubling is this type of unsecured commercial paper is usually short term to cover expenses such as say payroll, etc.

Sovereign Wealth Fund has no payroll to speak of.  What is scaring JPM ?  The Fund running short of funds to pay the stipend due to its 20,000+ royals ?  The coming flood of stock that it must buy to support the Aramco stock price once lockup comes off in June ? 

Something has spooked them.  

Does this mean no more " Neom the City of the Future"  with flying cars in Saudi Arabia ? 

Some believe the oil industry will never be the same and will see oil prices no higher than the upper $50's.  And those are the good projections.

Others predict a more volatile and dangerous region than we've ever seen before. That's saying something.

Is JP Morgan the only Investment bank to get the heck out of there .   .   .   .   or just the first.

U.S. military should take JP Morgans lead and hightail it out of there.  U.S. does not need to be stuck in another quagmire. Get out while you can. 

Saudi Arabia is dumping oil on the U.S. market ?  Screw them.  

Side note: Group of U.S. Senators paid a visit to the Saudi Ambassador to the United States Friday.  I think the ambassador is another one of the Salman Bros.  I hear the discussion became rather heated.  The Saudi ambassador started screaming, " why blame us (KSA) , how about the Russians".  Reportedly a Senator named Ted Cruse shouted back, "Russia is our enemy, we expect that of them , you're supposed to be our friend and you are trying to destroy our oil industry ?"

I hear the good Senators threatened to withdraw troops and close bases.  Seems the Saudis came to their senses. 

Curious that the Saudis would play this game when everyone has known from day one that the US-Saudi relationship was one of convenience.  Why even bother with the facade?

As for bringing our toys home and leaving the Saudis to their fate, I don't think that's feasible right before an election.  Even with the coronavirus, throwing the entire Middle East into chaos runs too much risk of high oil prices.  I'm curious to see what happens after the election.  Then again, I'm an engineer - not a politician.  I don't know how these decisions are really made. 

@Jan van Eck, you seem to have much more insight into these things than I.  How do you see the US playing its relationship with Saudi Arabia now that they're somewhat expendable? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

@Jan van Eck, you seem to have much more insight into these things than I.  How do you see the US playing its relationship with Saudi Arabia now that they're somewhat expendable? 

The USA relationship with the Middle East has little to do with oil.  As has been amply demonstrated on this Forum by the serious experts, North Ameerica  (and you include Mexico and canada) is quite self-sufficient for oil.  What it is all about is the Jews sitting in the West Bank.

The US Jewish numbers are quite small; perhaps 4% of the population.  The number of Jews as staffers inside Washington, working in the offices of various Congressmen and in the Administration Divisions, is about 12%.  That is influential.  What has happened over the decades is that tons of money has been funnelled through AIPAC and similar lobby groups to influence each Administration in turn to place a veneer of legitimacy on Israeli seizure of lands in the West Bank.  Now, I am not going to get side-tracked into discussioons about how the Jews were in Palestine 2,000 years ago so never mind they left for Russia and Poland, that land is still theires, because it was promised to them by Jehovah  (God to the rest of you) and therefor the Jews can take it back 20 centuries later, that argument is for others to make and break.  

Baut the b ottom line is that it is an argument that does not have any audience anywhere except in the Israeli Likud Party, and in the USA Jewish Community, which sends tons of money over there to support and prop up the Israeli Zionist government, Mr. Netanyahu's Likud guys.  And that policy, additional to the land grabbing, is to convince the Palestinians that they are a conquered people, so you get all the petty insults and humiliations that are the stock in trade in that part of the world.  

Now, all those acts of land theft, house demolition, miscallenoous murder, and humiliations all deads to this permanent status of enmity and the swearing of eternal vengeance from the various Arabs and the Shi'ites that are travellers on that caravan.  the big proponent of that is (no surprise) Iran and the Mullahs.  the Iranians are seriously smart people, really clever, and they are working on building nuke bombs and the missiles to use them.  The idea is to destroy Israel.  Ultimately, the mullahs will be dropping nukes on tel Aviv soon enough, sot he only realistic way tostop them is with the US military sitting in between, and that means at Qatar and KSA. 

So: will the USA pull troops out of KSA?  In my opinion, never.  Those men are there to stop the Iranians and shoot down anything and everything that goes flying towards tel Aviv.  Will it (eventually) come to war?  But of course.  Nothing is going to derailthe mullahs except death - their death.  Until bounties are placed on the heds of the Ayatollahs, or some revolution comes along, eventually the Strike Order will be given and the ICBM's are going to launch with 1-megaton warheads on them, and the result is not going to be pretty. 

I would not be investing in real estate in Tel Aviv.  The odds of stopping the upcoming nukes are, at best, maybe 50%.  Without the Americans sitting in KSA and Qatar, the odds of shutting down the mullahs is zero. Ther are going to be only two outcomings:  awful, and unthinkable.  Unless, of course, somebody whacks the various Ayatollahs, which is the best possible outcome. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BFS, 

you asked why even bother with the facade.  I would suggest that the petrodollar benefits the US immensely, 0r0 would disagree, how else could the US have anyone buy the gargantuan amounts of debt at such low rates if the dollar was not the dominant currency for international trade.  Losing that benefit as we are seemingly printing unlimited dollars seems like a foreseeable disaster foretold.

walt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, waltz said:

BFS, 

you asked why even bother with the facade.  I would suggest that the petrodollar benefits the US immensely, 0r0 would disagree, how else could the US have anyone buy the gargantuan amounts of debt at such low rates if the dollar was not the dominant currency for international trade.  Losing that benefit as we are seemingly printing unlimited dollars seems like a foreseeable disaster foretold.

walt

Which is better: using petrodollars to fund deficit spending or simply expanding one's economy?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the petrodollar made sense when the US was hopelessly dependent on foreign oil and, therefore, had no choice but to suffer trade imbalances.  That's no longer the case, so why not keep the industry and money at home?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

The USA relationship with the Middle East has little to do with oil.  As has been amply demonstrated on this Forum by the serious experts, North Ameerica  (and you include Mexico and canada) is quite self-sufficient for oil.  What it is all about is the Jews sitting in the West Bank.

The US Jewish numbers are quite small; perhaps 4% of the population.  The number of Jews as staffers inside Washington, working in the offices of various Congressmen and in the Administration Divisions, is about 12%.  That is influential.  What has happened over the decades is that tons of money has been funnelled through AIPAC and similar lobby groups to influence each Administration in turn to place a veneer of legitimacy on Israeli seizure of lands in the West Bank.  Now, I am not going to get side-tracked into discussioons about how the Jews were in Palestine 2,000 years ago so never mind they left for Russia and Poland, that land is still theires, because it was promised to them by Jehovah  (God to the rest of you) and therefor the Jews can take it back 20 centuries later, that argument is for others to make and break.  

Baut the b ottom line is that it is an argument that does not have any audience anywhere except in the Israeli Likud Party, and in the USA Jewish Community, which sends tons of money over there to support and prop up the Israeli Zionist government, Mr. Netanyahu's Likud guys.  And that policy, additional to the land grabbing, is to convince the Palestinians that they are a conquered people, so you get all the petty insults and humiliations that are the stock in trade in that part of the world.  

Now, all those acts of land theft, house demolition, miscallenoous murder, and humiliations all deads to this permanent status of enmity and the swearing of eternal vengeance from the various Arabs and the Shi'ites that are travellers on that caravan.  the big proponent of that is (no surprise) Iran and the Mullahs.  the Iranians are seriously smart people, really clever, and they are working on building nuke bombs and the missiles to use them.  The idea is to destroy Israel.  Ultimately, the mullahs will be dropping nukes on tel Aviv soon enough, sot he only realistic way tostop them is with the US military sitting in between, and that means at Qatar and KSA. 

So: will the USA pull troops out of KSA?  In my opinion, never.  Those men are there to stop the Iranians and shoot down anything and everything that goes flying towards tel Aviv.  Will it (eventually) come to war?  But of course.  Nothing is going to derailthe mullahs except death - their death.  Until bounties are placed on the heds of the Ayatollahs, or some revolution comes along, eventually the Strike Order will be given and the ICBM's are going to launch with 1-megaton warheads on them, and the result is not going to be pretty. 

I would not be investing in real estate in Tel Aviv.  The odds of stopping the upcoming nukes are, at best, maybe 50%.  Without the Americans sitting in KSA and Qatar, the odds of shutting down the mullahs is zero. Ther are going to be only two outcomings:  awful, and unthinkable.  Unless, of course, somebody whacks the various Ayatollahs, which is the best possible outcome. 

12% is disproportionate, but still not a lot.  Is there not a scenario in which the other 88% of lobbyists/staffers/whoever convince politicians that Middle East defense spending would earn more votes if applied elsewhere? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

12% is disproportionate, but still not a lot.  Is there not a scenario in which the other 88% of lobbyists/staffers/whoever convince politicians that Middle East defense spending would earn more votes if applied elsewhere? 

Not really.  AIPAC is pretty much all-powerful.   Crossing AIPAC is like touching the third rail down in the subway tunnels.  Instant destruction.  Nobody dares cross AIPAC.  One of the realities of American politics. 

Meanwhile, at least for the forseeable future, you have Kushner convincing Trump to do other AIPAC bidding, like moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, which is (frankly) idiotic, given that their couterparts in the government there are all in Tel Aviv. The US remains enmeshed in ME politics.  Ugh.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BFS, sorry my phone just ate my comment.  I never argued for deficit spending (though now is the time to finance it) but it has to be future looking.

We have had record low interest rates and massive injections of liquidity without the growth (tax revenue) to bring down the deficit or debt over the last decade.  Without global demand for currently issued US debt, because of the petrodollar phenomenon, I can only believe we would be further behind the eight ball.

Not sure how to quote but at this point it is not a case of keeping money and industry at home but financing our already existing and continuously growing debt at rates the country can cope with.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, waltz said:

Not sure how to quote but at this point it is not a case of keeping money and industry at home but financing our already existing and continuously growing debt at rates the country can cope with.

The country cannot cope with the debt load.  The only reason the ship still floats is because of the rust principle.  It isthe rust that is holding the ship's hull together, and as long as nobody gets fancy and starts rust-chipping, then it will still float.  At least, for now. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

JvE, my phone seems hungry tonight.  I agree just making the point that in my opinion it would be worse without global demand for the dollar.  
Did you see the Saudis are issuing new bonds?  Looks like they may have been the likely buyer of JPM’s holdings.

Edited by waltz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

Not really.  AIPAC is pretty much all-powerful.   Crossing AIPAC is like touching the third rail down in the subway tunnels.  Instant destruction.  Nobody dares cross AIPAC.  One of the realities of American politics. 

Meanwhile, at least for the forseeable future, you have Kushner convincing Trump to do other AIPAC bidding, like moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, which is (frankly) idiotic, given that their couterparts in the government there are all in Tel Aviv. The US remains enmeshed in ME politics.  Ugh.

How did AIPAC accomplish that with so few people? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

5 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Now, all those acts of land theft, house demolition, miscallenoous murder, and humiliations all deads to this permanent status of enmity and the swearing of eternal vengeance from the various Arabs and the Shi'ites that are travellers on that caravan.  the big proponent of that is (no surprise) Iran and the Mullahs.  the Iranians are seriously smart people, really clever, and they are working on building nuke bombs and the missiles to use them.  The idea is to destroy Israel.  Ultimately, the mullahs will be dropping nukes on tel Aviv soon enough, sot he only realistic way tostop them is with the US military sitting in between, and that means at Qatar and KSA. 

So: will the USA pull troops out of KSA?  In my opinion, never.  Those men are there to stop the Iranians and shoot down anything and everything that goes flying towards tel Aviv.  Will it (eventually) come to war?  But of course.  Nothing is going to derailthe mullahs except death - their death.  Until bounties are placed on the heds of the Ayatollahs, or some revolution comes along, eventually the Strike Order will be given and the ICBM's are going to launch with 1-megaton warheads on them, and the result is not going to be pretty. 

I would not be investing in real estate in Tel Aviv.  The odds of stopping the upcoming nukes are, at best, maybe 50%.  Without the Americans sitting in KSA and Qatar, the odds of shutting down the mullahs is zero. Ther are going to be only two outcomings:  awful, and unthinkable.  Unless, of course, somebody whacks the various Ayatollahs, which is the best possible outcome. 

I think the Iranian regime hates America and Saudi Arabia as much as they hate Israel.

Why America? Khomeini's popular movement was basically a movement against the Shah, and he also galvenized the public against western complicity in the 1953 coup d'etat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état

Why KSA? The Saudi state popularized the teachings of Abd al-Wahhab. From https://www.hudson.org/research/9885-the-paradoxes-of-shiism

Quote

Abd al-Wahhab saw Shiism in this same polytheistic light and with even greater animosity. By his era, the tombs and shrines of the Shiite Imams had long been important places of pilgrimage for Shia believers. Moreover, the commemoration of the death of the 3rd Imam, Hussain, had become the occasion and basis for the holiday of Ashura—a holiday unique to Shiites. Abd al-Wahhab reviled these Shiite practices and others, and his hatred for what he viewed as Shiite polytheism eventually found political expression through the establishment of the Saudi state in the 18th century, to which he had given his support and blessing. At several times during the history of that state, Saudi rulers and their forces invaded and attacked southern Iraq, the site of the most important Shiite shrines. Insofar as Wahhabism has been a major contributor to the sensibility of Sunni Islamism, the latter has tended to share in Wahhabism’s hostility toward to Shiism.

Ibn Saud defeated Hussein bin Ali, the Sharif of Mecca, who was not a supporter of Wahhabism. bin Ali's descendants became the kings of Jordan. The British and French helped mess up the entire ME after WWI and the decline of Ottoman power.

Overall, I think historically, the US interest in the middle east has been partially oil, partially Israel.

Edited by surrept33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.