Saudi Arabia

“The administration needs to abandon its behind-closed-doors approach to addressing human rights” in Saudi Arabia, said Tess McEnery, who served on Biden’s National Security Council until last year and now heads the nongovernmental Project on Middle East Democracy. “There need to be clear public costs to [Salman’s] repression. . . . For nearly a year [since the Biden visit], we’ve seen what a policy of appeasement looks like.”

“[The Public Investment Fund’s golf strategy is about both image and economics.] It’s both diversification and soft power projection. . . . It is now a more aggressive approach to simultaneously find lucrative, high-margin returns in the intermediate run simultaneous with elevating the image of the Saudi royal family, state emblems and nation in a global era defined by multipolarity.”

“[Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund] is not just a cash cow and rainy day fund for the Saudi government. . . . It is an investment arm that directly channels the kingdom’s immense oil wealth into strategic spaces that simultaneously generate profit while elevating Saudi Arabia as a stakeholder in global markets, ideas, technology and expansion.”

“[Biden’s fistbump with Saudi Arabia’s MBS last July] was just really this visceral visual welcoming of a full international rehabilitation of, quite frankly, one of the most brutal dictators in the world. . . . I think it’s very evident that the administration needs to abandon its behind closed doors approach to addressing human rights. There need to be clear public costs to MBS’S repression.”

“Ultimately . . . five, 10, 15 years from now we will see the negative national and international security implications of appeasement of authoritarian allies like Saudi.”

“To me, the biggest takeaway is the PGA would have never done this if Biden hadn’t have gone to Jeddah and rehabilitated MbS. . . . Biden made it OK for the whole world, especially the business community, to not worry about re-engaging with MbS.”

“The NSC Democracy Directorate reliably asserts that democracy and human rights are not just values, but vital national security interests. It remains difficult to get other national security officials on board with this approach. . . . It would require people willing to break with the status quo to implement democracy and human rights as the center of our foreign policy.”

“Countries that are democratic and respect human rights, at the end of the day, are more stable, more peaceful, more prosperous, and better allies.”