Daniel Pipes
Mobile Edition
Regular Site

Why must we dirty our hands with evil at all?
Reader comment on item: Support the lesser evil [in Saudi Arabia]

Submitted by Jonathan Rick (United States), Jan 11, 2005 at 14:44

Isn't this a false alternative? Why must we dirty our hands with evil at all—making the world safe for monarchy? Why not support no evil?

I realize of course that if the Ikhwan prevail, as you wrote in 1992 of Saddam (http://www.danielpipes.org/article/215), they would then be "in a position to obstruct the supplies of the world's most vital commodity and thus manipulate the price." This would give them "immense leverage over the global economy. Instead of the price of oil being $18 a barrel and falling, it would likely be $50 a barrel and rising; the consequences . . . especially to the world's poorest countries and to the struggling democracies of the ex-Soviet bloc, is almost incalculable."

But if the Ikhwan commandeer and hoard Saudi oil—and make the '73 embargo pale in comparison—by what moral right can Americans intervene?

Practically, in the short-term, this would be spell disaster. But in the long-term it would be a great incentive for what Tom Friedman calls an energy Manhattan project—the development of alternative sources to fossil fuels. Moreover, this would cause Americans to decrease our dependence on the duplicitous House of Saud—whose oil, although abundant and thus cheap, is terribly pricey, given the vast funds the U.S. government spends to protect our interests there.

Jonathan Rick
http://students.hamilton.edu/2005/jrick/

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

Submit a comment on this item

Search by Enter name or date
Search Forum Comments:

Reader comments (21) on this item

Title By Date
Bad News [47 words]Charles NickalopoulosFeb 7, 2008 16:39
⇒ Why must we dirty our hands with evil at all? [210 words]Jonathan RickJan 11, 2005 14:44
We are wasting our time and energies [126 words]a nevaresJul 5, 2004 20:41
What proportion of Muslims are Islamist fundamentalists?
[w/response] [54 words]
James CofferJun 12, 2004 00:15
No Real Choice In Saudi Arabia [300 words]Henry William KalweitJun 8, 2004 16:13
Thank you [27 words]Andrea BricksJun 3, 2004 15:29
US supports Saudi monarchy; Saudi monarchy supports Wahabism... till recently... [97 words]Victor Bloom MDJun 2, 2004 09:48
Tell us more ! [42 words]Fred SchwartzJun 2, 2004 00:03
The KKK analogy [72 words]Ethylred SmithJun 1, 2004 11:45
Election Choice [155 words]Larry BohannonJun 1, 2004 11:28
Hi [367 words]MichaelMay 31, 2004 20:00
thank-you [96 words]John McGinleyMay 31, 2004 16:01
How to keep Arabia stable! [775 words]#453: Pipes on the Saudi civil war in "The Australian"May 31, 2004 14:15
A Better Middle East [117 words]Walton CookMay 31, 2004 12:20
Catch 22 ? [106 words]yonasonMay 31, 2004 10:46
saudi arabia [11 words]munnuMay 31, 2004 09:07
And if the ultra radicals gained power [63 words]Matt KennelMay 31, 2004 01:57
Let bin Laden loose [40 words]Alex GoppMay 30, 2004 23:01
side remark and whats happening. [122 words]r. richard fusilierMay 30, 2004 21:44
Reaction [221 words]William GreeneMay 30, 2004 21:42
two evils nonetheless [113 words]Peter J. HerzMay 30, 2004 20:16

Comment on this item

Name
Email Address (optional)
Title of Comments
Comments:

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

See the 25 most recent outstanding comments.

Back to top of page