Submitted by John Hadjisky (United States), Aug 9, 2006 at 13:26
Dr. Pipes,
When you write "The contradiction points to the tight strategic thinking in the Saudi government and the populist instincts of its international agents," you should probably clarify what you mean by "tight".
Do you mean that such thinking is, from a Saudi point of view, good, i.e. focused and disciplined towards the Saudi goal of creating or co-opting domestic, populist pressure groups to influence government agencies and the US public?
Or do you mean it is from the Saudi point of view bad, i.e. so tightly focused on the task at hand to the point of being oblivious to the likelyhood that the populism inheirent in these pressure groups will back-fire on the Saudis?
Put another way - are the Saudi's in your view mypoic or clever in electing to use populist groups and themes to deliver their decidedly non-populist message?
In the vernacular: Are they "tight" as in "if you hold on too tight, you'll loose control", or are they "tight" as in "Man, that's one tight blues combo?"
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.
