“This is all worrying, because the only reason to kill a journalist in your own consulate with 15 people and a bone saw you flew in that day is because you wanted to send a message, and you were sure you could get away with it.” https://t.co/jN9YGFKVQu
— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) October 15, 2018
Trump just now says Saudi Arabia “firmly denies” killing #Khashoggi & brings up idea of “rogue killers” being responsible. As with Putin, Trump taking denial of authoritarian & interested party at face value.
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) October 15, 2018
SNL’s cold open next week is going to be Putin, Kim, Kavanaugh, and MbS forming the “Strong Deniers Club” and prank-calling Trump. https://t.co/Yz7isBCMGb
— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) October 15, 2018
Looking forward to the announcement of the joint U.S.-Saudi Task Force for the Protection of Dissidents and Journalists https://t.co/o2D8yUNxlm
— Carlos Lozada (@CarlosLozadaWP) October 15, 2018
Trump regularly demonizes legal permanent residents with a wildly false claim that they’re sent to the US by their home countries to get rid of undesirables. This distinction matters a lot. https://t.co/zTXDrPBP5g
— Benjy Sarlin (@BenjySarlin) October 15, 2018
The Orb will tell us who killed Khashoggi
— Spencer Ackerman (@attackerman) October 15, 2018
Both Trump and MbS are desperately trying to bullshit their way past Khashoggi's disappearance. Here's why that dog won't hunt. https://t.co/W6IrcX0zjc
— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) October 15, 2018
Michael Bersin
Senator Claire McCaskill (D) at a campaign town hall at a diner in Odessa, Missouri this afternoon – a Navy veteran stood up to speak:
“…I’m a United States Navy, retired. And let me say this, if it wasn’t for Claire McCaskill and the late [Representative] Ike Skelton veterans would not be in the position that we’re in today. Because of those two individuals, this I know for a fact, I thank God that they stood up for veterans and the insurance and the benefits that we have. And I appreciate very much, and the sad part, we’ll never have another Ike Skelton, and that’s very sad, but we have Claire McCaskill [applause]…”
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) – Odessa, Missouri – October 15, 2018
NotMax
FYI.
Also too, originally published a year ago, Seventy Years of the New York Times Describing Saudi Royals as Reformers.
Adam L Silverman
@NotMax: There’s something very strange (wrong? weird? warped?) in The New York Times editorial DNA.
Brachiator
One day some supporters at a Trump rally are going to look over at the journalists covering the event and start chanting “Chop them up!”
Major Major Major Major
Question, which I’m sure somebody knowledgable here has already answered: how much do we really need Saudi oil these days?
Adam L Silverman
@Major Major Major Major: We’re their #2 client. The larger issue is how the global oil market works. So it is less about how much we buy from them, than how much they pump into the global supply. And since they dominate OPEC, any disentanglement needs to be handled very carefully and diplomatically, neither of which are hallmarks of this administration. It would also help if the US government’s policy was to backstop R&D to accelerate switching to alternative energy and fuel sources, including not just generating and transmitting them, but using them as well. So solar power storage a la Tesla’s power wall concept. Alternative fuel vehicles. High speed rail running on alternatively generated energy. Things like that. The more alternatives for energy generation, transmission, storage, and utilization that exists, the easier it will be deal with Saudi as it actually is, rather than as we have been because we won’t need to worry about their oil or their control of OPEC.
Major Major Major Major
@Adam L Silverman: oh right, OPEC, duh, that’s a problem.
Adam L Silverman
@Major Major Major Major: It is what it is. And what I am is going offline.
Mike J
@Major Major Major Major: The US is a net exporter of oil. I imagine the market would go all roller coastery if you tried to forbid exports to balance loss of KSA imports.
Also there are differences in types of crude (light, sweet v Brent v WTI). Need to rejigger refineries to get the desired outputs.
hueyplong
@Adam L Silverman: That sounds like a list of things Republicans make sure we aren’t doing.
Brachiator
@Major Major Major Major: The world needs Saudi oil, and the US still has an interest in a stable world order.
To be cynical, reporters are being tortured or murdered in a number of countries, and the world shudders a bit, and then moves on. Trump makes a little noise, but has made it clear that human rights issues are not a priority, and his preferred path is non interference with anything that would be bad for business.
To raise my cynicism even more, current BBC news reports warn of a coming famine in Yemen which may kill millions. The Saudis are directly responsible for this and could relieve pressure on the country that would permit civilians to be helped.
But help is not coming. And the oil will keep flowing.
Major Major Major Major
@Mike J: I was just curious how drastic the disruption would be.
Mike J
@Adam L Silverman: Did you see the latest in dumb energy policy from Trump? Since Washington won’t build a new deep water coal terminal for exports, he wants to use navy bases.
piratedan
@Adam L Silverman: the hardest part, imho, is weaning us off of the ideal of Americans behind the wheel of their own car, the 20th century symbol of American independence, the sad part is that we’re woefully behind in mass transit in moving people from one place to another and driving a dagger thru the hearts of three major US industries (or rather helping them transition into the 21st century) is going to be a major challenge, I have a hard time envisioning how we provide better alternatives to automotive, trucking and the airlines without some major growing pains in determining how and what our infrastructure should be modeled after. We not only have to reinvent the grid that stores and delivers power, but where to live and work and how that will likely affect the lives of our children and grandchildren, especially in coping with climate change
Mike in DC
Seems likely the perpetrators of the murder will turn out to be closely linked to MBS. That might not be all that great for his prospects of retaining power, given the nature of Saudi political intrigues.
Amir Khalid
@Brachiator:
I can all too easily imagine the Trumpenproletariat charging at the press stand with machetes.
Major Major Major Major
First day in the new job was alright. I’m bff’s with a guy from Brooklyn named Mike now. But my engineering liaison didn’t know he was my engineering liaison this afternoon, and an IT glitch meant I couldn’t even get to the DevOps page for setup instructions, so we’ll try again tomorrow—in between more onboarding sessions, which go all week.
NotMax
@Adam L. Silverman
KSA oil, though, represents only about 8% of U.S. imports (citation), roughly on a par with what we get individually originating from Iraq and Venezuela and (although not always as there are wide swings in this case) from Nigeria.
And then there was/is this. Testing the waters as it were (emphasis added).
Brachiator
From Newsweek and the Guardian: up to 13 million at risk of famine.
The murdered journalist only adds to the dire record. On a small scale and on a large scale, this is a vile Saudi regime
NotMax
@Major Major Major Major
You’ve already moved? Lock, stock and cat?
Major Major Major Major
@NotMax: nope, three weeks in the SF office first.
Brachiator
@piratedan:
Yep. This is the dilemma for the US and other countries.
BTW I wonder how much oceangoing cargo transport adds to pollution.
Ken Shabby
@Adam L Silverman:
“It would also help if the US government’s policy was to backstop R&D to accelerate switching to alternative energy and fuel sources, including not just generating and transmitting them, but using them as well. So solar power storage a la Tesla’s power wall concept. Alternative fuel vehicles. High speed rail running on alternatively generated energy. Things like that. The more alternatives for energy generation, transmission, storage, and utilization that exists, the easier it will be deal with Saudi as it actually is, rather than as we have been because we won’t need to worry about their oil or their control of OPEC.“
Anyone affected by this in the 70s knows how OPEC ….works.
Anyone giving more than a glance at our Foreign Policy sees that same thing.
Alternatives to burning petroleum are Strategic.
Tangential but not:
Forget now where I read this but, at Kyoto climate accords, Saudis were following then leading alt. energy countries around – let us in on the ground floor….We were more or less in that group and among the countries giving them the Heisman …most of this is at least that old and, back in the late 90s, we were aggressively developing alt. methods. It’s not like Saudi Arabia is unaware or inactive, either. I have no idea who is working with them on things like solar, wind, grid or battery tech, but, business is business.
I have strong feelings about this that go back decades, and, because it is Strategic.
It’s with a great deal of concern and sadness I view the damage done over the decades by GOP in that specific area.
Most of this is over my head but, energy production is fundamental. Fighting over oil, in this century, is both tragic and avoidable. But, it’s what most of the last century’s wars were both about and facilitated by – oil (and, coal and steel). More important than this: most of new conflict will be over water and arable land and, it will be because of burning fossil fuel.
I don’t write as good as you, Adam but, that paragraph is one of the best I’ve read as summary. It’s that direct and that simple. And, has been so for over four decades, particularly these last two.
I can’t think of a better reason to get the hell off that train but, managed in a way that is intelligent, effective and sustainable. Again, it’s Strategic. Unless you’re GOP and control all policy decisions.
Waynski
@Major Major Major Major: It would be disruptive in driving up the price and slowing Western economies. The Saudis can pump enough to keep a steady and cheap world supply. They have enough to screw with that supply. Other reserves can be tapped in other countries, but that takes time and significant financial risk.They can turn the pumps back on as quickly as they turned them off and screw anybody who invests in developing new supply. Put simply, they have enough to screw with worldwide markets whenever they care to and burn developers of new supply. They can cause a lot of economic chaos, as they did in the 70s. They control the price.
Ken Shabby
@Brachiator:
“The murdered journalist only adds to the dire record. On a small scale and on a large scale, this is a vile Saudi regime”
Yes, it is. And, as it goes backwards into barbarity, like us, it will worsen, perhaps (likely?) to flashpoint. Quickly.
Einstein’s quote about WW4 being fought with sticks and stones.
Over drinking water and crop land.
As the Saudi royal family continues to add members in its population – financial mouths to feed – it will also worsen quickly, that basis. This recent event is a sneak preview, coming attractions. This is exactly the wrong turn, that leadership and doomed before it begiIns. No idea how that extended family works but, perhaps other members will grab this man’s 15 minutes, find him something better to do and course correct.
Major Major Major Major
Thanks everyone for answering my question!
Chetan Murthy
@Waynski: While it’s true that the Saudis [esp] control the -floor- of the oil price, they don’t control the ceiling. Consuming countries can force the price of energy up via tariffs and taxes. And so, if the US wanted to, it could tax carbon-based energy both to fund renewables, and to render them more competitive in price. And while the Saudis could pushback on that by lowering the price of oil, we could just increase the tariff in response.
Obviously if those renewables were never gonna become economically [and energetically] feasible, this would be foolish. But OTOH if it were about providing incentive to develop them, this would be sound policy.
This is partially why the Saudis work to keep the price of oil down. If it gets too expensive, their customers will develop renewables as a replacement. But that development has a high “barrier to entry” in terms of development cost. So really, the Saudis don’t have to compete with “renewables in the end-stage when they’re more fully-developed and competitive”, but rather, with “renewables in the early stage when they kinda suck, but show promise”. So they make sure to kill that baby in the cradle, every chance they get. Slowly they lose that war, but hey, eventually they’ll run out of oil, too [I remember on The Oil Drum, many interesting articles about whether KSA was exaggerating their reserves, esp. in the Abqaiq monster field]
NotMax
@Major Major Major Major
Well then, as you’re still on west coast time and awake, gotta ask how far along this is going, from what you know. From September 4:
Major Major Major Major
@NotMax: close? Not super in the loop though.
Ken Shabby
@Waynski:
“They can cause a lot of economic chaos, as they did in the 70s. They control the price.”
But, not market.
Any of these countries can and would do this if
– it was good for business
– sustainable, and for more than a decade – decades
– and, if they were remotely sane, with an end game exit strategy to doing the same thing with whatever new energy markets develop
Grabbing the wheel and violently wrenching it is twice stupid, no matter who’s doing it.
Wrong at the instant and wrong in the outcome and consequence.
When I look at it like that, cooler heads must have prevailed in mid 70s.
Either that or we threatened to just take it if they wouldn’t sell it to us. I’ve got a suspicion it was both.
That was four plus decades ago. Current events are blatantly, tragically Stupid.
Ken Shabby
@Chetan Murthy:
This. Thanks for this. Exactly or close enough.
lgerard
At this point do you think that the Saudis regret their sub rosa support of Kurdish independence given how adamantly the Turks are pushing this story?
On one level poor Khashoggi is just a pawn in a PR battle between two authoritarian states.
And to trump it is a question of who can treat him “more fairly”. the Saudis with their dealz or the Turks by releasing a hostage and allowing trump to play hero to the religious nuts
Waynski
@Chetan Murthy: Correct. I don’t believe your comment and mine are in tension. I was describing the problem. You’re describing a very plausible solution, but there has to be the political will to do it. Sadly, I don’t see it yet, but we should all be working to make it happen. Cheers.
Chetan Murthy
@Waynski: We agree 100%. As you wrote:
And of course, “renewables” are a great example of “new supply”.
Amir Khalid
@lgerard:
The Saudis see Turkey as a regional rival. No amount of messing with Turkey is going to strike them as cause for regret.
Jay
Canada, that country that according to the Insane Clown POSus, is a National Security Threat.
It’s also the source of most of the US’s imported oil.
Apparently, we don’t buy enough Trump Condo’s.
We had to nationalize pot to keep living next to y’all.
Martin
@Chetan Murthy:
Right. It’s important to remember that it’s not the 70s any more. The US has vastly expanded its own extraction industries thanks to fracking, and a huge amount of the growth since the 70s was in natural gas, not oil. We’ve added ethanol. And of course we’ve added renewables as well as conservation. Taken as a whole, the US could mostly shrug off a modern embargo. We’d feel it as a secondary effect to other nations struggling.
As for the barrier to entry, I would dispute that. Two things have changed. Renewables may be expensive to deploy, but that assumes a sunk cost in the grid. Eliminate the need for the grid, or reduce it in scope, and suddenly renewables are a lot easier to deploy. Oil is handy because it’s easily portable – hand someone a generator and a jerry can and they have power, but now that can be done with a solar panel and a battery. It’s more expensive to get going, but there’s no recurring cost, and like the generator, there’s no infrastructure coordination needed. Just toss up your panels, light you home, and deal with the infrastructure question later.
The other really big change is that due to changes across the global economy, capital is really fucking cheap. The 70s were hard because inflation meant that borrowing money to build that infrastructure would cost you that much more. And the high interest rates really meant that free capital was scarce. But now, we’ve got a strong economy and almost no inflation. There’s still trillions of dollars in negative yield bonds because nobody has any better use for that money. So if you want to build out renewables, yes, the up-front costs are high relative to oil, but the ability to acquire capital to do it is really easy, and cheap. Those other factors eliminate what’s left of the leverage that OPEC had. Hell, China would LOVE to fill the EV gap created by high gas prices.
But put me down for not buying SAs proclaimed reserves. They wouldn’t be drilling offshore if they had so much on hand. Offshore drilling is 10x the cost of doing it on land. Why spend the money now if they had so much in reserve?
But much of the reason why you see the renewable explosion in CA is the fixed vs marginal cost angle. We have a shitton of idle cash out here, so if you’re a company trying to protect against future energy costs when you don’t know what your cash flow will look like, why not invest in a solar or wind farm now, put that cash out there while you have it and know that if you need effectively free electricity next year or 20 years from now, you’ll have it. Having a governor that looks at things the same way really helps. He was governor of the state 40 years ago and I’m sure every day brings a ‘why didn’t we do this 40 years ago, it’d have paid dividends’ thought.
Jay
@Martin:
Yup, double yup.
bjacques
MBS figures his hole card is the threat of economic chaos via OPEC, and KSA can just sit back and watch, untouched by it. Yeah, no. That kind of instability has a way of reaching across borders, and members of the losing factions have lots of financial interests domestic and foreign. They put up with the new order now, but who’s to say their newfound financial woes might not inspire them to make a play after all?
But credit where it’s due. Russia and other countries that murder journalists just shoot them in the street or apartment building lobbies, leaving others to clean up the mess, or else gun them down or car bomb them in public, endangering innocent passersby. The Saudis were neat and clean, and thoughtfully disposed of the remains (allegedly) afterward. The extra effort and care are just wasted on you people.
I read Jamal’s his widow-to-be Hatice’s editorial in the FTFNYT today, and I am sad and angry.
Jay
WTF, in moderanton for a yup, double yup comment?
trnc
It’s been reported that the saudis are working on a claim that Khashoggi was being interrogated and died accidentally. Obviously a ridiculous claim, but with the added bonus that it doesn’t square at all with DT’s claim.
A Ghost To Most
Fucking Nazis. That’s an expression that constantly intrudes into my thought stream these days.
Ken Shabby
@Martin:
Love everything about this post.
Century ago, sunk costs dragged a lotta feet on internal combustion engines replacing….horses. Banks wouldn’t get near it. Neither would a lot of other folk. Before that…whale oil – going out to sea, at any hazard, in wood ships and boats (there’s more sunk costs) to slaughter and process huge sea going mammals for…oil. Same time, Lincoln’s initiative to unite the country by rail had many nay sayers. By 1880s, that rail system helped propel petro and coal fueled Industrial revolution. Digging huge holes in the ground and scalping mountains for coal and ore is…expensive. There’s another sunk cost for some idiot to whine about. Early 1950s and Eisenhower initiative for nation wide interstate highway system did it…again. FDR did something similar with TVA, including facilitating research and production at Oak Ridge.
I just…LOVE how Conservatives consistently supply their vast acumen and forward thinking to new, important initiatives –
NOT.
Tech has caught up or catching up to viability.
Why We Can’t Have Nice Things, Infrastructure Week, every week, month, year, decade….
I don’t care if we ever get to fly to work and live in a Popular Mechanics magazine illustration, it would seem straight forward that burning things, in this century, is beyond idiocy. Fixing a few bridges, roads and water systems also might need a quick glance.
Instead of protecting The Kingdom.
Hempires Cost Money. It’s expensive to be so Exceptional. So much winning.
Things that are worth a lot, cost a lot. And, take time for worth.
Ken Shabby
It’s better in Latin, which is a great language to insult people with. I don’t know Latin, but, an acquaintance shared this:
In any just world, (you) they would be chained to a rock at low tide.
VOR
@Ken Shabby: But investing in renewable energy would give the owners of extraction industries a sad. And those owners are big political donors. People like Pruitt and Zinke are wholly owned subsidiaries. Trump was actually proposing to force power companies to buy more coal – so much for the wisdom of the Market.
There is a lot of machismo tied up in things like driving a big vehicle and “rolling coal”. Even though a Tesla can beat practically any gasoline-powered street-legal car from 0-60, it doesn’t seem macho enough.
I remember the Oil Drum has a search for “silver BBs”, things which were win-win smaller scale infrastructure projects. One of my favorites was the National Strategic Railroad. The idea was that the Obama administration would mandate use of electrically operated trains on certain rail routes due to National Defense needs. Subsidies would be provided to rail companies to build their infrastructure, including some serious electrical transmission infrastructure. This would switch a significant amount of the Rail transport from diesel fuel to electric, much of which could have potentially come from renewable resources. But nothing ever came of the idea.
I wholly agree that if we were smart, we would be encouraging the building of new energy infrastructure. But alas, we elected Donald Trump.