Al-Sisi mouthpiece uncovers details about alleged talks between Saudi King and Obama

The following is a translation of a video clip from the TV programme of pro-coup journalist Mustafa Bakri, known for his close links with the military coup leader Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi and considered his mouthpiece in the media, in which he claims obtaining serious details about the Saudi King and Obama talks.

In the second half of the clip Bakri launches an attack on the US and what he calls the “American plan” in the region:

“The position of Saudi Arabia vis-à-vis terrorism and its support for Egypt is a position no one can outbid. This position is similar to the position of the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and the Palestinian leadership as well as all those who stood with this homeland. However, the sharp confrontation between the Custodian of the Two Holy Shrines and US President Obama has been ignored by many media outlet despite the important and strength of that confrontation.

The real dimensions of the visit US President Obama made to Saudi Arabia were extremely important. Some have been content to talk about headlines relating to the main points of disagreement covering several files: the Syrian file, the Iranian file and the US position toward Egypt in the aftermath of the 30 June revolution and the decision by the army to take sides in favour of this revolution. The meeting between President Obama and King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, attended by senior Saudi officials, was characterised by strength. Strong criticism was directed toward Obama’s policy with regard to the three files. Yet, what I would like to focus on is the position toward Egypt.

We know well that since the eruption of the 30th of June revolution and the siding of the army with it on the 3rd of July, Saudi Arabia expressed its full support for Egypt politically, morally and materially. We recall the positions of Saudi diplomacy within the international community. We do not forget the famous meeting between Saudi Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal prior to the meeting of European Union foreign ministers and how Saudi diplomacy together with UAE diplomacy succeeded in preventing the imposition of any EU sanctions against Egypt. At the time, the Saudi foreign minister was accompanied by the Saudi ambassador to Egypt Ahmad Al-Qadda’.

The Egyptians realise the important of the statement issued by the Custodian of the Two Holy Shrines on16 August, just two days after the breaking up of Rabia armed sit in. In that statement he sharply criticised those who support terrorism and those who deal according to double standards. It was a strong statement that came at the appropriate moment. All this is understandable and clear. Yet, the recent Saudi meeting with Obama deserves that we pause before it to contemplate and learn some of the events witnessed by this lukewarm meeting between the two sides, as informed sources have disclosed.

When the turn of Egypt’s file came, King Abdullah said to Obama: We blame you for your position of support for the Muslim Brotherhood group, which is a terrorist group that aims at undermining stability in the region. We are astonished by your support for it and for backing it in its plot against Egypt and against the Arab world.

Obama (responded) by saying: We do not support terrorism. But our position was based on the knowledge that President Morsi was an elected president. (Yes) he had major errors, but we never intervened in Egypt’s internal affairs or the choices made by the Egyptian people.

The King said: But you refuse to designate this group as a terrorist group. And the (US) Administration is continuing to incite against Egypt and against its right to choose its president.

Obama said: We are with the right of the Egyptian people (to make its) own choices. We have no reservation regarding any of the presidential candidates. All we want to see is free and fair elections that are (conducted) under international supervised. At the same time we have requested the provisional administration, more than once, to exclude no one irrespective of who he happens to be.

King Abdullah said: But you threatened to use the aid weapon more than once. We all have the feeling that America wants to rely on this group as well as others and that it incites (them) to topple regimes in the region and spread chaos.

Obama said: No. We do not intervene in the internal affairs (of others). All we want to (see the region) accomplish is democracy, reform and respect for human rights.

King Abdullah said: Each country (has the right to) choose its own regime of governance according to its own traditions and system. We shall not permit the imposition of a specific vision that clashes with our societies and their accepted norms and their faith. That is why we demand that you revise your position vis-à-vis Egypt and the rest of the Arab, but especially toward Egypt because Egypt for us means common destiny and we shall never allow the fall of Egypt into the hands of terrorism.

Obama: Egypt is a fundamental partner and we shall support it in the coming days. And we shall respect the choices of the Egyptian people of their president.

King Abdullah said: And we wish for this to happen. We desire to hear about tangible steps in the coming future.

Obama: And I promise you that.

This is part of the important conversation that took place between the Custodian of the Two Holy Shrines King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz and US President Obama during the latter’s visit to Saudi Arabia on Saturday the 30th of March.

Undoubtedly, the Saudi position is an expression that reflects the anxiety of the Saudi leadership toward the US plans in the region. This is not a new position. However, it has grown sharper in the wake of the US incitement campaign against Egypt and against the Arab world. It has exposed the nature and objectives of these plans.

The American plan did not start today just as today’s positions did not come out of the blue. They have been proceeding in a consistent fashion since the events of 11 September 2001. It is true that the perpetrators were Arabs, Egyptians or Saudis or others. Yet, time has proven that a certain party, American or Zionist, was the one that hatched this plot or permitted its execution. The objective was to provide the Americans with a legitimate cover to mobilise their troops to strike in the region under the pretext of resisting terrorism. Immediately, they directed their strikes against Afghanistan and then they paved the way for striking Iraq and bringing down President Saddam Hussein under the pretext that he possessed weapons of mass destruction.

Had America been serious about toppling Saddam Hussein, it would have done so in the aftermath of the liberation of Kuwait when the climate was optimal and when its troops penetrated deep into Iraqi territories in 1991. But it postponed this step until it forced the Gulf countries, or some of them, to sign a number of agreements. Qatar, and we have seen what happened in Qatar. The US bases were in Qatar and there was a US (military) presence in Kuwait and others. It was then that American formulated its plan called at the time the New Middle East Plan. The objective was to fragment the big entities and also the big groupings.

The war on Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya and Yemen came immediately after Iraq. They focused specifically on countries that were multi-religious, multi-sectarian or multi-racial, such as (the existence of) Sunnah, Shi’ah, Copts, Kurds, Amazig, Druz, Alawites, and others. The parallel plan was to fragment the big groupings such as the Arab League, the Gulf Cooperation Council, the Arab Maghreb Union and so forth. It seemed as if we were facing a new Sykes-Picot in the region whose objective is to serve Israel’s interest. The fragmentation of edifices, groupings and armies, and the eruption of civil wars, can only be of service to Israel and the US plans to dominate the region and control the sources of oil (supplies).

The plan was premised on the assumption that fragmenting the national state into conflicting entities would definitely lead to border problems among these new mini-states because each of them would be endeavouring to control civil resources and oil. Consequently, wars would erupt among them and that in turn would prosper the arms industry in the United States of America while the Arabs are left to pay the bill in full.

What occurred in Egypt of a revolution against the Muslim Brotherhood group, its fundamental objective was surely to thwart or delay this plot, and this is where we have succeeded. This is in spite of the fact that Israel and America are still conspiring against the region and there are still plots going on in parallel despite our feeling that we have managed to impede or thwart this plot.

You have seen what happened in the plan to split Yemen into six mini-states that then enter into a federation among themselves. This would pose a threat to the security of Saudi Arabia. It would also pose a threat to Egypt’s security and would pose a threat to the security of the region. There is a consistent endeavour to seize control of Bab-el-Mandeb strait. Iran endeavours to seize control via the Hoothies and so do the Americans. Israel is present in islands (belonging to Eritrea) for this purpose. As for Qatar’s role, there is so much one can say about it. It is the undisputed God Father of the region. In the past it succeeded in infiltrating the Arab League, as we have seen. It has started undermining the Gulf Cooperation Council from within through Qatar. It has gone supporting religious and irreligious opposition paying money to whoever asks or whoever does not ask. The objective is to stir up trouble within the Arab world and within the Islamic world. We find it everywhere. In Tunisia, in Libya, in Egypt, in Syria, in Yemen, in Somalia and in Bahrain. It is (today) persistently seeking to sow discord within Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the rest of the Gulf countries.

In Egypt there was a plan to destroy the Egyptian army by pulling it down into the quagmire of conflict in the aftermath of the 25 January revolution. This was a clear plot. The objective was to cause conflict to erupt between the army and the people, and the Muslim Brotherhood was ready for this conflict. However, the General Command of the Armed Forces realised the danger and realised its dimensions and therefore succeeded in averting the conflict causing the Brotherhood and the Americans to lose such an opportunity at this time.”-End of quote.