Trump Engineered Saudi Soft Coup, attack on Qatar, to Save Self

By Juan Cole

 

Informed Comment, January 7, 2018

Michael Wolff in his new book Fire and Fury makes a number of allegations about Trump’s role in the Gulf crisis that, if true, help explain the mess in that part of the Middle East.

Wolff asserts that Trump and his then inner circle – Jared Kushner, Steve Bannon, Gary Cohn, Hope Hicks, etc. – hoped the mid-May foreign policy jaunt would change the conversation in Washington, DC, about Trump’s having fired FBI director James Comey and about the investigation of special counsel Robert Mueller. So the first thing to say is that the whole trip and the announcements around it were for the purpose of hype.

Originally published at Juan Cole’s blog, Informed Comment

In ancient Greece, Bion of Borysthenes observed that “Boys throw stones at frogs in sport, but the frogs die in earnest.” Trump and his cronies glibly unleashed a massive crisis in Gulf affairs that will have long term downstream effects, all in hopes of a week or two of positive headlines.

Trump was convinced that his son-in-law and Middle East plenipotentiary, Jared Kushner, had gotten the Arab world on the side of the US and that his administration was on the cusp of a huge breakthrough in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

His team was concerned that the geriatric, cautious, Saudi establishment was not up to the challenges of the 21st century. Jared had met with Muhammad bin Salman, the son of King Salman and minister of defense, and was pleasantly surprised at how quickly the two became fast friends. It was, he is alleged to have remarked, like meeting someone nice on the first day in boarding school. (The bourgeois assumptions behind that remark are worth a book.)

Muhammad bin Salman is an insular and largely uneducated young prince in his early thirties known for his recklessness, love of conflict and bullying style of regional politics. So of course the Trumpies fell head over heels in love with him.

Trump misunderstood what was being offered by the Saudis. They had made a vague commitment in the Obama era to buy some US military weaponry, to the tune of tens of billions of dollars. They recycled this pledge for Trump, specifying $110 bn. Most of it was not a new commitment. Trump, on whom the Wizard of Oz has nothing, hyped this old pledge into hundreds of billions in new investments in the US and was sure that the Saudis all by themselves could in this way jumpstart the US manufacturing sector. While Saudi Arabia is heavily invested in the US stock market and in US real estate, and while it helps keep Boeing, Lockheed Martin and a whole phalanx of Washington fixers in business, that they are interested in more US F-18s is not new news and was not a game changer in the way Trump understood it.

Trump also seems to have been under the impression, perhaps given to him by Muhammad bin Salman, that Saudi Arabia would offer the US a new air force base, replacing the al-Udeid Base in Qatar, where some 11,000 US personnel are stationed, and which has been crucial for the fight against ISIL in Iraq and Afghanistan. Al-Udeid will be even more important if Trump roils relations with Pakistan to the point where the latter cuts back on US basing rights for Afghanistan bombing raids.

Saudi Arabia does not have the slightest intention of giving the US a military base. It leased Prince Sultan air base to the US during the Clinton era for policing the Gulf War aftermath and no fly zones in Iraq, and that was one of the bases on which al-Qaeda’s Usama Bin Laden said he launched the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington, DC, which left almost 3,000 dead. It isn’t true historically, but fundamentalist Muslims believe that early Muslim holy figures banned non-Muslims from the Muslim holy land around Mecca and Medina, and Bin Laden et al. interpreted it as a ban on foreign troops anywhere in Saudi Arabia, which rules over the holy cities.

So then Trump accepted the Saudi line that Saudi Arabia is uninvolved in Muslim terrorism, but that Qatar is. This proposition is bizarre. I have argued that it is inaccurate to associate the Saudi state with terrorism, since it was at daggers drawn with al-Qaeda. The argument that it spreads terrorism indirectly by spreading its intolerant and bigoted interpretation of Wahhabi Islam is also hard to prove, since most acts of terrorism in the Middle East have not been carried out by Wahhabis but by Sunnis. Terrorism is a weapon of the weak, and people deploy it when they feel oppressed and blocked and want to break out of some intolerable situation. How they frame the world (why they see a situation as intolerable) is important, but only part of the picture.

Qatar has been an important US ally in the fight against terrorism. Not only has al-Udeid base (once commanded by current US Secretary of Defense James Mattis) been absolutely crucial, but Qatar helped capture al-Qaeda’s mastermind Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and operative Ramzi Bin al-Shibh.

The Saudis mean, when they charge Qatar with supporting terrorism, that many in the Qatari government are sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood (which used to be supported by Saudi Arabia before the early 2000s). The Muslim Brotherhood is not a terrorist organization. It ran for office peacefully in Egypt before being massively repressed. The Saudis and the Egyptians just don’t like it, so they brand it terrorism. The Muslim Brotherhood is right wing and religious, but not opposed to democracy, and has parallels to the Christian Dominionism of US Vice President Mike Pence, who also probably is not a terrorist. For Trump of all people to equate support for the religious Right with terrorism is rich.

So Trump appears to have given a green light to Muhammad Bin Salman last May to do two things: to make a soft coup against Crown Prince Muhammad bin Nayef and to launch a campaign to isolate and perhaps overthrow Qatar.

After Trump’s visit, on 21 June 2017, King Salman removed Bin Nayef from all his positions. Muhammad Bin Salman became the crown prince. Wolff said Trump exulted that June that he had made a coup in Saudi Arabia and put his own man in charge. But this soft coup had been predicted in late 2016 by German intelligence and was long in train. Trump at most gave it his imprimatur.

But the Saudis were emboldened. On June 5, 2017, they severed diplomatic relations with Qatar and put it under boycott. Qatar is a small country and a peninsula that juts into the Gulf, surrounded on land by Saudi Arabia. There are roughly 300,000 Qatari citizens and a guest worker population that brings the total to 3 million. Saudi Arabia probably has a citizen population of 20 million (they exaggerate it) and a guest worker population of 6-8 million. Saudi Arabia initially apparently planned an invasion of Qatar and overthrow of its emir in favor of a puppet from an alienated branch of the ruling family, sort of along the lines of its war on Yemen. But the Turkish parliament voted to allow troops to be sent to Qatar, and that move put the brakes on any Saudi invasion plans.

In the end, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt imposed an economic and travel boycott on Qatar, which is probably illegal by the rules of the World Trade Organization. They also cut off Qatar Air from air traffic control, which is certainly illegal. (Qatar Air has survived nicely but had to fly over Iran, Iraq and Turkey). After initial concern about the loss of trucked in food imports via Saudi highways, Qatar replaced them with goods shipped from Iran or Iraq by sea or brought in by plane. Prices went up a little for some things but the situation has normalized.

This naked power grab on the part of Saudi Arabia has likely destroyed the budding Gulf Cooperation Council (that groups Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait and Qatar), which aimed at being sort of like the European Union plus NATO for the small Gulf Arab oil monarchies. Some of its rationale was to resist Iranian hegemony, so breaking it up helps Iran. Iran has correct relations with Qatar, and stepped in to help offset the Saudi boycott.

To any extent that Trump encouraged the rash Saudi move, he helped further fragment politics in the region. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and SecDef Mattis clearly did not approve and have tried behind the scenes to undermine Trump policy in this regard.

So to conclude: Trump did not get hundreds of billions in new investments in the US from Saudi Arabia. He did manage to put in an erratic and aggressive crown prince in Riyadh, helping destabilize the region in ways Iran will take advantage of. The other corner of Wolff’s reporting on the May trip, that Trump thought it was a prelude to Peace in Our Time in Israel-Palestine, is too complex to take on here but that was also obviously a scam.

Originally published on Informed Comment – where you’ll also see the lively debates Cole’s columns cause.

Related Posts

PART 2 — Diplomacy, Law and Nonviolent Power By Jan ObergTFF co-founder and director January 26, 2026 This is the second of four TFF-created idea portfolios designed to curb the global reach of the United States and, in both the short and long term, help catalyse a worldwide nonviolent resistance to what many observers describe as the Trump administration’s uniquely confrontational, destructive and world-threatening policies. These portfolios outline what governments and citizens across the world can do through dynamic diplomacy, creative initiatives, and strictly nonviolent means. They are typical TFF works in that we do not only tell what the problem is and how bad it will go – as 90+% of all commentators, experts and scholars do – we tell what we think can be done, inviting you to think of what you think you can do. It seems painfully clear to me that the current political dynamics in Washington increasingly resemble the most dangerous...
PART 1 — Media, Culture and Information Sovereignty By Jan ObergTFF co-founder and director January 20, 2026 This is the first of four TFF-created idea portfolios designed to curb the global reach of the United States and, in both the short and long term, help catalyse a worldwide nonviolent resistance to what many observers describe as the Trump administration’s uniquely confrontational, destructive and world-threatening policies. These portfolios outline what governments and citizens across the world can do through dynamic diplomacy, creative initiatives, and strictly nonviolent means. They are typical TFF works in that we do not only tell what the problem is and how bad it will go – as 90+% of all commentators, experts and scholars do – we tell what we think can be done, inviting you to think of what you think you can do. It seems painfully clear to me that the current political dynamics in Washington increasingly resemble the most...
Introduction to TFF’s forthcoming four Idea Portfolios of Diplomatic and Nonviolent Resistance By TFF’s Board & FoundersPascal Lottaz, Biljana Vankovska, Annette Schiffmann, Christina Spannar & Jan Oberg January 19, 2026 “America, you are too arrogant.” — Martin Luther King Jr. Over the course of Trump’s first term and now a year into his second, the world has witnessed a consistent pattern of actions that challenge the basic long-standing norms of international cooperation, weaken multilateral institutions, and ignore the global norms and legal frameworks established by the UN Charter. During these years, we have witnessed military operations in Iran, Syria and Ukraine without UN authorisation; the killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani; repeated strikes across the Middle East; and the launch of tariff wars against allies and competitors alike. We have seen a renewed emphasis on nuclearism and zero interest in arms control and disarmament negotiations. Pentagon is now The Department...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...