This is the paradox that the Saudis are working with; export the Salafis and fund them to keep them occupied elsewhere/get them killed so that they can't repeat the coup attempt from a few decades ago.
All the more reason to do this is to show the Islamic World that Saudi Arabia is the leader of Islam and not revolutionary Iran.
You have read that Saud has banned supporting Al Nusra in Syria and talks shit about it in Al Arabiya regularly?
The Saudis are backing the FSA, secular Sunni defectors from the Assad regime. They want the Salafis kept away from the reigns.
The people in Saudi Arabia backing Salafis abroad are wealthy Arabian dissidents in OBL's vein, the men who want to build a Jihadi Army in places like Syria, Iraq, and Yemen so that they can rush into Saudi Arabia and aid them when the coup begins.
It just doesn't fit, this portrayal of Saud throwing money at Al Qaeda and Salafi groups whose leaders publicly call for Saud's execution.
Saud is backing the FSA precisely because it doesn't want Syria to go Salafi. And not only do they hate the Salafis, they hate the Ikhwanis as well, they've openly called the Muslim Brotherhood the source of all problems in the Arab world and worse than Israel. If they oppose Ikwanis, what is their position on Salafis?
The idea that Saud can support them abroad to keep them busy, get them killed is nonsense. By supporting them abroad, it would grow the Salafi threat abroad, give them the experience it needs, exactly what is happening. And it defies the simple fact that this isn't what Saud has ever done, rather it has round up, arrested, and tortured people for backing foreign jihads. They've had their bought clerics put out statements that it is forbidden to support these jihads abroad. You're just not paying attention.
Be clear Nic,
either you believe Saud is backing Al Nusra or you believe the FSA is Salafi
. That's the only way you can conclude that Saud is backing Salafis in Syria.
Though Al Nusra is Salafi, Saud is not backing Al Nusra. Secondly, though Saud is backing the FSA, the FSA is not Salafi. So Saud is not backing Salafis in Syria. It's simple isn't it?
If you follow Al Arabiya, the Saudi owned news channel, they refer to Al Nusra as extremists and terrorists who are threatening the Syrian uprising. Saud has clamped down on the kingdom to prevent fighters and funds from going off to Al Nusra. At the same time, they're showering the FSA to ensure it is not eclipsed by Al Nusra.
The mistake commentators like Pepe Escobar make, in a flailing attempt to paint the US-GCC as backing their own enemies and create a sensationalist scandal where there is none, is that
they don't differentiate between Syrian rebel factions
presently, or Afghan rebel factions during the Soviet War, for example.
And this theory that Saud intends to send its Jihadis off, to redirect the internal threat elsewhere, is silly. Saud crushed its Jihadis, locked them up. It doesn't want them going abroad so that they can return anymore than the UK or France wants its young militant minded Muslim yoofs to do the same. Why would they? So they can come back hardened veterans who know how to topple well entrenched regimes... like Saud?
When Saud wants to fund militants it's with oil money. They don't need to ask for charity to fund rebels, they fucking dump oil money on everything from American fighter jets to golden toilet seats, are you kidding? Meager charities were used by Islamic dissidents in the KSA, Egypt, etc to fund Jihadists until the regimes locked them down.
The Israeli establishment is split on Assad.
And even if they were to support Sunni against Shia, it would not be Al Qaeda. They're likely to throw their weight behind Sahwa in Iraq, Kurdish leftists in Syria, Iran, and Iraq and Baloch separatists in Southeast Iran. They would continue support for the secularist Sunnis in Lebanon against Hezbollah. They would work more closely with the regime in Yemen against Al Qaeda and Houthi rebels, and they would back the GCC monarchs against their own Shia in Bahrain and Qatif.
I'm going into details when I ask you to explain who you think the GCC and the US is supporting in Syria. Are they supporting Al Nusra or the FSA or both? If you say they support Al Nusra, then I understand why you think they're backing Salafis and we can go into determining if it's true. If you think the FSA is Salafi, then I understand that also and we can determine if the FSA is Salafi.
Unless the FSA is Salafi or the GCC-US are supporting Al Nusra, then they are not aiding Salafis in Syria. It's simple isn't it?