Follow us on social

Signal-2023-08-21-110137_002

As US mulls security pact, Saudi Arabia accused of crimes against humanity

Human Rights Watch says Riyadh has killed hundreds of migrants at its border with Yemen since March 2022.

Reporting | Washington Politics

Saudi border guards have killed hundreds of asylum seekers at the country’s border with Yemen using bombs and live fire, according to an explosive new report from Human Rights Watch, which says the attacks would amount to a “crime against humanity” if they were part of official regime policy.

Survivors of the alleged attacks described their experience in harrowing terms. One migrant said only seven of the 150 people they crossed with survived shelling with heavy weapons. “There were remains of people everywhere, scattered everywhere,” they told Human Rights Watch.

“They were firing big rocket launchers at us,” remembered another survivor. “It was like a bomb. From the 250 people [in the group crossing], 150 died.”

Others accused border guards of firing on migrants, most of whom were fleeing unrest in Ethiopia, at close range. The report strongly suggests that the number of migrants killed since last year alone may reach into the thousands.

The accusations come at a particularly sensitive time for the Saudi monarchy, which has embarked on a massive public relations push in order to burnish a global image tarnished by alleged war crimes in Yemen and the grisly 2018 murder of Saudi journalist and Washington Post opinion writer Jamal Khashoggi.

“Spending billions buying up professional golf, football clubs, and major entertainment events to improve the Saudi image should not deflect attention from these horrendous crimes,” said Nadia Hardman of Human Rights Watch in a statement.

The report also raises uncomfortable questions for the Biden administration, which is considering giving “security guarantees” to Saudi Arabia in order to entice its leaders to normalize relations with Israel. Among the proposals on the table is a mutual defense treaty that would obligate U.S. troops to defend Saudi Arabia in case of attack. American officials are also mulling whether to help Riyadh develop a civilian nuclear program, a move that many experts worry could be a first step toward a Saudi nuclear weapons push.

The White House, aware that any new treaty would face an uphill battle in Congress, has already started briefing Democratic leaders about the talks in order to build support, according to the New York Times.

President Joe Biden, who once said he hoped to turn Riyadh into a “pariah,” may meet with de facto Saudi leader Muhammad bin Salman, or MBS, at next month’s G-20 Summit in New Delhi, India. The main topic of discussion at the proposed meeting would be a potential “mega deal” in which the United States would make a series of concessions to Saudi Arabia in order to encourage it to normalize ties with Israel, according to Axios. It remains unclear what the U.S. would get from the agreement.

Some analysts argue the Human Rights Watch report should serve as a reminder that working with the Saudi government often entails moral pitfalls.

“At a minimum this should trigger a [State Department] investigation into whether US law has been violated by US-trained Saudi forces or with US arms,” said Dylan Williams of J Street, a progressive pro-Israel advocacy group. “It’s also a horrific reminder of why the US should not bind itself [to] the Saudi autocracy with major new military commitments or arms sales.”

Sarah Leah Whitson, the executive director of Democracy for the Arab World Now, argued that Saudi actions on the border are a direct result of Washington’s continued support for Riyadh. “Saudi Arabia feels empowered to act as recklessly, inhumanely and unlawfully as it wants — including lobbing mortar attacks on desperate migrants seeking safety — because it knows it has U.S. support,” Whitson told RS.

“We can expect that its reckless belligerence will only increase with the added security of a U.S. security guarantee,” she added. “The Biden administration should take responsibility for its role in knowingly aiding and abetting Saudi security forces.”


Repatriated Ethiopians from Saudi Arabia queue to get registered, after disembarking from a Saudi Airlines plane, at the Bole International Airport, in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, April 1, 2022. REUTERS/Tiksa Negeri
Reporting | Washington Politics
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.