This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/05/world/middleeast/kerry-meets-saudi-king-to-smooth-relations.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Kerry Meets Saudis to Ease Tensions Kerry Reassures Saudis U.S. Shares Their Goals
(about 4 hours later)
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Secretary of State John Kerry met with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia on Monday in an effort to ease deepening tensions with the Saudis, longstanding allies over American policy in the Middle East. RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — In his first meeting with Saudi Arabia’s ruling monarch since becoming secretary of state, John Kerry sought to reassure the king on Monday that the Obama administration and the Saudis shared common objectives on Syria, Iran and Egypt.
It was Mr. Kerry’s first meeting with the Saudi monarch since he became secretary of state, and the session took place amid more pronounced differences over Syria, Iran and Egypt. But the meeting, which lasted more than two hours at the opulent palace of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, was followed by a cordial but blunt statement from the Saudi side signaling that differences remained.
In a news conference with Prince Saud al-Faisal, Mr. Kerry’s Saudi counterpart, after the meeting, Mr. Kerry sought to play down reports of a rift. “A true relationship between friends is based on sincerity, candor and frankness,” Prince Saud al-Faisal, Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister, said in opening remarks at a news conference with Mr. Kerry after the meeting. “It’s only natural that our policies and views might see agreements in some areas and disagreements in others.”
Mr. Kerry said President Obama had asked him to reassure Saudi Arabia that the United States remained committed to defending it against external threats. And he portrayed disagreements between the two countries as largely tactical. He also carefully avoided being drawn into the debate over whether women in Saudi Arabia should be allowed to drive. There are two kinds of differences: differences in objectives and differences in tactics, Prince Saud said later in response to a question. “Some of the differences are in objectives, very few,” he added. “Most of the differences are in tactics.”
The Saudi foreign minister took a similar approach, reading a statement that took exception to news media reports that Saudi-American relations had dramatically deteriorated. Mr. Kerry’s intensive day of diplomacy in Riyadh opened a small crack into the highly private realm of American-Saudi diplomacy, and both sides took pains to play down foreign policy disputes and publicly dispel the notion that the relationship was in danger of collapsing. Differences between the Obama administration and the Saudi leadership burst into view last month after Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the head of Saudi intelligence, privately complained to diplomats about the White House’s reluctance to intervene in Syria — concerns that were later echoed publicly by Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former intelligence chief.
“A true relationship between friends is based on sincerity, candor and frankness, rather than mere courtesy,” his statement said. “With this perspective, it’s only natural that our policies and views might see agreement in some areas and disagreement in others.” At the root of much of the Saudis’ criticism was the perception that President Obama was uncomfortable with exercising power on the world stage, a gnawing worry for Saudi officials who have become increasingly concerned about the role of their nemesis Iran in Syria and elsewhere in the region.
In response to questions, however, Prince Saud acknowledged that the two sides did have some disagreements on objectives, which he did not identify, though he insisted that most of the differences concerned how to pursue those objectives. As much as American officials sought to dispel such criticism, the fact that the Obama administration has felt it necessary to offer such assurances has highlighted the strains.
On Syria, Prince Saud said that both the United States and Saudi Arabia agree on the need for a Geneva peace conference and that President Bashar al-Assad of Syria should not have a role in play if a new transitional government is agreed upon. Mr. Kerry said at the news conference that Mr. Obama had told him to make clear to Saudi Arabia that the United States would defend the kingdom from external attack — a public promise that American officials would not have found necessary to make several years ago.
Earlier in the day, Mr. Kerry sought to set a positive tone for the session when he described Saudi Arabia as “the senior player in the Arab world.” Mr. Kerry also assured the Saudis that he would regularly inform the kingdom about developments in the talks that the United States and other world powers are conducting with Iran on its nuclear program “so there are no surprises” — another public pledge noteworthy mainly for the fact that it needed to be made to a close ally.
The Saudis have made their unhappiness clear over the Obama administration’s decisions to eschew airstrikes in Syria and to provide only limited military support to the Syrian opposition following an Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack in a Damascus suburb. Western and Arab critics of Mr. Assad, supported by information from a United Nations investigation, have blamed Mr. Assad’s forces for that attack. Seeking to persuade the Saudis that the Obama administration does not take them for granted, Mr. Kerry, in an appearance at the American Embassy here earlier on Monday, described the kingdom as “the senior player” among Arab nations, a notion he reinforced when, at his news conference, he called Saudi Arabia an “indispensable” partner.
Saudi leaders have also been increasingly concerned that the Obama administration may be overly eager to strike a bargain with Saudi Arabia’s regional rival, Iran, over its nuclear program. (Wary of inflaming Saudi sensitivities, Mr. Kerry sidestepped a reporter’s question about whether Saudi women should be allowed to drive, casting the debate as one “best left to Saudi Arabia.”)
And the Saudis have been angered over what they view as insufficient American support for Egypt’s generals, who wrested power four months ago by deposing the president, Mohamed Morsi, the candidate of the Muslin Brotherhood. Even the best efforts by American and Saudi diplomats to frame reports of their disagreements as news media hype, however, could not mask their deep differences over how to bring an end to the civil war in Syria.
In a Sunday news conference in Cairo, Mr. Kerry acknowledged there had been differences but sought to cast them as tactical in nature. Mr. Kerry held out the hope that a Geneva peace conference that has yet to be organized might eventually yield a political settlement that would lead President Bashar al-Assad of Syria to relinquish power.
“There are some countries in the region that wanted the United States to do one thing with respect to Syria, and we have done something else,” Mr. Kerry said. “Those differences on an individual tactic on a policy do not create a difference on the fundamental goal of the policy. We all share the same goal that we have discussed; that is, the salvation of the state of Syria.” “Absent a negotiated solution, we don’t see a lot of ways to end the violence, certainly, that are implementable or palatable to us, because we don’t have the legal authority, or the justification, or the desire at this point to get in the middle of a civil war,” Mr. Kerry said. “And I think that has been made very clear.”
Most analysis agree, however, that the differences between the United States and Saudi Arabia have widened considerably in recent years. Sitting by Mr. Kerry’s side, Prince Saud initially highlighted areas of convergence between Washington and Riyadh.
King Abdullah wants to stop the wide-scale killing of his fellow Sunni Muslims in Syria and, more broadly, sees the Syria conflict as a test of wills in Saudi Arabia’s struggle against Iranian influence in the region. Both the United States and Saudi Arabia, he said, agreed that there was a need for a Geneva peace conference, that the moderate Syrian opposition coalition should be supported and that Mr. Assad should go.
The Obama administration’s decision to promote the elimination of chemical weapons in Syria has done little, in the Saudi view, toward fulfilling these objectives. But in his later comments, the prince rattled off statistics of those killed and displaced by the war and criticized the United Nations Security Council for failing to authorize international intervention to halt the fighting.
And as much as Mr. Kerry has touted the importance of a holding a peace conference in Geneva, most experts say President Assad is unlikely to relinquish power unless military pressure on his government is increased. “It is the largest calamity that has befallen the world in the present millennium,” he said. “If that isn’t enough to intervene, to stop the bloodshed, I don’t know what is.”
Saudi unhappiness with the international response to Syria, and with American policy, was graphically illustrated when it turned down a seat last month on the United Nations Security Council.