6 thoughts on “Saudi Stray Dogs in the UK”

  1. I think Occam’s razor should prevail over the tinfoil hats in this instance.
    It is more likely that budget cut-fuelled ineptitude is the reason that the Met did not attend a minor scuffle. Nor am I surprised that much of the media ignored a minor scuffle. We may reach a stage, of course, where we need to discuss Skirpal-like incidents, but this is hardly a comparable example. And does anyone think that one of the leakiest institutions in the land could keep secret Machiavellian orders to, in some ill-defined way, kowtow to Saudi interests in London?
    When I get new evidence, I’ll change my mind. Until then, I’ll go for the simplest explanation.

  2. How much coverage has this had in “mainstream” UK media? I have to admit with shame that I am learning of it for the first time through your excellent and informative post. Given the obvious parallels with the Skripal affair it surely deserves maximum attention…

    1. The only mainstream UK media to report this story so far has been the Independent (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/saudi-arabia-human-rights-activist-attacked-london-mbs-ghanem-al-dosari-show-a8538406.html) on Sunday 16 September.
      It has also been covered by the New Arab (https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2018/9/6/youtuber-details-violent-attack-by-saudi-agents-in-london) on 6 Sept, by Al Jazeera (https://twitter.com/GhanemAlmasarir/status/1037372728972587008) as mentioned in the article, and yesterday by RT (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf6GrYSQgxM).

  3. I suppose this is what being “sovereign” is going to mean: grovelling before every tyrant with a chequebook.
    I remember the late Lord Carrington refusing to try and influence the BBC before the screening of a programme deemed anti-Saudi. The Tory Party has come full circle in a generation. Lord Palmerston and Benjamin Disraeli, not to mention Winston Churchill and Harold Macmillan must be mightily proud of the likes of Boris Johnson.

  4. As this excellent and insightful article makes clear, on the face of it there is sadly nothing particularly new about the events surrounding the attack on Mr Al Dowsari. However, my personal reading of the article suggest to me that it implies, possibly unintentionally, that the problem with the Met is one of individual police officers being corrupted by Saudi government agents; this particular incident, on the other hand (and assuming the accuracy of Mr Bender’s account), smacks, to my mind at least, of institutionalised ‘corruption’ in the Met which, one hopes given that the alternative is even worse, can only be on instructions from HMG to avoid actions which would risk damaging the UK’s relationship with the KSA.
    If this is the case, I fear that we could see more of this sort of thing in London – if not worse. MBS’s track record at home and abroad shows him to be alarmingly intolerant of any form of dissent; thus, just as I have long seen his anti-corruption drive at home as modelled on that of Xi Jinping (ie ridding himself of domestic opponents), it seems to me to be perfectly possible that he may pursue a course against dissidents abroad modelled on the practice of yet another autocrat, ie Vladimir Putin. And especially if his agents feel that they can act in third countries with more or less guaranteed impunity.
    Furthermore – and notwithstanding that I very much agree with the expert opinion expressed at Chatham House about the prospect of big increases in UK trade with Saudi Arabia – Brexit (whether ‘hard’ or ‘soft’) and its, now clearly growing, negative impact on the UK’s economy are only likely to make HMG even more inclined to put principle significantly further down the agenda in favour of economic ties.
    ‘Chapeau’, therefore, to Arab Digest for this exposé!

Leave a Comment

Scroll to Top

Access provided by the Bodleian Libraries of the University of Oxford

Copy link