Khashoggi’s ‘killers’ have been sentenced to death. That won’t detoxify Saudi Arabia
|
Version 0 of 1. These dubious convictions will do nothing for the kingdom’s reputation, says foreign affairs commentator Simon Tisdall If Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, believes the sentencing to death of five hapless stooges for the murder of the dissident journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, is the end of the affair, he is sorely mistaken. The brutal killing at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October last year has shamed the kingdom, caused lasting harm to its global standing, and irretrievably damaged Prince Mohammed’s personal reputation. In short, the whole business stinks – and the stench will not be dissipated, nor the noxious smell dispersed, by a travesty of a trial that bears little or no resemblance to a properly conducted legal proceeding. This horrendous crime will remain a gross and indelible mark on the conscience of the House of Saud. The ponderous transactions of the criminal court in Riyadh, which handed down a total of eight guilty verdicts on Monday, lacked credibility from the outset. The trial was held in conditions of utmost secrecy throughout, further undermining confidence – and encouraging suspicions that the accused were dispensable fall guys. Those suspicions will only grow with confirmation that Prince Mohammed’s former senior adviser, Saud al-Qahtani, has been released without charge. The Saudi deputy public prosecutor, Shalaan bin Rajih Shalaan, previously said Qahtani had been involved in discussions about Khashoggi with the squad of agents that was sent to Istanbul. The prosecutor said Qahtani had also acted in coordination with the Saudi deputy intelligence chief, Ahmed al-Asiri, who had ordered Khashoggi’s involuntary repatriation from Turkey. The suggestion was that members of the kidnap squad subsequently went “rogue” and killed Khashoggi without the consent of higher authority. Both Qahtani and Asiri have been moved to other jobs. Asiri was put on trial but on Monday, Shalaan said he, too, had been released – due to insufficient evidence. Like Prince Mohammed, both men deny any personal responsibility for Khashoggi’s murder. In a television interview with CBS in September, Prince Mohammed said: “This was a heinous crime. But I take full responsibility as a leader in Saudi Arabia, especially since it was committed by individuals working for the Saudi government.” Asked whether he ordered the murder, Prince Mohammed replied: “Absolutely not.” For eminent Saudi royal personages with face to save, this all looks very convenient. The regime will claim justice has been served and the guilty men identified and condemned. And consider this: the death sentences, barbaric in themselves, are preliminary. They may be appealed, commuted, or even dismissed at some future date when the world is no longer watching. It all simply does not wash. A report published in June by the UN’s special rapporteur, whose independence and impartiality, unlike that of the Riyadh court, is not open to question, found “credible evidence” of liability for the murder among high-level Saudi officials, including the crown prince. Khashoggi’s death was an extrajudicial killing and the investigation conducted by Saudi Arabia and Turkey failed to meet international standards, the rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, declared. She went on to allege that the Saudi authorities might still be engaged in obstructing justice – and demanded that the trial be suspended. The UN’s findings and recommendations were dismissed by Riyadh. But Callamard was not alone in her suspicions. Indeed, the CIA, which has no particular reason to embarrass an important US Middle East ally and trading partner, went further. American officials expressed high confidence in a CIA finding last year that Prince Mohammed personally ordered the murder, a conclusion they said was supported by multiple sources. The agency reportedly pointed to the alleged involvement of Khalid bin Salman, Prince Mohammed’s brother who is the deputy defence minister. He was said to have “phoned Khashoggi, urged him to go to the Istanbul consulate, and assured him of safe conduct”. The Washington Post said it was unclear whether Khalid knew Khashoggi would be killed, but that he made the call at his brother’s direction. One of the few people who appears to believe the official Saudi version of events is Donald Trump. Even if, privately, he does not, he has made it abundantly clear he will not allow the Khashoggi scandal to derail his own and Washington’s close relationship with the Saudis, which rests on arms and oil sales, mutual business interests and a shared antipathy to Iran. As in separate instances relating to Russia, Trump has effectively disowned his own intelligence community. But if Prince Mohammed believes a corrupt poltroon in the White House can resurrect him and his ruined reputation, then once again, he is deluding himself. The murder has brought down the wrath of US Congress on his head where, as is the case in Britain and Europe, many continue to favour a halt to arms sales and possible post-Trump sanctions. It has shone an unforgiving light on broader, systemic human rights abuses by the Saudi regime. And it has drawn overdue attention to Riyadh’s murderous military campaign in Yemen. The Khashoggi murder has forced the western democracies to question how much longer they can continue to pretend that Saudi Arabia, with its preening regal autocrats, gaping democratic deficit, and still largely unreformed, medieval attitude to women, is a normal country. Justice has not been done. Jamal Khashoggi, whose offence was to speak up freely and bravely against those who oppress and exploit his native land, has not been avenged. Khashoggi’s true killers still await exposure and punishment. Whatever cover story the regime may propagate, the seeds of doubt have been sown. For Prince Mohammed and those of his blood, it may be a bitter harvest. • Simon Tisdall is a foreign affairs commentator |