How King Abdulaziz Established Saudi Arabia’s Independence, Neutrality?

King Abdulaziz at the time was very cautious and aware of the political game played by Westerners, especially Britain. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
King Abdulaziz at the time was very cautious and aware of the political game played by Westerners, especially Britain. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT
20

How King Abdulaziz Established Saudi Arabia’s Independence, Neutrality?

King Abdulaziz at the time was very cautious and aware of the political game played by Westerners, especially Britain. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
King Abdulaziz at the time was very cautious and aware of the political game played by Westerners, especially Britain. (Asharq Al-Awsat)

The period between 1915 and 1927 witnessed conflicts in various parts of the world, most notably the outbreak of the First World War. The Arabian Peninsula, for its part, was experiencing a decisive transitional phase in its history.

During that time, the Peninsula passed through three important stages: The revolution against Turkish subordination in some of its parts, internal wars, and then the unification and stability under the founding king.

In this atmosphere, the Uqair Treaty was signed in 1915 and constituted the first basis for shaping the spirit and nature of the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Britain.

Some historians describe it as a treaty of protection and influence, which is similar to other accords concluded by Britain with a number of Gulf States. However, King Abdulaziz at the time was very cautious and aware of the political game played by Westerners, especially Britain.

Fearing the expansion of the conflict of the great powers to the Arabian Peninsula during the First World War, King Abdulaziz wrote to his neighbors, including Mubarak in Kuwait, saying: “I see as the war has occurred, that we meet to deliberate, hoping that we agree on what will save the Arabs from its horrors, or we will ally with one of the countries to protect our rights and promote our interests.”

The Uqair Treaty is not like all other treaties concluded by Britain in the Gulf region. It is neither a protection pact nor an agreement of influence, but rather a treaty of mutual interests between two parties, each of which wants to protect its own interests.

The Treaty Clauses

The first clause included the British government’s recognition of Nejd, Al-Ahsa, Qatif and others (areas that belong to Saudi Arabia now) as “the countries of Ibn Saud and his fathers, and that the ruler nominates whoever succeeds after him, and that the candidate is not opposed to the British government in any way, especially with regard to this treaty.”

This specific item reflected the correct picture of the relationship between King Abdulaziz and Britain, which was based on the British government’s explicit recognition of the nascent state of King Abdulaziz.

The second clause stipulated that if “any attack occurs by a foreign country on the territories of Ibn Saud and his allies without consulting the British government… then Britain shall assist Ibn Saud after consulting with him.”

It is worth noting that King Abdulaziz did not ask for assistance from a foreign country from the date of the conquest of Riyadh in 1902 until the unification of the Saudi state.

In Clause 4, King Abdulaziz pledged not to sell any of the aforementioned regions to a foreign country without the approval of the British government, provided that this does not prejudice the country’s interests.

In the fifth clause, Ibn Saud vowed to secure the freedom of movement and protect pilgrims on their way to the holy sites.

King Abdulaziz pledged, in the sixth clause, not to interfere in other countries’ affairs – a policy that he long sought to advocate.

The seventh and last item includes the commitment of Britain and King Abdulaziz to sign another treaty that further details matters pertaining to the relationship between the two sides.

Saudi Arabia and Britain... After the Treaty

After World War I, Britain was keen to maintain its presence and strength in areas far from the battlefield, especially as it competed with countries that had a strong desire to obtain spheres of influence in the Middle East, such as France, Germany, Russia and other European countries.

During the war, Britain sent Captain Shakespeare to Riyadh, carrying with him recognition of the Saudi State and recalling the “danger of the German influence” and the desire to develop a plan of cooperation with King Abdulaziz on a solid basis.

King Abdulaziz, for his part, believed that the Turks were passing through a critical stage and that supporting them against Britain during the war could make his country lose the opportunity to consolidate its security.

The British policy was working to serve its interests and realized that the Saudi power had become dominant in the Arabian Peninsula. King Abdulaziz, for his part, was aware of the need to forge a treaty that is consistent with the new status of his state and for the world’s major powers to recognize the new Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Consequently, the Jeddah Treaty was concluded on May 20, 1927, and consisted of 11 articles and 4 annexes. It included the British government’s absolute official recognition of the complete independence of the state of King Abdul Aziz without reservation.



Alarm in Tel Aviv After Removal of Pro-Israel Officials from Trump Administration

US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meet in the White House in April. (dpa)
US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meet in the White House in April. (dpa)
TT
20

Alarm in Tel Aviv After Removal of Pro-Israel Officials from Trump Administration

US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meet in the White House in April. (dpa)
US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meet in the White House in April. (dpa)

The dismissal of pro-Israel officials in the White House sparked concerns in Tel Aviv as US President Donald Trump’s “America First” sidelines allies and reflects a broader effort to curb foreign influence across the administration.

“Israeli officials are expressing growing concern over a series of unexpected personnel changes within the US administration, particularly involving individuals widely seen as strongly supportive of Israel,” sources told the Ynetnews website, which is affiliated to the Israeli Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper.

The reshuffling comes amid rising tensions between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over a potential strike on Iran and the ongoing war in Gaza.

According to the Israeli report, two senior officials recently removed from their posts are Merav Ceren, a dual US-Israeli citizen who was only recently appointed as head of the Iran and Israel portfolio at the National Security Council, and Eric Trager, who oversees the Middle East and North Africa.

Both had been appointed by former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, a staunch supporter of Israel, who was himself dismissed by Trump.

Ynetnews wrote that their removal was reportedly carried out by Waltz’s successor, Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Meanwhile, another high-profile figure expected to depart is Morgan Ortagus, deputy to special envoy Steve Witkoff and the official handling the Lebanon portfolio. Sources say her departure is not voluntary.

Ortagus, who converted to Judaism and wears a Star of David necklace, is considered one of the strongest supporters of Israel within the administration.

According to the Israeli report, she played a key role in ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Lebanon and in persuading the Lebanese government to take a firm stance against Hezbollah and disarm Palestinian refugee camps.

“Her imminent departure has stunned officials in Jerusalem, where she is viewed as closely aligned with Israeli interests,” Ynetnews said.

Officials following the issue do not rule out the possibility that more pro-Israel officials may be removed.

In the Trump administration, they note, decisions often come abruptly.

These removals are not occurring in a vacuum, but rather reflect a broader distancing between Jerusalem and the Trump administration, which appears to be pursuing its own strategic calculus.

Israeli sources familiar with US-Israel relations told the Israeli website that the spate of removals is driven by Trump’s “America First” agenda.

According to those sources, the shakeup is not specifically aimed at Israel but reflects a broader effort to curb foreign influence across the board.

They stress that the dismissals were not a result of the officials' views on Israel, but rather part of Trump’s ongoing attempt to weaken the National Security Council and consolidate control of US foreign policy in his own hands.

This, they said, explains why Trump has left the national security advisor post vacant, with Rubio assuming the responsibilities instead.

Also, the sources noted that the push to remove pro-Israel figures is being led by Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr, and Vice President JD Vance.

Ynetnews said that Netanyahu has reportedly confided in closed-door discussions with his confidant, Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, that he misjudged the direction the US was taking on Israel and the broader Middle East.

Senior Israeli officials said Netanyahu did not hide his disappointment with Dermer.

“Dermer misread the situation; he was convinced the US would never turn against us,” said one source.

“He failed to anticipate the shift in US policy toward Israel. Even now, Dermer still believes the US will remain supportive and maintain coordination, but the truth is, he’s lost his bearings.”