Mixing
Why would a Western country sanction Saudi Arabia over Khashoggi's possible killing?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Suppose, hypothetically, it is determined that the Saudi Arabian government murdered Jamal Khashoggi over his opposition to Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
I can understand why this would be an unethical thing to do, as it would amount to the government killing a political opponent. I am having trouble understanding why it would be of such a concern to the United States that the United States might sanction Saudi Arabia. The killing would be bad, and bad for the people of Saudi Arabia, but would it be bad for the United States?
I have seen some discussion of how killing political opponents undermines Saudi Arabia's efforts to convince foreign businesses that the country is safe to invest in. I can see why this would be a concern to businesses. But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions. Where does the role of the U.S. government fit into this?
united-states international-relations saudi-arabia
asked 2 hours ago
Owen
2288
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Suppose, hypothetically, it is determined that the Saudi Arabian government murdered Jamal Khashoggi over his opposition to Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
I can understand why this would be an unethical thing to do, as it would amount to the government killing a political opponent. I am having trouble understanding why it would be of such a concern to the United States that the United States might sanction Saudi Arabia. The killing would be bad, and bad for the people of Saudi Arabia, but would it be bad for the United States?
I have seen some discussion of how killing political opponents undermines Saudi Arabia's efforts to convince foreign businesses that the country is safe to invest in. I can see why this would be a concern to businesses. But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions. Where does the role of the U.S. government fit into this?
united-states international-relations saudi-arabia
asked 2 hours ago
Owen
2288
Related question, but a slightly different situation (less relation to the US, yet the US did impose sanctions).
– JJJ
21 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Suppose, hypothetically, it is determined that the Saudi Arabian government murdered Jamal Khashoggi over his opposition to Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
I can understand why this would be an unethical thing to do, as it would amount to the government killing a political opponent. I am having trouble understanding why it would be of such a concern to the United States that the United States might sanction Saudi Arabia. The killing would be bad, and bad for the people of Saudi Arabia, but would it be bad for the United States?
I have seen some discussion of how killing political opponents undermines Saudi Arabia's efforts to convince foreign businesses that the country is safe to invest in. I can see why this would be a concern to businesses. But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions. Where does the role of the U.S. government fit into this?
united-states international-relations saudi-arabia
asked 2 hours ago
Owen
2288
Suppose, hypothetically, it is determined that the Saudi Arabian government murdered Jamal Khashoggi over his opposition to Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
I can understand why this would be an unethical thing to do, as it would amount to the government killing a political opponent. I am having trouble understanding why it would be of such a concern to the United States that the United States might sanction Saudi Arabia. The killing would be bad, and bad for the people of Saudi Arabia, but would it be bad for the United States?
I have seen some discussion of how killing political opponents undermines Saudi Arabia's efforts to convince foreign businesses that the country is safe to invest in. I can see why this would be a concern to businesses. But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions. Where does the role of the U.S. government fit into this?
united-states international-relations saudi-arabia
united-states international-relations saudi-arabia
asked 2 hours ago
Owen
2288
asked 2 hours ago
Owen
2288
asked 2 hours ago
Owen
2288
asked 2 hours ago
Owen
2288
asked 2 hours ago
Owen
2288
2288
Related question, but a slightly different situation (less relation to the US, yet the US did impose sanctions).
– JJJ
21 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Related question, but a slightly different situation (less relation to the US, yet the US did impose sanctions).
– JJJ
21 mins ago
Related question, but a slightly different situation (less relation to the US, yet the US did impose sanctions).
– JJJ
21 mins ago
Related question, but a slightly different situation (less relation to the US, yet the US did impose sanctions).
– JJJ
21 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
It's an issue because Jamal Khashoggi is an immigrant and permanent resident to the US.
The Washington Post reported on 9 October that "US intelligence intercepted communications of Saudi officials discussing a plan to capture" Khashoggi. It was not clear whether the Saudi Arabians intended to arrest and interrogate Khashoggi or to kill him, or if the US warned Khashoggi that he was a target. The intercepted communication is deemed important because Khashoggi is a legal resident of the United States, and is therefore entitled to protection. According to NSA officials, this threat warning was communicated to the White House through official intelligence channels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Khashoggi
answered 2 hours ago
CrackpotCrocodile
51229
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
First, civilization is based on doing things that don't directly benefit them. Sanctions can be based on moral concerns, without reference to interests.
Second, acting in support of morality even when it's not directly beneficial encourages others to do the same, which helps the US.
Third, there are extended effects of this that can hurt the US. For instance, killing opposition journalists makes it easier for dictators to engage propaganda, which makes it easier to drum up support for attacking other countries, and the US is another country. So there is an argument to be made for having a general policy opposing killing journalists.
But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions.
No, they can't. Without the coordinating power of the US government, any company that decided to not do business would be at a competitive disadvantage to any company that did do business.
answered 36 mins ago
Acccumulation
700210
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
It's an issue because Jamal Khashoggi is an immigrant and permanent resident to the US.
The Washington Post reported on 9 October that "US intelligence intercepted communications of Saudi officials discussing a plan to capture" Khashoggi. It was not clear whether the Saudi Arabians intended to arrest and interrogate Khashoggi or to kill him, or if the US warned Khashoggi that he was a target. The intercepted communication is deemed important because Khashoggi is a legal resident of the United States, and is therefore entitled to protection. According to NSA officials, this threat warning was communicated to the White House through official intelligence channels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Khashoggi
answered 2 hours ago
CrackpotCrocodile
51229
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
It's an issue because Jamal Khashoggi is an immigrant and permanent resident to the US.
The Washington Post reported on 9 October that "US intelligence intercepted communications of Saudi officials discussing a plan to capture" Khashoggi. It was not clear whether the Saudi Arabians intended to arrest and interrogate Khashoggi or to kill him, or if the US warned Khashoggi that he was a target. The intercepted communication is deemed important because Khashoggi is a legal resident of the United States, and is therefore entitled to protection. According to NSA officials, this threat warning was communicated to the White House through official intelligence channels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Khashoggi
answered 2 hours ago
CrackpotCrocodile
51229
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
It's an issue because Jamal Khashoggi is an immigrant and permanent resident to the US.
The Washington Post reported on 9 October that "US intelligence intercepted communications of Saudi officials discussing a plan to capture" Khashoggi. It was not clear whether the Saudi Arabians intended to arrest and interrogate Khashoggi or to kill him, or if the US warned Khashoggi that he was a target. The intercepted communication is deemed important because Khashoggi is a legal resident of the United States, and is therefore entitled to protection. According to NSA officials, this threat warning was communicated to the White House through official intelligence channels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Khashoggi
answered 2 hours ago
CrackpotCrocodile
51229
It's an issue because Jamal Khashoggi is an immigrant and permanent resident to the US.
The Washington Post reported on 9 October that "US intelligence intercepted communications of Saudi officials discussing a plan to capture" Khashoggi. It was not clear whether the Saudi Arabians intended to arrest and interrogate Khashoggi or to kill him, or if the US warned Khashoggi that he was a target. The intercepted communication is deemed important because Khashoggi is a legal resident of the United States, and is therefore entitled to protection. According to NSA officials, this threat warning was communicated to the White House through official intelligence channels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Khashoggi
answered 2 hours ago
CrackpotCrocodile
51229
answered 2 hours ago
CrackpotCrocodile
51229
answered 2 hours ago
CrackpotCrocodile
51229
answered 2 hours ago
CrackpotCrocodile
51229
51229
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
First, civilization is based on doing things that don't directly benefit them. Sanctions can be based on moral concerns, without reference to interests.
Second, acting in support of morality even when it's not directly beneficial encourages others to do the same, which helps the US.
Third, there are extended effects of this that can hurt the US. For instance, killing opposition journalists makes it easier for dictators to engage propaganda, which makes it easier to drum up support for attacking other countries, and the US is another country. So there is an argument to be made for having a general policy opposing killing journalists.
But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions.
No, they can't. Without the coordinating power of the US government, any company that decided to not do business would be at a competitive disadvantage to any company that did do business.
answered 36 mins ago
Acccumulation
700210
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
First, civilization is based on doing things that don't directly benefit them. Sanctions can be based on moral concerns, without reference to interests.
Second, acting in support of morality even when it's not directly beneficial encourages others to do the same, which helps the US.
Third, there are extended effects of this that can hurt the US. For instance, killing opposition journalists makes it easier for dictators to engage propaganda, which makes it easier to drum up support for attacking other countries, and the US is another country. So there is an argument to be made for having a general policy opposing killing journalists.
But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions.
No, they can't. Without the coordinating power of the US government, any company that decided to not do business would be at a competitive disadvantage to any company that did do business.
answered 36 mins ago
Acccumulation
700210
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
First, civilization is based on doing things that don't directly benefit them. Sanctions can be based on moral concerns, without reference to interests.
Second, acting in support of morality even when it's not directly beneficial encourages others to do the same, which helps the US.
Third, there are extended effects of this that can hurt the US. For instance, killing opposition journalists makes it easier for dictators to engage propaganda, which makes it easier to drum up support for attacking other countries, and the US is another country. So there is an argument to be made for having a general policy opposing killing journalists.
But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions.
No, they can't. Without the coordinating power of the US government, any company that decided to not do business would be at a competitive disadvantage to any company that did do business.
answered 36 mins ago
Acccumulation
700210
First, civilization is based on doing things that don't directly benefit them. Sanctions can be based on moral concerns, without reference to interests.
Second, acting in support of morality even when it's not directly beneficial encourages others to do the same, which helps the US.
Third, there are extended effects of this that can hurt the US. For instance, killing opposition journalists makes it easier for dictators to engage propaganda, which makes it easier to drum up support for attacking other countries, and the US is another country. So there is an argument to be made for having a general policy opposing killing journalists.
But again, businesses can make their investment decisions as they see fit without need for the U.S. to impose sanctions.
No, they can't. Without the coordinating power of the US government, any company that decided to not do business would be at a competitive disadvantage to any company that did do business.
answered 36 mins ago
Acccumulation
700210
answered 36 mins ago
Acccumulation
700210
answered 36 mins ago
Acccumulation
700210
answered 36 mins ago
Acccumulation
700210
700210
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f34494%2fwhy-would-a-western-country-sanction-saudi-arabia-over-khashoggis-possible-kill%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Related question, but a slightly different situation (less relation to the US, yet the US did impose sanctions).
– JJJ
21 mins ago