Dec 13, 2019
The emergence of the destructive political-security role of Saudi Arabia can be seen as a positive consequence of recent developments in West Asia. The destruction of the political independence of nations, the diversion of the will of nations, the siege and war and aggression, have allbecome key elements of Saudi regional policy in recent years.
In this regard, the option of infiltrating social networks using financial means and arresting, assassinating, torturing or executing media and human rights activists should be seen as a new arena for destructive Saudi role-playing. Influence of individuals such as Abu Mumtiri and Al Zabbar in Twitter staff to spy on users and Saudi opponents alongside the controversial assassination of Jamal Khashoggi and Abdul Aziz Al-Jasser (Twitter activist), while revealing the absurd claim of social media networks to protect users’ information, it has also raised the growing concern of users and human rights activists.
The active role of the Saudis’ new security tool in the region’s socio-political unrest, which is largely exploited by robotic and unrealistic accounts, demonstrates the organized and specialized nature of Saudi malicious mobility in the cyber arena.
Bin Salman and Saudi modernist princes, trying to buy 80% of Twitter shares, set up a center called Moderation (anti-extremism) and set up a supposedly charitable foundation in Moscow to cover up their destructive targets in cyberspace. Follow the goodwill, the rule of law and the pretense of civilization.
Bin Salman and Saudi modernist princes are trying to pursue their destructive goals in the cyber arena in the guise of benevolence, legalism, and pretense of civilization by buying 80% of Twitter shares, and setting up a center called Moderation (anti-extremism) and setting up a supposedly charitable foundation “MiSK” to cover up their destructive targets in cyberspace.
The transfer of a large scale of the share of one of the largest social networks to Saudis, whose human rights record and repression of their social freedoms are evident, shows that the independence of social networks and the red line of their users’ information security was no more than a claim.
These networks have been increasingly influenced by certain powers with their financial-political deals, and they are in fact a tool of these governments to control the citizens and suppress the opposition. In fact, when we look at the new behavior of Saudi Arabia, we find some points:
First, the United States became aware of the importance and position of social networks after the Islamic Awakening, but after the failure of the Great Middle East Plan, it knew that the continuation of the process by the United States itself could inflict serious damage to the prestige of the US government, so that the US opens the gate to its allies in this arena and what better option would be than Saudi Arabia, given bin Salman’s supposed reform process!
Second, after the defeat of the Arab coalition in Yemen, as well as the failure of the maximum pressure campaign against Iran, Americans are concerned about the tendency of the Persian Gulf sheiks towards Iran.
Of course, this tendency does not mean, that the Gulf Arab alliance or alliance with the Islamic Republic is, but rather, the failure of a policy of challenge to Iran. Since the Presidency of George W. Bush, the policy of Arab countries in the Persian Gulf with Iran has been mostly challenging and tense, but after nearly two decades, the ineffectiveness of this strategy has become clear to the Arabs, and we are seeing signs of a trend toward a policy of tension relief. That is why America, which felt threatened, is seeking to provide soft power tools to its regional allies to essentially provided a social barrier to this deterrent policy.
However, but what lies ahead is America’s use of an old tool for its new interests in the region. In fact, the United States is trying to preserving the status quo for the next decade by giving Saudi Arabia the social network control to prevent tensions relief in the Middle East and to persuade public opinion on the matter of intervening in other countries’ affairs.