[ad_1]
An Iranian official said that Saudi Arabia should stop serving “Israel” and respecting its neighbors, a day after statements by Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz strongly attacked Tehran.
The vice president of the Iranian Parliament for International Affairs, Hussein Amir Abd al-Lahian, blamed the Saudi monarch for “attacking Yemen and defending US terrorism from ISIS in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.”
The Iranian official’s attack came after King Salman called on the international community to toughen its stance on Tehran, in a statement that coincided with the loss of US President Donald Trump, and spoke of actions against Iran.
And Abd al-Lahian tweeted on his Twitter account yesterday Thursday: “The Saudi monarch has no right to accuse Iran.”
“It is better for Riyadh to stop serving Israel and respect its neighbors, especially as Iran remains the main defender of peace and security for its neighbors and the region,” Abd al-Lahyan said.
In a speech at the opening of the first year of the eighth session of the Shura Council, the Saudi monarch called on states to toughen their stance on Tehran on Thursday.
King Salman said: “The countries of our region are faced with numerous attempts by regional powers that seek to impose their political influence and extremist ideology to serve their interests.”
King Salman’s remarks come amid leaks to the US newspaper “New York Times,” which said Pentagon officials are not ruling out Trump’s military operations against Iran or other opponents such as ISIS in his last days in power.
The newspaper said Monday that Pentagon officials had expressed “fear about the possibility of Trump launching overt or covert military operations.”
Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper, apparently using his last two months in power after his defeat in the presidential election to clean up accounts within his administration.
During the Trump era, tension increased between Washington and Tehran, the latter and Riyadh, especially in 2019. When the tension moved to the waters of the Gulf, amid massive US military movements, the mobilization of forces and the threat , did not result in any significant development on the ground.
[ad_2]
