Washington, DC — 15 July 2022
On 2 October 2018, shortly after 1:00 PM, Washington Post contributor and U.S. resident Jamal Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and was never seen again. In the years since, his killing has sparked global outrage, congressional action, and sustained demands for accountability.
Although key elements of the operation have been pieced together, the United States has stopped short of fully pursuing accountability at the highest levels. Rather than demanding justice, successive administrations have framed their approach as a “recalibration” of relations with Saudi Arabia—effectively recalibrating accountability itself.
Intelligence Findings and Shifting Narratives
In February 2021, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) released a report implicating Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. The assessment cited his control over decision-making within the Kingdom and his support for using violent measures to silence dissent abroad.
Throughout the investigation, Saudi officials offered multiple, shifting explanations for Khashoggi’s disappearance and death. MBS denied any prior knowledge of the operation. Early accounts suggested a failed rendition attempt; later findings pointed instead to a premeditated killing followed by efforts to dispose of the body.
Further evidence emerged from Turkish intelligence, which had previously surveilled the Saudi consulate and obtained extensive audio recordings documenting the killing. Agnes Callamard, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, reviewed the recordings and presented her findings to the Human Rights Council. Based on this evidence, the Council concluded that Khashoggi’s murder constituted a “state killing.”
Saudi Impunity
Since rising to prominence, Mohammed bin Salman has consolidated power to an extraordinary degree, sidelining critics and centralizing authority within the Saudi state. Given this level of control, it is difficult to view the Khashoggi operation as a rogue action carried out without senior-level awareness.
While MBS has introduced reforms that have expanded certain social freedoms, these changes exist alongside a system that continues to suppress dissent and restrict fundamental rights.
The killing of Jamal Khashoggi is not an isolated case. Saudi Arabia’s conduct in Yemen has drawn widespread condemnation, including allegations of unlawful airstrikes on civilian infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, and public spaces. These patterns raise serious concerns about adherence to international humanitarian law and the protection of civilians.
Avoidance and Strategic Restraint
Despite the ODNI’s findings, the United States has avoided directly targeting Mohammed bin Salman with sanctions. Officials have justified this approach by emphasizing the need to preserve strategic relations with a longstanding ally and major oil supplier.
Saudi Arabia is also one of the largest purchasers of U.S.-manufactured arms, many of which have been used by the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. That defense relationship has played a significant role in shaping U.S. policy responses.
In February 2021, the Biden administration announced an end to U.S. support for offensive operations in Yemen and paused certain weapons transfers, including precision-guided munitions, pending review of potential human rights concerns.
The administration has argued that sanctions against a sitting head of state are not a standard diplomatic practice and that alternative mechanisms may be more effective in promoting accountability. Yet this position raises a fundamental question: can accountability be meaningfully pursued if it excludes those most responsible?
Limits of Accountability
Sanctions alone are unlikely to alter the balance of power within Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom has repeatedly asserted its sovereignty and rejected external pressure on its internal affairs.
More effective measures may include sustained international monitoring of human rights conditions, increased transparency in legal proceedings, the release of prisoners of conscience, and guarantees that individuals can express dissent without fear of detention or retaliation.
President Joe Biden has pledged to hold Saudi leadership accountable. The credibility of that commitment depends on whether it is applied consistently and without exception.
Free Speech – Free from Intimidation and Murder
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms the right to freedom of opinion and expression. This principle is foundational to democratic systems, including that of the United States, where it has been repeatedly upheld by the courts.
The killing of Jamal Khashoggi represents a direct assault on that principle. That the act occurred within a diplomatic facility does not diminish its severity; if anything, it underscores the extent to which state power was used to silence dissent.
If the United States seeks to recalibrate its relationship with Saudi Arabia, that process should begin with a clear and consistent defense of free expression. There must be an unequivocal message—to Saudi leadership and to governments globally—that such violations will neither be ignored nor excused.
Jamal Khashoggi was one individual, but his case carries broader implications. A journalist advocating for reform was killed for his views. Equally concerning is the response: two U.S. administrations have acknowledged the findings yet stopped short of full accountability.
Strategic relationships matter. But when maintaining those relationships requires overlooking a killing of this nature, the cost is not only moral—it is systemic. Without accountability, there is no deterrence. Without deterrence, there is no justice.
Photo Credit: Torture in the Kingdom – by POMED – License by CC 2.0 license.
Lara Kajs is the founder and executive director of The Genocide Report (TGR). She has conducted extensive fieldwork in conflict and displacement settings, including Yemen, Syria, and Afghanistan. Her work focuses on humanitarian crises, international law, and atrocity prevention.