Jeff Bezos Makes His Most Ghoulish Deal Yet with Saudi Arabia Despite Jamal Khashoggi Murd3r

Jeff Bezos, once hailed as a pioneering tech entrepreneur and media magnate, has plunged into one of the most morally troubling deals of his career. 

The Amazon founder and owner of the Washington Post has agreed to a multibillion-dollar partnership with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), despite the regime’s brutal assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

This decision has sparked widespread outrage and raised serious questions about Bezos’s priorities and ethical judgment.

The horrifying murder of Jamal Khashoggi in October 2018 sent shockwaves through the global community. Khashoggi, a prominent columnist for the Bezos-owned Washington Post, was killed and dismembered inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul—a brutal act orchestrated by agents of MBS.

The journalist had entered the consulate to obtain paperwork for his upcoming marriage. His body was never recovered, making the crime all the more chilling and symbolic of the regime's ruthlessness toward dissent.

Six years after this atrocity, Bezos and his company have announced a massive collaboration with Humain, an AI firm owned by MBS. This partnership involves a staggering $5 billion investment to build an “AI Zone” in Saudi Arabia, aimed at fostering artificial intelligence development in the kingdom.

The announcement, made on May 13, 2025, has been met with disbelief and condemnation from human rights advocates and many within the tech community.

The deal starkly contrasts with Bezos’s earlier image as a defender of free press and democracy. The Washington Post had long served as a platform for challenging authoritarian regimes and exposing corruption worldwide.

Now, the company’s owner appears to have prioritized financial opportunity over principles, forging business ties with the very regime responsible for silencing one of his journalists in the most gruesome manner imaginable.

Saudi Arabia has been aggressively pursuing a vision to transform its economy away from oil dependence under the banner of “Project 2030.” This includes high-profile investments in emerging technologies such as AI, aimed at diversifying the kingdom’s economy.

However, many experts view these initiatives as a smokescreen intended to divert attention from ongoing human rights abuses, repression, and brutal crackdowns on dissent.

One of the flagship projects under this initiative is Neom, a sprawling futuristic city promoted as a model of innovation and sustainability. But Neom has repeatedly faced delays and setbacks, leading many to dismiss it as vaporware—a grandiose concept that has failed to materialize.

Researchers note that Neom primarily serves as a tool for MBS to consolidate power and attract foreign capital while masking the regime’s darker realities.

The fallout from Khashoggi’s murder included widespread withdrawal of support from Saudi projects by notable tech leaders and institutions.

OpenAI’s Sam Altman and former U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz publicly stepped back from Saudi collaborations, and numerous companies distanced themselves from the kingdom’s investments.

The reluctance to engage was a powerful statement about the global unease with Saudi Arabia’s blatant human rights violations.

Yet Jeff Bezos has taken the opposite course, embracing a partnership that many view as morally bankrupt. His willingness to cooperate with MBS’s AI company raises disturbing questions about the influence of authoritarian regimes within Silicon Valley.

It suggests that lucrative business prospects may outweigh ethical considerations for even the most prominent industry figures.

Further scrutiny has been placed on Bezos’s stewardship of the Washington Post, which has faced significant upheaval in recent years. The appointment of Will Lewis, a figure linked to previous media scandals, as the newspaper’s leader has alarmed journalists and observers.

Under Lewis, the Post notably declined to endorse a candidate in the 2024 U.S. presidential election, breaking a tradition that had lasted for decades and alienating many readers.

The Post has also seen a wave of defections among its star reporters and editorial staff, with many citing frustrations over editorial direction and corporate influence.

Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Ann Telnaes resigned after controversy erupted over a cartoon critical of Bezos, highlighting tensions between journalistic independence and the owner’s business interests.

This shift calls into question whether the Post can continue its role as a vigorous watchdog of democracy under Bezos’s control. While once praised for fearless investigative journalism, the paper now appears to prioritize business and market-friendly narratives, potentially at the expense of truth and accountability.

Bezos’s earlier public posture as a defender of free speech now rings hollow. His banning of op-ed writers critical of “free speech and the markets” indicates an effort to control dissenting voices and protect vested interests.

This censorship undermines the very values the Post purported to champion and fuels accusations of compromising journalistic integrity for profit.

Adding to the complexity is the reported hacking of Bezos’s phone by Saudi operatives, a breach allegedly linked to MBS. The motive behind this cyberattack remains unclear, but it underscores the murky ties between Bezos and the Saudi regime.

Whether this incident was a form of kompromat, blackmail, or industrial espionage, Bezos’s subsequent deal with the kingdom paints a troubling picture of capitulation or complicity.

The relationship between tech giants and authoritarian regimes poses deep ethical dilemmas. Bezos’s decision to prioritize business dealings with MBS’s Saudi Arabia illuminates the tensions between profit motives and human rights advocacy.

This episode reveals how economic interests can sometimes erode moral boundaries, leaving critics to question the true cost of innovation and expansion.

While the promised billions may boost AI research and economic growth in Saudi Arabia, the human toll of cooperating with a regime infamous for brutal repression cannot be overlooked.

The murder of a journalist, suppression of freedoms, and ongoing abuses cast a long shadow over any technological progress made under such partnerships.

This deal also spotlights the limits of corporate responsibility in today’s interconnected world. Bezos’s actions suggest that even the most influential leaders are willing to compromise ethics when confronted with vast wealth and strategic advantage.

The episode compels a reevaluation of how power and money intersect, often at the expense of justice and accountability.

As the story unfolds, the spotlight intensifies not only on Bezos but on the broader system that enables such partnerships. It challenges stakeholders—from governments to consumers—to demand higher standards and hold powerful actors accountable for their complicity in human rights violations.

Jeff Bezos’s journey from a celebrated visionary to a figure embroiled in morally dubious deals underscores the fragility of corporate ethics in the face of ambition. It serves as a stark warning about the perils of unchecked power and the consequences of sidelining conscience for gain.

This saga is not just about one man or one regime. It reveals the precarious state of human rights globally and the challenges of balancing economic development with fundamental ethical imperatives.

It calls for urgent reflection on how societies can foster innovation while protecting the vulnerable and defending truth.

In the end, Jeff Bezos’s Saudi deal will be remembered as a dark milestone in the history of tech and media. It forces a reckoning with the price paid when the pursuit of power eclipses the defense of human dignity and freedom.

Until a new path is forged—one that reconciles progress with morality—the world will watch with unease as corporate titans like Bezos navigate a landscape rife with compromise and contradiction, forever shaping the future in ways both promising and perilous.