NSA's charter is explicit in it's scope, that much is obvious and clear. If you are a US citizen sending money abroad via SWIFT, well then you place yourself into that purview, that's just a thing.

The definition of an "ally" is a curious thing. I prefer to think of the ME as more of a realpolitik scenario. The countries you name lack any real connection to the US beyond the realpolitik at the end of the day.

>"The countries you name lack any real connection to the US beyond the realpolitik at the end of the day."

You might want to look up Occidental Petroleum of Houston, Texas:

"Occidental's oil and gas operations in the Middle East are in Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. The region produced 294 thousand barrels of oil equivalent (1,800,000 GJ) per day, representing approximately 46% of 2016 total worldwide production.The region also held 28% of the company's proved reserves in 2016.

Occidental is the largest independent oil producer in Oman. In Qatar, Occidental is the second-largest oil producer offshore and is a partial owner in the Dolphin natural gas project, which delivers gas to Oman and the United Arab Emirates.

In early 2011, Occidental partnered with Abu Dhabi's state oil company in developing the Shah Field, one of the largest natural gas fields in the Middle East, through a joint venture known as Al Hosn Gas. Al Hosn Gas became operational in 2015."[1]

You might want to also read up on the Dolphin gas pipeline in the UAE as well:

"Occidental Petroleum of the US and Total of France each have a 24.5 percent equity stake in the Dolphin gas pipeline project."[2]

Then there's the old U.S stalwarts: Chevron Over-seas Petroleum (Qatar), Pennzoil Qatar Oil Co, Mobil Oil Qatar. And Penzoil, Caltex and Shell are all in U.A.E as well.

I would say military bases, arms sales, joint infrastructure projects and U.S business interests all qualify as pretty substantial connections to the U.S.

Sources:

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occidental_Petroleum

[2] http://www.uae-embassy.org/about-uae/energy/uae-and-global-o...

No, not really. It's a trade-off between putting the relationship at risk, and uncovering bad behavior on their part. For example, most or all (don't remember) of the 9/11 hijackers were from allied countries, and some states (notably Qatar and Kuwait) are extremely lax in preventing money from flowing through their banking system to terrorist groups.

>".. and some states (notably Qatar and Kuwait) are extremely lax in preventing money from flowing through their banking system to terrorist groups."

And the UK's HSBC has also been shown to be quite keen on doing business with terrorists and drug cartels:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jul/11/hsbc-us-mon...

As did the U.S's Wachovia Bank - now part of Wells Fargo:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico...

As did the U.S's Bank of America and Western Union:

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/03/20/291934724/a...

And we prosecute those banks. But our courts do not have jurisdiction in Qatar.

No the U.S does not, paying a fine is not the same as criminal prosecution. Nobody in any of those links I provided went to jail. A slap on the wrist fine is not prosecution at all, it is simply the "cost of doing business."

And in the case of HSBC the decision was made to not to pursue the case, and it had nothing to do with jurisdiction.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/07/15/hsbc-j15.html

Do you really ? AFAIK no one went to prison, those banks still exist today and still operate in the same way.

In the best case scenario they are given a fine that's a fraction of the profit they made doing this. So the incentive is to keep at it unfazed and pay fines.

Indeed and not only are these banks all still around and nobody has gone to jail but these U.S banks are actively lobbying Congress for an easing of the existing anti-money laundering regulations:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-banks-moneylaundering-...

Qatar isn't exactly a friend to US interests in the middle east. Be careful of awarding them the title of "ally".

Centcom has had a forward air base in Qatar for the better part of 20 years now(circa 2000.) The US also has also sold the Qatari government billions of dollars in arms. I would say that's a pretty big indicator that they are a strategic ally of the U.S., despite whatever complexities that relationship has.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-qatar-idUSKBN0FJ2M8201...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/As_Sayliyah_Army_Base

  Despite hosting this strategic military installation, 
  Qatar is not always a strong Western ally. Qatar has 
  allowed the Afghan Taliban to set up a political office 
  inside the country and has close ties to Iran, including a 
  shared natural gas field. According to leaked documents 
  published in The New York Times, Qatar's record of 
  counter-terrorism efforts was the "worst in the region". 
  The cable suggested that Qatar's security service was 
  "hesitant to act against known terrorists out of concern 
  for appearing to be aligned with the U.S. and provoking 
  reprisals".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar#Foreign_relations

>"Qatar has allowed the Afghan Taliban to set up a political office inside the country and has close ties to Iran"

You should have looked a little further:

"Senior leaders of the Taliban are currently stationed in Doha, Qatar. The original purpose for the Taliban leaders’ presence in Qatar was to open an office that would facilitate reconciliation between members of the Taliban, Afghanistan, the U.S. and other countries. However, shortly after the opening of the Taliban office in 2013, the office was closed by the Qatari government."[1]

>"According to leaked documents published in The New York Times, Qatar's record of counter-terrorism efforts was the "worst in the region"."

That cable was part of the wikileaks dumps and the quote was widely seen as both suspect and confounding:

"The details offered in these cables are particularly strange when compared with a 2008 Congressional Research Service report for Congress.

The U.S. State Department called Qatar's terrorism support since 9/11 "significant," according to the CRS report. Since the attacks, Qatar established both a Combating Terrorism Law and the Qatar Authority for Charitable Activities (QACA) in March of 2004."[2]

>"and has close ties to Iran, including a shared natural gas field."

So you are faulting a country for having shared business interests with their neighbor in the region? You realize shared business interests represent stability right? You also realize that the Iran is fighting Isis in both Iraq and Syria right?

sources:

[1] "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_in_Qatar"

[2] https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/11/qa...

They have two US air force bases, and we just sold them eleven billion dollars of arms. There is no question that they are an ally, there's just a chance that will change.

Ehhh Qatar hosts one of the largest USAF bases in the Middle East. They are definitely a close US ally.

I'm well aware: I live in Qatar.

All I'm saying is that it is important to look at what the left hand is doing even while praising the actions of the right hand.