WhySaudiArabiaiscooltoWashington.html

Why Saudi Arabia is cool to Washington

BY MARCUS GEE
The Globe and Mail

When the United States and its allies attacked Saddam Hussein's Iraq in 1991, Saudi Arabia was the launching pad. Hundreds of thousands of foreign troops encamped on Saudi soil, and hundreds of warplanes took off from its bases.

Things are different this time. If the United States carries through on its threat to bomb Iraq in the next few weeks, it will be forced to launch its planes from Kuwait, Bahrain, aircraft carriers and Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean.

Why is Saudi Arabia so reluctant to support its long-time friend in an attack on its bitter enemy? Those who study the region give several reasons:
--Because it fears Mr. Hussein's retaliation.

Most experts doubt the Americans will be able to destroy all Mr. Hussein's chemical and biological weapons in the proposed attack. So the Iraqi leader might well turn his weapons on Saudi Arabia.

Dan Goure, an analyst at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said it is unfair to ask the Saudis to support an attack that would leave Mr. Hussein still armed, dangerous and in power. --Because it fears moving too close to the United States.

Before the Persian Gulf war in 1991, Saudi Arabia was careful to balance its close Washington relationship with Arab friendships, even courting radical countries such as Syria. The war shifted the balance to the American relationship, and Saudis want to shift it back. --Because it fears its own people.

An attack that killed or injured Iraqi civilians could create sympathy for Iraq. If Saudi Arabia were implicated in the attack, that sympathy could turn into opposition to the Saudi monarchy. "An Arab country cannot be associated with foreign attacks that hurt Arab people," said Kamran Karadaghi, a columnist for the London-based newspaper Al Hayat. --Because it fears terrorism.

Saudi Arabia has suffered at least two serious terrorist attacks in recent years, both aimed at the foreign military presence in the country. The worst, against a military housing complex near Dhahran in 1996, killed 19 U.S. military personnel and wounded 400 others. --Because it fears Western influence.

Saudi Arabia is a conservative, Islamic country that forbids women to drive cars. Saudi leaders felt foreign soldiers who swarmed over the country during the Persian Gulf war--some of them women driving cars and wearing T-shirts--set a bad example. --Because it fears Iran.

Conservative, Arab and mainly Sunni Muslim Saudi Arabia has been at odds for years with radical, Persian, mostly Shia Muslim Iran. Saudi leaders fear that if the attack on Iraq succeeded, Iran would take advantage of Iraq's weakness to subvert Saudi Arabia, possibly by infiltrating the country's Shia minority of about 15 per cent.

Despite all these fears, experts caution that Saudi leaders have no sympathy for Mr. Hussein. They may still let the U.S. use Saudi air bases for support and communication aircraft.

Saudi officials indicated earlier this month if diplomacy fails and the U.S. bombs Iraq, the fault "would lie exclusively on the Iraqi regime."

Joseph Kotinger, an Israeli Middle East scholar who is a visiting professor at Washington's Georgetown University, said that "it's not that the Saudis want the U.S. to step aside altogether. They would like to see the Americans do a hatchet job on Iraq. It's just that they can't afford to be officially on the U.S. side."

(text of article from February 13, 1998 Globe and Mail)


-I ran into someone i went to college with before my car accident in 1972 on a Toronto street one day 16 years ago. He was a musician labouring at a government day job who expressed some interest in a musical collaboration with me, so we spent some time together, renewing a relationship that had not been a very close friendship when we were in school together.
This happened during the time i was back in Toronto after the first failed sojourn (of more than 3 months) staying in Ottawa when then-Canadian prime minister Pierre E. Trudeau refused to meet with me to then settle the dispute over my "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children. The disentitlement to unemployment insurance had been rendered and a judicial process loomed unless he finally responded to it in the way that we recommended and was documented in 1978...and indicated to the U.S. authorities involved, the United Nations, the Vatican, Egyptian and Israeli authorities, and specific press authorities.
As i explained in the course of this "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children at that time, i went to Ottawa to see if he'd meet with me then because the Israelis had invaded Lebanon. Obviously the Middle East was much on my mind.
So, of course i discussed the "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children that i'd done in 1978 briefly with my friend so that he understood what was also on my mind beyond possibly writing some songs with him. People old enough to remember may recall the fears then that the circumstances in the Middle East could escalate beyond the borders of Lebanon. So, when i explained to him that the partriarchs of Islam had invented international diplomacy--my having also mentioned to my friend that my "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children had played a "significant" part in 1978 in laying the groundwork to encourage the Soviets to negotiate nuclear arms reductions with the Americans CARTER IGNORES THE DISENTITLEMENT, REAGAN ANNOUNCES START TALKS AFTER THE DISENTITLEMENT, THE VATICAN...ETC. HAS DOCUMENT COPIES...HOW BLASE SHOULD I HAVE BEEN? TAKE YOUR NEXT FOOTSTEP HERE.



This page hosted by
 1