|
Insight
on the Kingdom from the Author of Inside the
Mirage --
A Conversation with Thomas Lippman
Part
Two
SUSRIS:
Saudi Arabia hosted a conference to discuss
the global war on terrorism in February. Sixty
countries showed up. What significance does the
international counter terrorism conference in
Riyadh hold?
LIPPMAN:
I would say it is certainly a good sign on one
level. It can't be bad that the Saudi state would
commit itself to this effort, to participate with
others who are committed to this effort, to put
some resources into it and to take a clear public
position. Who could object to that right? But
there were a couple of negative aspects. I
remember the big multi-nation summit conference in
Sharm el Sheikh. As soon as the press tent folded
the whole thing sank without a trace.
 That
was before 9-11 and I understand the
situation is different now. But there has been
some discomfort over Saudi policy at the
conference because they said that they wanted
everybody who has been a victim of terrorism to
participate in this effort and then they didn't
invite any Israelis. The fact is, you can argue
that attacking Israeli military outposts in Gaza
is not legitimately called terrorism. You can
argue that. But you can't argue that blowing up
nightclubs full of teenagers in Tel Aviv is not
terrorism.
So
people are uncomfortable at making common cause
with the Saudis who can be perceived as
equivocating when the cause terrorists are
purporting to uphold is one that they sympathize
with.
SUSRIS:
Do you share the view that there are people of
goodwill on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict who believe in their cause but don't
condone some of the methods used?
LIPPMAN:
Exactly, I just think that -- you know there are
people who argue that Hamas does good work, and
has legitimate political interests and all those
things. I understand all that. I just know that
some people are uncomfortable with the position
that we found ourselves in and think that to a
certain extent that the Saudi position is a little
less forthright than it appeared to be.
SUSRIS:
When an opening with Israel comes should it happen
at such a narrowly focused event as a counter
terrorism conference?
LIPPMAN:
Well, no, I understand that. And I know that some
people made that argument about letting women vote
in the elections -- that it would have been such
an incendiary thing to do that it would have
stirred up more trouble than it was worth. I
understand that. I also understand that the
incendiary thing to do was Sadat's trip to
Jerusalem. Sooner or later you have to stand up
and show up.
 I
agree on balance the counter terrorism conference
was a good thing to do and I'm happy that the
Saudis did it. I just don't think we should allow
ourselves to forget that this is a very
complicated subject. It's tied in directly with
other things that are going on in the region. Be
that as it may, lets see what the outcome of the
conference is going to be.
SUSRIS:
What do you think of the recommendation that
emerged at the conference to create a joint center
where the international community could coordinate
counter terrorism efforts.
LIPPMAN:
Well that sounds like a good idea and you can
immediately see all the pitfalls, heaven knows you
don't need another institutionalized international
bureaucracy. On the other hand, information
sharing and joint efforts are vital. I think there
is no doubt the Saudis have come a long way in a
positive direction and I salute them for it.
Back
in 1994, there was a terrorist named Imad Mugniyah
[wanted for the 1985 hijacking of TWA 847]. You
may have heard about an episode in which he was on
a plane traveling from, I believe, Khartoum to
Beirut and it stopped in Jeddah. The Americans
asked the Saudis to go on that plane and get Imad
Mugniyah, and turn him over and they wouldn't do
it. Today they would. And we've all paid a
terrible price. We and the Saudis paid a terrible
price to get to this point but its good that we've
gotten here.
SUSRIS:
Let's look back a little further. You recently
wrote about the 1945 meeting between President
Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz at Great Bitter Lake.
Tell us about that.
LIPPMAN:
Yes, the Americans for Middle East
Understanding organization published it in their
magazine "The Link." It's really
fascinating to go back and read the accounts of
the participants in that event.
 As
I put it in the article, Roosevelt and Ibn Saud
were analogous to the United States and Saudi
Arabia. One of them was an Ivy League patrician
from sort of the most advanced levels of
sophistication, and the other was a Bedouin
monarch who was marginally educated had never been
anywhere. I described him as probably the world
leader with whom Roosevelt had the least in common
and yet look how they hit it off -- as
individuals.
It's
amazingly true the same thing was reflected in
what happened between the two countries. You
couldn't imagine two societies that were more
different in every way putting together in short
order a constructive relationship. One thing that
you notice is that when the king went to that
meeting, he went as an equal. It was one ruler to
another.
SUSRIS:
Could you draw the conclusion that each in his
own way, in his own context was actually like the
other, in that they were the grand masters of the
game. Roosevelt had pulled the country out of a
depression and led it through war; Ibn Saud had
unified the kingdom. They were both widely
respected by their respective countrymen.
LIPPMAN:
That's correct, that's absolutely correct. They
each had the self-assurance that comes with their
own accomplishments. But, there was another
context for the meeting. Let's put it this way,
the difference between the way the king was
received and talked to by Roosevelt and the way
the king was received and talked to by Churchill
tells you everything you need to know about
colonial society.
When
the King got back to Saudi Arabia he had a private
audience with Colonel Bill Eddy, who facilitated
the FDR and Ibn Saud meeting. Eddy's account has
since been published. He said the King talked
about his conversations with Churchill who all the
while was blowing smoke in his face, literally
blowing cigar smoke in the King's face. He was
basically telling the King, "See here boy,
you know we've been the big boys around the Gulf
and we took care of you and now you have to take
care of us in Palestine." And the King said,
"If I do what you want me to do, it won't be
good for me, it won't be good for Palestine and it
won't be good for you, so buzz off," in so
many words.
SUSRIS:
As we mark the 60th anniversary of that
historic meeting between FDR and Ibn Saud meeting
-- regarded as the inauguration of a high-level
relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia --
how would you characterize the current state of
the relationship?
 LIPPMAN:
Compared to where we were a year ago I'm
pretty encouraged. Certainly on the Saudi side the
report of the 9-11 commission came as an immensely
welcomed relief. I don't blame them for taking
advantage of that by saying, look this is what
your own commission said. Anyway, it was good that
the commission did that -- it cleared the air and
removed the cloud of suspicion that existed.
There
is also the way the Saudis have confronted
domestic terrorism. I read an interesting account
the other day about the Jeddah attack in December
that persuasively made the case it was an act of desperation. It was carried out by a group
of people who are without leadership or planning
capability. They have been cut down by the
security forces and that's a good sign.
The
Saudis are conducting themselves on the terrorism
front in a seemingly upright way and cooperating
around the world. I think a lot of the uncertainty
has now been cleared up. On balance it reflects a
better position than a year ago.
SUSRIS:
How do you evaluate the reports of Saudi
"Jihaddis" going to fight in Iraq? Is it
really a significant problem?
LIPPMAN:
First of all I think that some Saudi
preachers, whatever you want to call them, are
contributing to the collective debasement of the
entire concept of Jihad. Every two bit, loud mouth
stands up and calls for Jihad. It's ridiculous,
but I don't like the concept that people who say
unpleasant things should be silenced by the
government. I don't know what the impact of this
will be. Certainly there are plenty of restless
young men in Saudi Arabia looking for something to
do and some cause to get behind. So there's
potential for trouble. But it seems to me the
American government seems to be taking the
position that the external problem in Iraq is more
from Syria and Iran than from Saudi Arabia.
SUSRIS:
But you remain optimistic about the relationship?
LIPPMAN:
Encouraged. Lets put it that way. I'm never
optimistic about the Middle East. I'm encouraged
by where we are compared to a year ago. Lets put
it that way.
SUSRIS:
It seemed that 2004 was a rough year for the
relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia - it
became an issue in the US presidential election,
on movie screens and so forth. How would you
evaluate the criticisms of the relationship? Are
we past that chapter?
LIPPMAN:
You mean Michael Moore's movie?
SUSRIS:
That was certainly one of the vehicles used to
bludgeon the relationship.
LIPPMAN:
My impression is the answer to that question is
yes, a lot of that stuff has subsided. For better
or worse Kerry wasn't elected and the 9-11
commission report, I think, helped to diffuse a
lot of the things that were flying around last
year. As I said, on balance I think compared to
where we were a year ago things are in much better
shape.
SUSRIS:
Parade magazine recently published, what seems
to be an annual feature, the top ten list of the
world's worst dictators by David Wallenchinsky. He
placed Crown Prince Abdullah on the list again
this year. Your reaction?
 LIPPMAN:
Look that's just ridiculous. What planet do these
people dwell on. You know, if Crown Prince Abdullah
is the world's worst dictator then the world is in
better shape than it has been in my lifetime.
You
don't want to get into invidious comparisons but
the fact is I would say that Crown Prince Abdullah
doesn't even fit the category of dictator. He's
not a dictator. He's a negotiator. That is what he
is. That's the only way he can run Saudi Arabia.
I'd
ask any American who has been to Saudi Arabia, do
you see armies of regimented slaves starving and
chained in the factories? I don't think so.
Please. Just this morning I heard an interview
with one of those journalists who had to flee
Zimbabwe last week because they were going to
charge him with treason for what he was writing.
Of
course, in Saudi Arabia dissidents who get out of
line get arrested we know that, that's true. But
we also know that the references that we always
see of Saudi Arabia as a quote absolute monarchy
unquote, are just not correct. That's just not the
way Saudi Arabia operates.
The
metabolism there is one in which individual Saudis
take on other individual Saudis in argumentation
and discussion and questioning. And its one in
which maybe what happens in the public arena is
constrained, but that doesn't mean its an absolute
dictatorship like North Korea, for heaven's sake.
SUSRIS:
We recently spoke with Dr. Rachel Bronson, her
interview is posted on the SUSRIS web site. She
talked about her forthcoming book, "Thicker
than Oil: The United States and Saudi
Arabia." Are you familiar with it?
LIPPMAN:
Yes. I sat in on one of the group sessions.
Her book is going to be different than mine. By
the way, the paperback of my book ["Inside
the Mirage, America's Fragile Partnership with
Saudi Arabia,"] is coming out soon, before
hers, which is good because hers will draw a lot
of attention.
 She
is focusing much more on the strategic
relationship. In other words she is not interested
in the elements of the relationship that I
chronicled: what the Ford Foundation did, or how
Americans assisted in agricultural developments,
for example. She's more interested in geopolitical
developments: who did what to whom over the AWACS
sale to Saudi Arabia, what were the implications
of the Cold War in the relationship -- that sort
of thing.
SUSRIS:
When is the paperback edition of "The
Mirage" coming out?
LIPPMAN:
It is scheduled to come out the end of April.
SUSRIS:
We will be looking for it on the bookshelves.
Thank you again, Mr. Lippman, for sharing your
objective insight on the history, scope and
current developments in the US-Saudi relationship.
LIPPMAN:
It was my pleasure.
Part One -- More of our conversation with Thomas
Lippman (Click
Here)
|
