Crossroads in US-Saudi Relations
Jean-Francois Seznec Interview

EDITOR'S NOTE:

Jean-Francois Seznec teaches political economy of the Persian Gulf at Georgetown and Columbia universities. He lived and worked in the Gulf for more than a decade and visited Saudi Arabia earlier this year. Professor Seznec has shared his insights on Gulf affairs in numerous articles and television and radio appearances, including CNN, C-Span and PBS.
��
Professor Seznec was interviewed on the Georgetown University campus on September 14, 2004.

SUSRIS: Thank you for taking time to talk about US-Saudi relations. Can we start with your appraisal of the status of the relationship?

Jean-Francois Seznec: There are days when I am extremely pro-Saudi, and other days when I'm in between pro- and anti-Saudi. It's really a love-hate, intellectual relationship on these issues.

I think on the U.S.-Saudi relationship, I'm actually very pessimistic but not necessarily in a violent manner. I think in many ways, our U.S. intervention in Iraq and the policies of the present administration, in particular on Palestine and Israel, are really making us totally irrelevant to the region.

There's this whole idea, this sort of sacred cow of the U.S.-Saudi relationship that there is oil for security. It's mighty iconoclastic in a way, but I feel that the Saudis don't care about our providing security to them. That's been sort of part of the deal, but at this point, my view is that they feel they can handle their own security themselves better, thank you very much.

They are not worried about Iran. I think they've made a deal with Iran. Prince Abdullah made a deal with Iran some years back, and they're working together on OPEC. That's helping and the arrangements with Venezuela helps keep the price relatively high, which is good for Saudi Arabia, good for Iran, good for Venezuela. The market is very tight today, despite Saudi efforts, and it will stay that way for the near future anyway.

I think if the Saudis were really worried about nuclear efforts in Iran, they could make a deal with Pakistan to sort of be the bad guy. Their only worry is Iraq. They are worried, and I heard that from some very high officials in Saudi Arabia in March. They are worried that our intervention in Iraq has opened Pandora's Box, and it's going to make the country totally fall apart whether we are there or not. If it falls apart, it's going to create a lot of violence in the region because they're afraid the Turks would take over the Kurdish areas, and the Iranians would get involved in Shia area of the south, although personally, I doubt that. It would basically create a big upheaval in the region, and the Saudis don't like that. But, they're not worried about the Iraqis invading Saudi Arabia. I don't think they really ever were worried about Saddam Hussein controlling the oil markets through Kuwait. They knew they could still control their own areas.

I think they view the U.S. presence in the region as being very negative right now. So, my guess is that the Saudis have decided to open up to many other areas but not to the U.S. They are closing down, shutting down the relationship with the U.S.

The big relations we had with them were through the military for many years. That is of course going to continue because we control the airplanes in essence. We control the parts and so forth. My guess is that they will continue to work with us but in a declining fashion. The next big arms contract will not take place with the United States. They don't want the U.S. to keep controlling the Saudi forces. It may be with Europe. It may be with the Far East somewhere, probably with Europe at this point because of the technology.

Mostly, the Saudis are making a big effort to open up their economy towards China and towards the Far East in general, but mostly China. That doesn't mean that China is going to come in and defend Saudi Arabia. I don't think the Chinese would even think of that. It means increases in the economic links between China and Saudi Arabia, which are growing by leaps and bounds. Saudi imports into China are growing by over 40 to 50 percent per year. The Saudis are selling tremendous amounts of petrochemicals, not only oil, but petrochemicals and chemicals into China. That is only growing and will grow further. The Saudis are investing in China. There was just a new deal signed by Aramco this month, a joint venture with Exxon actually, and the Chinese to build a huge complex in Fujian near Shanghai. I think that in a way, the worst thing that could happen between the Saudis and the U.S. has happened. Today, from the Saudi standpoint, the U.S. is irrelevant. It's not negative. It's not positive. It's irrelevant to what they want to do in the future.

SUSRIS: In what specific areas do you see that the relationship has changed or is changing?

Jean-Francois Seznec: I think in terms of economy, the level of imports into Saudi Arabia has declined. This year, it is the same as last year, but in 1998, the U.S. exported over $10 billion worth of goods into Saudi Arabia. Today, in 2003, it was about $4.6 billion. In 2004, it seems to be coming up a little bit, but the dollar is very weak. So, it is to their interest to buy stuff from the U.S. rather than from Europe at this point.

SUSRIS: Do you see that the change in this relationship may have been a temporary consequence of 9/11 that could be repaired?

Jean-Francois Seznec: I think the Saudi leadership in particular is so upset at all levels, whether it is the commoners, the ministers, the technocrats, or the princes -- they are so upset about what is happening against Saudi Arabia in this country, the treatment of Saudi Arabia in Congress. I attended a few of the meetings in Congress just to go there and look. It's unbelievable what you hear from the neoconservatives and from perfectly normal representatives in Congress who have been briefed by various people on all the negative sides of Saudi Arabia.

I went to one of the Hudson Institute meetings the other day, and it was just crazy. The enemy was Saudi Arabia, and we had to fight Saudi Arabia. We should prepare invasions and so on. The Saudis are aware of that, and it annoys them. Quite honestly, it would annoy anyone. I would be the last one to say that the Saudis are saints. A lot of the criticism that is laid upon the Saudis is based on reality. But to make Saudi Arabia the bad guy that we have to destroy is going too far, and it makes the Saudis very worried. I think they have decided to gently but surely cancel the relationship with the United States. There will always have to be relations because we will buy oil. Some of our companies have very large investments, but it will be a purely commercial transaction.

SUSRIS: Has official Washington having received this message? Are people aware of it or ignoring it or are they blind to it?

Jean-Francois Seznec: I think they know about it, and I think they have refused to accept the reality of it. They are blind to it -- that's a good description of it. But, I think a lot of people know it. A lot of experts on Saudi Arabia, there are many in this country who know about these things, have been passing the message on to the various arms of government. But, it does not seem to go beyond a certain level -- definitely in terms of policymaking I don't think it has been heard or at least acted upon.

SUSRIS: How would you describe cooperation between Saudi Arabia and the United States in the war on terrorism? Critics of Saudi Arabia, especially in Congress, say not enough has been done, while the Bush Administration has given Saudi Arabia high marks for cooperation. Which is it?

Jean-Francois Seznec: I think there was a time when the Saudis were not really cooperating on terrorism. They really didn't see the need for it. They really didn't feel it. They sort of knew it. But, after the 2003 bombings in Riyadh, all of a sudden, they realized that this applied to them as well. That's when, in my view anyway, that the cooperation really started coming back and increasing on terrorism.

There had been a fair amount of cooperation already against the financing of terrorism. The Central Bank of Saudi Arabia had people working very closely with the U.S. Treasury Department to try to figure out how to work this out. It just so happened that the amounts of money are so small that it is very difficult to control.

In Congress the agenda is that it is very easy to criticize the Saudis. Definitely, the Israeli lobby is trying to make sure that we don't like Saudi Arabia because it's favorable in that sense that if we hurt Saudi Arabia, it's not so bad for Israel. I don't think it goes much beyond that.

They know it costs nothing to criticize Saudi Arabia, but it makes people feel good, and it shows that Congress people really are eager to help the plight of women throughout the world and to see that we are not so dependent on one source of energy in the world.

I think it's a mixed bag on why people in Congress don't like Saudi Arabia. I think it's encouraged by the Israeli lobby and by the neoconservatives here because they have their own agenda on what it should be. Although, it's probably not as all bad as we make it to be sometimes, but they take advantage of it.

SUSRIS: What will be the nature of the relationship between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia after the November elections? Will there be any changes in the dialogue or the issues?

Jean-Francois Seznec: Well, nothing too good actually because, let's face it, if we're talking just about the Israeli-Palestinian issue, the Sharon government is trying very hard to take advantage of the political campaign to establish more facts on the ground. They are trying to establish more settlements. They are increasing the length of the wall. They are taking all kinds of unilateral actions, which we cannot oppose because it's the political season where you cannot oppose Israel. This is, in my view, going to stay.

Whoever is elected to power in November, I don't think it will change the facts on the ground in Israel, and therefore, that will only create and increase these disagreements between the Saudis and the U.S. I think what's going to happen is that the Saudis are going to continue to try to marginalize the U.S. influence on Saudi Arabia. That's why I said earlier that I think our policy has made us irrelevant in the region. That's very sad.

SUSRIS: What can Americans do to improve the situation? Do you think the decision you described, about a change in the relationship, is irreversible?

Jean-Francois Seznec: Yes, I think they've reached a decision. It's just a question of making a smooth transformation, so that it is not too violent. They don't want the U.S. to invade Saudi Arabia. So, the oil relationship will continue. The relationship with some of the big U.S. firms, Exxon-Mobil and so on, will continue because it is to the interest of the Saudis. But, all other relations will be basically a strictly diplomatic business point if view. They will not treat us better than they treat Zimbabwe or Nepal. They won't listen to us any better than they would listen to a third party that has nothing to do with them.

If we really started proving to the Saudis all of a sudden that we really mean business in the region, I think that would change things pretty drastically. If we made some real strong movements to get peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on the '67 borders, even if we forget about the refuges from '48. If we really push that and pushed Israel to do that, yes, I think they would say, "Yes, the United States does have some power after all, and maybe they really understand our point of view." If the U.S. could really somehow find some satisfactory settlement in Iraq, and that's a very difficult situation at this point, I think they would like that very much too. I think then they would start opening up to our diplomacy. But, I don't see this happening on either side, and I don't think they see it either. I think they are just going to go their merry way.

SUSRIS: Saudi Arabia has made efforts for Americans to learn more about the Kingdom through public relations campaigns and outreach programs. How do you see those being received by the American public?

Jean-Francois Seznec: I think the motivation, in my view, is very straightforward. What they want is to create just enough questioning of the public to know that any dangerous views by the United States and the Administration upon Saudi Arabia would be a mistake. I think the Saudis don't want us to use any kind of excuse to invade the oil fields, to put it this way.

I think the efforts are certainly good. They help, but it's a drop in the bucket. The Saudis are not an easy country to like. I personally love Saudi Arabia, but it's very much an acquired taste. There are very many things, which are impossible to defend. They're not necessarily improving a great deal.

On the other hand, the Saudi Kingdom is developing like crazy. Americans don't seem to know much about that. The petrochemical industry is amazing. It's one of the world's largest and growing by leaps and bounds. The management of the oil and the petrochemical industries is fabulous by any standard. These things are not stories that are told very much, even though Aramco is making a big effort to sell that. They are to a certain extent, among the specialists in particular, quite successful. But, to the person on the street or the average Congressman, it doesn't mean anything.

SUSRIS: Do you see the advancements made in economic reform and in political reform, such as the introduction of the Majlis -- those things that weren't around 10 years or so ago -- making a difference in outside perceptions of Saudi Arabia?

Jean-Francois Seznec: Well, I heard somebody say yesterday at the [Arab-US Policymakers] conference that the Majlis Ash-Shura is now part of the International Parliamentary Organization. Well, that does not say much for the International Parliamentary Organization because the Majlis Ash-Shura is fully, 100 percent appointed. It's only men, and of course, it's only appointed with people who favorable to the present government and mostly through the royal family. It is not a credible body at this point.

It does talk, and the advantage of that is that you have other people discussing issues. Nowadays, they are given a little more leeway where they can actually start actions on their own. They don't have to wait for the government to bring the laws. They are listened to.

Whatever is said by the Majlis Ash-Shura is usually listened to by Prince Abdullah and the rest of the cabinet. That helps, but it can be destroyed so easily in terms of credibility in people's minds. In terms of democratic reform, it really is a small step. In my view, it is a big step. But, since your question is more about the impact in the public here, I think the impact is pretty small. I think in terms of the Saudi public, it's a big impact, and it is making a really big step in the right direction because they are going to have municipal elections starting in February next year, and the next step would be to have elections to the Majlis Ash-Shura. I think that will make a great deal of difference.

SUSRIS: What else should people know about reform in Saudi Arabia?

Jean-Francois Seznec: One of the things that someone said at the [Arab-US Policymakers] conference was the biggest difference they saw between an assignment in Saudi Arabia in the '60s and an assignment now was that there was so much more freedom of the press. People were actually able to talk. Now, that, I agree with. I lived in Saudi Arabia in the mid-70's, and it is amazing the difference. It truly is. But, it is still a fairly controlled press. The two major pressrooms are owned by princes. Definitely, they would not take an anti-royal family stance, for instance.

On the other hand, the major princes who own these pressrooms are considered to be liberals in the region, at least in Saudi Arabia. That is good in the sense that we would imagine that the liberals would be going for more opening and liberalization and more power to the women, and so on. And, they are. So, these press groups are pushing that quite a lot. From our point of view that is excellent. Nevertheless, it is not necessarily coming from the heart, so to speak. There is a political angle to certain factions in the country of trying to push this agenda. Now, these factions have lost a lot of power since March because other groups wanted to start controlling things more. So, I think we have to view this in perspective.

But, the progress has been absolutely tremendous. You can't go back on it. It's not as if you could go back all of a sudden to the old days and have a press where articles the government doesn't like are cut out -- where you get a newspaper and you could actually read through it. No, those days are gone.

People have satellite dishes. They get the news from Al-Jazeera, but they also get their news from everywhere in the world. They get more news in Saudi Arabia than we do here. I mean, it's unbelievable. They get Chinese news in English. You name it, they have it -- a lot of it, we don't have.

In many ways, the Saudis are better informed than we are. It would be a little crazy, if you like, for the Saudi press to sort of not at least have some relevance, otherwise they wouldn't sell their stuff. But, the press is very successful. People read the papers in Saudi Arabia. So, I think in that sense that yes, there has been progress. They can make hay out of that here. In fact their editors come here and talk at a lot of universities to explain that, and rightly so. I think that is a very positive issue.

SUSRIS: There is increasing talk about the U.S. having to do something about the nuclear issue in Iran. When it came to war in Iraq, Saudi Arabia was a "steadfast" ally of the United States, according to Ambassador Robert Jordan. He told us last month American lives were saved because of Saudi Arabia. How does that experience fit into the Iran scenario?

Jean-Francois Seznec: The build-up against Iran today in this country reminds me very much of the build-up against Iraq here almost two years before we went to war against Iraq. So, there is a certain parallel here, and that is a very dangerous parallel. But, I think the Saudis would not be happy if we intervened in Iran at all -- first of all because they would feel quite surrounded between having 150,000 troops in Iraq and many hundreds of thousands of troops in Iran and a very violent region at this point.

I think the Saudis would like to handle Iran on their own. I think they feel they probably can by either buying off Iran through OPEC or what not or putting some pressure on Iran through Pakistan, which is also a nuclear power and much more advanced than Iran on these matters. I think they feel they could handle it on their own, but that's my personal opinion. I have no facts to back that up. It's just an opinion. I think the Saudis would be quite upset if we actually went into Iran, so I'm not sure if they would help us at all.

SUSRIS: What do you see as the greatest misunderstandings among Americans about Saudi Arabia?

Jean-Francois Seznec: I think there is a misunderstanding in this country about what .. well we have sort of dehumanized the Saudis. We talk about Saudi Arabia and the princes and the corruption and all this and all that, and that they are terrorists.

What most people have really not ever seen -- I think it's always been like that, but since it's so important nowadays it's coming forth -- that most of the Saudis are perfectly normal people. That the families want to earn a living. That they want their children to go to decent schools. They want to have decent housing. They have very strong opinions about who should be in control of the country or not be in control of the country. They have strong views about international affairs like everyone else. That these people are really human.

Okay, they may have very strong religious opinions for a lot of people but not more than many of us here. Frankly, I think that has been the key issue is the lack of, from our standpoint, is the dehumanization of a lot of Arabs but in particular of the Saudi Arabians.

Forgetting that there are probably 17 million Saudis who need to earn a living like us everyday and who have their problems and they have to solve them. They are much more interested in doing that and finding jobs than going out and blowing up airplanes or whatever. I think we forgot that. Saudis do feel that they have to work for their own interests, not for the interest of the United States. It's a mixed bag, but I think we have forgotten that people are people.

SUSRIS: Well, thank you very much for taking time today to talk with us.

Jean-Francois Seznec: My pleasure, really.

About Jean-Francois Seznec

Jean-Francois Seznec teaches political economy of the Persian Gulf at Georgetown and Columbia universities. He lived and worked in the Gulf for more than a decade and visited Saudi Arabia earlier this year. Professor Seznec has shared his insights on Gulf affairs in numerous articles and television and radio appearances, including CNN, C-Span and PBS. He is author of The Financial Markets of the Arabian Gulf. Professor Seznec's e-seminar "Oil in the Arab-Persian Gulf" is available through the Columbia University Web site.