|
�A Saudi View of the Middle East
and US Policy� at the US Army War College, Carlisle Barracks,
Pennsylvania, November 29, 2006
Thank you for inviting me back to Carlisle Barracks. Last
year when I spoke at the War College, my remarks centered on the
theme of �community and cooperation.� I talked about the
importance of Saudi Arabia and the United States working together
to bring resolution to global concerns.
A year later, I would say the need for our cooperation is no
less vital. However, I would note that there has been a
decided change to our relationship since last I spoke here.
The critical nature of security in the Arabian Gulf has increased.
As a result, our governments today are actively redefining their
strategic relationship. And from Saudi Arabia�s
perspective, we are also encouraging a reassessment of policy and
activity in the Middle East.
As two nations with unique roles and influence in the region,
Saudi Arabia and the US have an obligation to align themselves on
a series of cooperative efforts to address political and military
issues. The obligation is not only for the sake of our
peoples, but for the sake of the global community. While we
may have a duty to work together, our willingness to cooperate is
more deeply rooted. So before addressing where our nations
are headed � and what policies need to be pursued � we must
first examine the basis for our ongoing relationship.
Ladies and gentlemen: Some 50 years ago � in 1953 � the
first US military training mission arrived in Saudi Arabia to
supervise Saudi military assistance and training activities.
A few years later, Dhahran Airbase began hosting American forces
to contain the former Soviet Union. Saudi Arabia has always
been inherently anti-Communist, so on both an ideological and
strategic basis, our nations had reason to cooperate.
During this period � over which the Eisenhower administration
presided � American commitment to Saudi Arabia was affirmed
officially. In March of 1957, a joint resolution of both
houses of Congress was passed. It declared that �the
preservation of the independence and integrity of the nations of
the Middle East� would be vital to US national interests.
In this, the US committed to using armed force to assist the
countries of the region to fend off armed aggression.
Clearly aimed at countering Soviet advances, one of the first
actions by the US was Operation Hard Surface to respond to
Egyptian threats to Saudi Arabia. That was under President
Kennedy. Then under President Johnson, our military
coordination increased, and Saudi Arabia commenced a comprehensive
program for the expansion of the Saudi armed forces with US help.
Throughout the late 1960s, and into the 70s, as the US and
Saudi governments realized their relations were enduring, our
joint military cooperation spread to new areas. When the
British withdrew from the Gulf in 1970, Saudi Arabia became one of
the �twin pillars� of gulf security. At the time the
Dhofar rebellion in Oman was raging, and the Kingdom and the US
cooperated with Oman to bring that insurgency to an end.
When the US withdrew from Vietnam, and became crippled by the
Church Amendment, Saudi Arabia stepped in quietly to provide aid
to anti-Communist movements in countries such as Zaire, Somalia,
Angola, and Nicaragua. Most importantly, we both supported
the mujahideen in Afghanistan during 1980s, contributing to the
end of the Cold War.
After Iraq�s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, Saudi Arabia began
hosting a coalition of international forces, including over a
half-million US troops. We paid for all of their in-country
support � including free fuel for all military operations.
Of all countries in the world, Saudi Arabia made the largest
direct financial contributions to liberate Kuwait. Saudi
Arabia also fielded the largest military contingent after the US,
and our army, navy, air force and National Guard engaged fully in
the military operations of both Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
After this point � following four decades of successes in the
face of clear threats � military coordination between our two
nations cooled. This component of our relationship simply
was no longer a necessity. Saddam was contained, and other
global and regional players were quiet. During the Clinton
administration, military packages were discussed, but ultimately
they were not needed.
I do not believe Osama bin Laden took this long history into
account when he brought terrorism onto the global stage in 2001.
He may have seen that the more strategic elements of the Saudi-US
relationship were diminished. But he did not count on the
enduring strength of the nations� bond, which had been
solidified by our working together for those many years.
So the world�s most horrific terrorist act, which was
intended to drive our nations apart, actually figured to bring our
nations closer together. In subsequent years, the successes
we�ve experienced cooperating in the war on terror have
confirmed our longstanding ability and willingness to work
together. Our joint task forces have captured hundreds of
terrorists. Our governments have made joint designations of
terror financiers, preventing millions of dollars going to
terrorist causes. Our history of success together has been
renewed.
Now, however, we are confronted with an additional series of
challenges: Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Palestine and Israel, and other
situations in the region.
Overall security in the Middle East has diminished to a great
extent. The instability and uncertainty that exists within
the region is not contained to the region. Nor is it limited
to affecting a particular country. It affects the world.
So after almost a decade, our two nations are once again
aligning our resources and capabilities to deal with the political
threats that face the global community.
In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee earlier
this year, John Hillen, US Assistant Secretary of State for
Political Military Affairs, summarized the situation. He
stated, quote: �I think we have an opportunity in front of us to
re-frame Gulf security, understand their security concerns and
work [to] form closer and more productive and integrated defense
relationships in the region.�
Indeed, this �opportunity� arises out of unfortunate
circumstances, but it is an opportunity nonetheless. So at
the highest level of government we have been advancing security
cooperation.
Since the beginning of last summer, Saudi Arabia has been
working with the US to find ways to update and maintain its
military infrastructure and technology. Last month, the
Saudi assistant defense minister came to the US to lead the first
session, after the long hiatus, of the Joint Strategic Planning
Committee. This was the first meeting in five years.
He also met with top US officials, from vice president on down.
US officials who have recently traveled to the Kingdom include
Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rice and the US Undersecretary
for Defense among others.
Our long history allows us to join together again with
confidence. It also enables us to be very clear with one
another about our goals and what methods we feel will work to
address the challenges before us. With regard to these
challenges, I would like to make Saudi Arabia�s position
absolutely clear: While we prepare to defend, we first push for
diplomacy.
I say this with the full understanding that if an escalated
conflict ever broke out in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia would be
in the crossfire. We understand the stakes, and we insist on
open dialogue. We also understand that if you�re going to
address a problem, you need to get to the heart of it. This
is the message we�ve shared.
King Abdullah of Jordan a few a days ago said that the Middle
East is descending into three civil wars, in Palestine, Lebanon,
and Iraq.
As a way to illustrate this, let us look at one of the more
snarled situations facing the region: Iran, which is involved in
all three conflicts.
Iran�s state of affairs causes consternation among its
neighbors, particularly those countries on the western shore of
the Gulf. It is no secret to anyone that Iran has made
various intimations regarding the free flow of oil. Just
last week, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, chief commander of
Iran�s armed forces, commented to this end. General Safavi
stated that in the event of any hostilities with the US, Iran
would halt the flow of the 17 million barrels of oil that pass
through the Strait of Hormuz each day.
To provide some perspective to this statement, 17 million
barrels of oil represent roughly 20 percent of the world�s daily
oil production. I would say, therefore, that the free
flow of oil in the Gulf is of paramount interest to the global
community.
Faced with this situation, the Kingdom has continued the frank
discussions that we have with Iran. We cannot discount
statements made by other Iranian officials, who have assured Gulf
Arabs that they have no hostile intent. Our experience has
been that talking with the Iranians is better than not talking
with them.
President Bush has consistently stated that the US is going to
stick to a diplomatic course to deal with Iran�s nuclear
program. As our two countries work together for security,
Saudi Arabia and the US have to hope that the diplomatic track
works.
But there are ways of working to deflate this issue. We have
asked Iran as we have asked the permanent members of the Security
Council to join us in calling for a Middle East free of weapons of
mass destruction, including Israel. This will remove
any stigma of double-dealings or double standards that those in
Iran, who wish to continue on the nuclear proliferation path,
point to in making their claims of unfair treatment. Iran, after
all, is not an isolated entity in the Middle East. As a
nation, its politics and behavior is influenced and impacted by
its neighbors. Therefore, compartmentalizing Iran � and other
issues, such as what is occurring in Lebanon � is not helpful.
But that has been the approach taken largely by the US up to now.
General George S. Patton once advised: �Make your plans to
fit the circumstances.� Right now, the circumstances
require a comprehensive, holistic approach to healing the
divisiveness that exists in the Middle East. That
divisiveness is rooted in one single problem: the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Besides being a dispute between two peoples, the situation has
become an impediment to both regional and international stability.
Without forging a solution, we will continue to be unable to
secure lasting peace throughout the Middle East. And this
turmoil, as we have all witnessed, has echoed across the world.
No one can deny that the resolution of the Palestinian Israeli
conflict will drive solutions to other regional issues �
Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, terrorism, and others � all problems
impacting the stability and prosperity of the entire global
community.
Since peace is manifestly in the interest of the region and the
world at large, it is that much more incumbent on leading powers,
including Saudi Arabia and the United States, to be consistent �
and insistent � in moving Palestine and Israel towards the known
outlines of a durable settlement.
When this issue is removed from the table � or at the very
least, allowed to move towards resolution � then it will be
taken away as an excuse for those who use it to justify
divisiveness or terrorism.
Already there are many parties supporting this approach.
British Prime Minister Blair recently called for a �whole Middle
East� strategy � one that emphasizes the importance of working
to find a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Such
an approach requires support.
Despite the horrific bombing of Palestine and Lebanon last
summer. Despite the tragic assignation last week of Lebanese
minister Pierre Gemayel. Despite the recent deadly Israeli
shelling of Beit Hanoun. We still have the Road Map � as
outlined by President Bush � and the King Abdullah peace plan.
We need to finally bring these parties to the negotiating table.
Implementation is not just achievable, it is necessary.
The British author P.G. Wodehouse once remarked that, quote:
�in this life�we must always distinguish between the unlikely
and the impossible.�
Will Saudi Arabia and the United States be able to find a
comprehensive peace for the region tomorrow, or next year, or five
years down the road? It is unlikely. However, we must
recognize that regional peace is not impossible.
The unique and respective positions held by our two countries
give us the ability to find solutions. Our long history of
cooperation � in matters both military and diplomatic � gives
us the strength to implement them. All that is left is for
us to act.
Let us act to bring parties together. Let us act to open
up dialogue. Let us act to heal wounds. If we
accomplish all of this first, then any preparations we will need
to make in the future will only be in anticipation of our
progress.
Thank you, and God�s peace and blessings are upon you.
Source:
|
