| Editor's
Note:
Prince
Saud Al Faisal, Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia,
spoke on "
(Note: This is
the text of the foreign minister's remarks as
prepared for delivery.)
Prince Saud Al
Faisal, Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister:
Thank you Mr. Peterson for your kind words.
Distinguished members, ladies and gentlemen.
Thirty years ago,
in the fall of 1974, I had the privilege of
addressing this forum for the first time. Many
things have changed since then ... for one thing
this audience seems much younger and regrettably I
am much older. However, one thing has not changed,
and that is the very important role this Council
plays in forging and formulating informed opinion
about issues of strategic importance for the
United States.
Saudi Arabia and
the United States have enjoyed a well known
"special relationship" which, over a
period of 70 years had developed and blossomed
into a strategic alliance that benefited both
countries. Recently this relationship has come
under extreme strain. A critical juncture has been
reached, and unless joint efforts are brought to
bear to redress and rectify the underlying causes,
the damage may be grave.
It does not take
great insight to conclude that the horrendous and
terrorist act of 9/11 changed the factors
influencing this relationship.
A great deal of
effort has been expended in analyzing the fatal
event; ranging from the cogent and perceptive, to
the ridiculous and absurd. The ensuing onslaught
on Saudi Arabia has been intense and at times
purposefully malicious.
I shall
concentrate on the major allegations, for there
have been many, which are at the core of these
attacks.
I hope with your
patience, and indeed with your collaboration, we
can "sit down and reason together", as
one American president had said, and sift fact
from fiction in order to stop the drift towards
alienation and suspicion, and return to the mutual
understanding and trust that defined our
traditionally healthy relationship.
Prior to 9/11,
Saudi Arabia was the target of some criticism in
the United States and elsewhere. But to what we
have faced since 9/11, these criticisms seem tame
by comparison. Since then, the attacks became--to
my mind--irresponsibly vicious. Some of the flavor
of these attacks can be gleaned from the titles of
books recently published as works of scholarship,
such as:
- "Sleeping
With the Devil: How Washington Sold Its Soul
for Saudi Crude"
- "Inside
The Opaque Kingdom." I don't know what is
opaque about Saudi Arabia, which is probably
the sunniest place on earth.
- "Forbidden
Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy,
Saudi Arabia and the Failed Search for bin
Laden."
- "101
Reasons NOT To Murder The Entire Saudi Royal
Family." Although I am gratified for
that, I wish that it had been 1,001, to keep
it within the Arab tradition.
- "Hatred's
Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New
Global Terrorism"
- Perhaps most
absurd of all: "House of Bush, House of
Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the
World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties"
Instant so-called
experts sprang from nowhere and everywhere, most
of whom have never even visited Saudi Arabia,
claiming a gift of analysis denied to mere
mortals. By using such words as jihad, Wahhabism,
madrassa, they endow them with emotively negative
contents that surpass the realm of objectivity and
defy any sense of reality.
Many of the
attacks are too absurd to respond to, so with your
indulgence I shall restrict my comments to the
four following themes:
- Fifteen of the
nineteen attackers came from Saudi Arabia.
- Saudi Arabia's
internal social and political makeup results
in nurturing extremism, radicalism and
breeding zealots and terrorists.
- Saudi Arabia is
not doing enough to introduce fiscal
regulations to control the flow of funds to
terrorist organizations.
- Saudi Arabia is
not cooperating with the United States and the
international community in the war on
terrorism.
These are at the
core of the attacks for what may be termed
"Saudi bashing."
To respond to the
two first allegations, one must look into the
phenomenon of al Qaeda and its figurehead, [Osama]
bin Laden. Though a Saudi by birth, he developed
his ideology and methodology in Afghanistan, under
the tutelage of a radicalized cult of the Muslim
Brotherhood, an organization I assume every one
here knows. He was not taught his doctrines and
creed in Saudi schools, or madrassas, or mosques.
If Saudi Arabia is
guilty of blame for what he has become, the United
States must surely share the blame. Both of us
backed the mujahedeen to liberate
Afghanistan from Soviet occupation and allowed
such people as Bin Laden into the fray.
We all remember
the days when the word mujahedeen was used
in the media of the time to signify the paradigm
of the true freedom fighter, when those same mujahedeen
were honored, praised, and even received in the
White House. No less a super hero than Rambo
himself adopted their cause and fought with them
side by side.
The ideology that
bin Laden follows was ingrained in him by this
radicalized cult of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is
not the teaching of the Wahhabi reform movement or
any other school indigenous to Saudi Arabia that
were the cause of his metamorphosis.
The ideology
espoused by al Qaeda can be summarized in its
belief in the negation of the legitimacy of all
the governments of the Islamic countries, and
especially Saudi Arabia, for the purpose of
re-establishing the Islamic Caliphate with al
Qaeda as its vanguard. The latest version of this
plan calls for the destruction of the Saudi state,
and from that point on, achieve the union of the
Islamic world with bin Laden presumably at the
helm and the Al Qaeda forming the nucleus of his
power.
To achieve that
objective, they had first to drive a wedge between
Saudi Arabia and the United States, and what
better tool to utilize than the spectacular
criminal act of 9/11 with the major instrument for
that act being the 15 Saudis.
Saudi Arabia in
fact has its own brand of extremists and zealots,
and even some hate-mongers. It is not unique in
this; many other countries have their own brand of
extremists and hate-mongers. The Saudi state,
since the time of King Abdul Aziz, has been at
constant conflict with them.
This indigenous
form of ultra-conservatism was and still is
isolationist in nature. Their major concern is to
keep Saudi Arabia outside the movement toward
modernity, which they perceive as a threat to the
moral purity of Islamic society.
Their preaching is
not the global expansionist ideology of Al Qaeda,
but rather an insular isolationist anti modernity
ideology.
If we merge the
isolationism of the Amish of Pennsylvania and the
beliefs of the puritans of the early Commonwealth
of Massachusetts, we can perhaps get a flavor of
the ideology of these arch conservatives.
This is a crucial
distinction that must be made. Because the insular
extremism of Saudi Arabia's arch conservatives is
being used as evidence for not only the sympathy,
but also the collaboration of Saudi Arabia and its
society with al Qaeda's aims and objectives.
Nothing is further
from the truth, as evidenced by the war being
waged relentlessly against al Qaeda in Saudi
Arabia, and the support that the society is giving
the government's efforts to rid the country of
these evildoers.
Even the extremist
religious elements within the country that are
against modernity completely reject al Qaeda's
ideology and methodology.
Seen in this
perspective, it is not hard to understand the
reasons why bin Laden and his cohorts chose Saudis
to perpetrate their heinous act in the United
States. What is not understood is why the
detractors of Saudi Arabia keep hammering on the
fact that 15 of the perpetrators were Saudis, as
if that fact alone makes a nation of 16 million
liable and accountable for the act.
It is ironic to
note here that those who most vociferously attack
Saudi Arabia are unwittingly serving the purposes
of al Qaeda and the ideology it represents.
More ominously,
their attacks, if anything, will undermine the
country that is waging total war against them, and
that is probably the country most capable of
preventing them from spreading their cultist
ideology in the Islamic world. It is the religious
establishment in Saudi Arabia that in fact is
proving to be the body most qualified to
delegitimatize al Qaeda's claims, the very
religious community that is being attacked and
discredited.
As a further
adjunct to the damage that these attacks are
inflicting, they provide cogent proof to the
conservative elements of Saudi Arabia to entrench
their opposition against reform. They see and
interpret these attacks, not as the erroneous and
misguided reactions to the tragedy of 9/11, but as
a purposeful intent to undermine the social
fabrics of Saudi society.
The media, the
instant experts, and even some respected think
tanks and political figures have done a great deal
of damage to my country in the eyes of the
American public. These attacks presumably are
aimed to force a reluctant Saudi Arabian
government towards reforms. They are accomplishing
exactly the opposite and making the government's
task of reform much more difficult.
Lest anyone
misconstrue, let me affirm here, with as strong a
conviction as I can make, that the leadership in
Saudi Arabia remain steadfast in their effort to
push their program for reform. For us reform is an
absolute requisite for the advancement of the
country and its people regardless where the
opposition is coming from or from where the
external pressure is being applied.
Reforms must
emanate from within, the purpose of which is to
insure the welfare of the people by providing good
governance and equality in the eyes of the law for
all citizens. It is not a mere slogan or a field
for risky experimentation. It is an ongoing
process where adaptability and continuity are
essential.
Unlike the
mainstream thinking in the West that views Islam,
indeed all religion, as the antithesis to
progress, for us in Saudi Arabia, Islam which
provides its adherents with a sense of community
has to play a central role as the binding force
that will maintain the unity of the nation and the
harmony of its society during this otherwise
turbulent period.
The other
allegation that Saudi Arabia is not doing enough
to stem funding to terrorist organizations is
simply not true. The new fiscal regulations in
force in Saudi Arabia at this time are the most
stringent in the world. This was attested to by
various United States officials and international
organizations. A report by the Financial Action
Task Force (FATF), an intergovernmental body
including the members of the G-8, recently
concluded that Saudi Arabia now has in place
world-class laws and regulations to combat terror
financing. According to one official involved in
the assessment, the new regulations Saudi Arabia
has put in place for Saudi-based charities
"probably go further than any country in the
world."
Those who make the
claim that Saudi Arabia is not cooperating in the
war against terrorism are surely grossly
misinformed. Saudi Arabia itself is a target for
the terrorists, as the events of last week amply
show.
Joint commissions
have been formed between various Saudi Arabian and
United State agencies to exchange intelligence and
actively participate in this continuing war. In a
testimony before the House International Relations
Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia
last month, it was stated that: "The Saudis
are a strong ally and are taking unprecedented
steps to address an al Qaeda menace that threatens
us both." (Ambassador J. Cofer Black of the
Department of State). Other members of the
administration have warmly praised Saudi
cooperation as well.
The most
frustrating aspect to us Saudis is that even
though these facts by now are well-known, some of
the media and some of the opinion-makers simply
ignore them as if Saudi Arabia serves a persistent
need for an Orwellian target to be constantly
assailed. As one example, when we approached a
leading politician in this country on why he keeps
attacking Saudi Arabia on these points of
terrorism and the money trail after providing him
with all the facts concerning the issues, his
answer was "don't pay any attention to what
we say these days. This is the silly season, the
season of election." I wonder if the esteemed
gentleman thought of the impact of his remarks on
attitudes towards democracy.
Sooner or later
both of us will have to abandon recriminations and
concentrate on what can be done to retrieve the
healthy relationship between our two countries.
Saudi Arabians
know the United States well. We know America well
because tens of thousands of Saudis studied here.
Hundreds of thousands of Saudis come here to
visit, and the interchange in the business
community is quite vigorous. On the other hand,
the people of the United States know very little
about Saudi Arabia, except that it is that far
away place, where men wear skirts, and there is
plenty of oil. Perhaps we must take the blame for
this lack of knowledge and we are trying to
correct that.
- The country has
opened its doors to the world media and they
can come and observe for themselves what is
going on. The relations of our two countries
are too important to allow them to be
determined by misconceptions.
- On the part of
the United States I shall hazard to suggest
that it should make a review of the stringent
requirements for travel to the United States
from Saudi Arabia and the Arab world,
especially for students. This is a very
important element in cementing the foundations
of the relationship, because these students
carry back with them not only the skills they
learned, but also the knowledge of the people
and the values they represent; these are two
essential elements that should be nurtured.
The
Palestinian-Israeli conflict is pervasive to all
issues in the Middle East. No, this is not a non-sequitor.
Although opinion-makers in the United States hold
to the premise that the relations between the
United States and the Arab world can not be based
on one issue alone, the other side of the coin is
no less true; you could not come to grips with
these relations between the United States and the
Arab world without tackling the problem of this
conflict with some semblance of justice and
fairness.
If American
audiences can see what millions of Arabs see
nightly on their television screens, they may come
to understand the overwhelming emotional impact
this has on the ordinary man and woman in the
Middle East.
We in the Arab
world have come to fully understand that the
United States is committed to the security of
Israel. But security has become a catch-word for
the Israelis to avoid the hard decisions needed to
make peace. Israel is demanding now to be assured
of absolute security before committing to peace.
But to quote a distinguished American statesman
and thinker, that if, and here I quote :
"Only absolute security--the neutralization
of the opponent--is considered a sufficient
guarantee, then the desire of one power for
absolute security means absolute insecurity for
all the others." The statesman is the
Honorable Dr. Henry Kissinger.
Because we have
adjusted to and accepted the existence of Israel
in the Arab world, His Royal Highness Crown Prince
Abdullah proposed a peace initiative, which was
unanimously adopted by the Beirut Arab Summit. The
initiative is a realistic peace plan that
compliments the Quartet's Road Map [peace plan].
The Arab initiative was refused outright. The road
map, I believe, was refused by the Israeli
government by over-qualifying the acceptance. We
should recommit our efforts to the peace process
particularly now when the civil societies on both
sides of the divide are pressing their public
opinion to accept a peaceful settlement. Such an
opportunity should not be lost.
The challenge for
the United States is to come with the proverbial
balanced policy towards the peace process.
The United States
must insure that Israel's actions and policies do
not jeopardize the establishment of a viable
Palestinian state and the return of the Arab
occupied lands. Peace is in the interest of the
United States as well as in the interest of
stability and security. Surely it is also in the
interest of Israel and its citizens.
International
cooperation is also needed in Iraq. I mention Iraq
here so that the subject does not become
conspicuous by omission. To do justice to the
subject would need more time than is allowed for.
I will be happy to answer any questions concerning
this issue in the question and answer session.
But in order not
to tax your patience further I would like to
conclude by saying:
It is certainly a
viable hope to see an end to widespread
misinformation between us, to respect each other's
history and culture. It is surely appropriate for
us to cooperate to bring peace to a region racked
by turmoil. The benefits for both of us are
enormous.
Saudi Arabia,
Islam, and Muslims are not the enemy. Injustice
and deprivation inflicted upon the Arab and
Islamic world are the true breeding ground for
terrorism. These are the real enemies.
In the struggle
against these evils, we must be partners, who,
sharing the same objectives, are still able to
recognize and allow for diversity. We must not
fight the wrong battle; our quarrel is not with
each other. Let us join forces instead against the
uncivilized, the criminal, and the unjust.
Let us resolve to
commit ourselves to this fight, and together
eradicate not only the scourge of terrorism, but
the very conditions that breed it.
Thank you again
for this opportunity and may God's peace be upon
you.
|
