Posted on 05/02/2003 12:57:38 AM PDT by kattracks
DOHA, Qatar May 2 —
Most people of this Gulf nation see the decision by the United States to move its troops from Saudi Arabia to Qatar as a way to improve security and enhance ties to Washington despite lingering resentment about U.S. forces being based anywhere in the Arab world.
The presence of American forces in Saudi Arabia the land of Islam's birth and its holiest shrines has long been a source of outrage in the Muslim world, and was cited by Osama bin Laden as one of the reasons for his campaign against America.
But such sentiments don't appear to be shared in neighboring Qatar, where government officials, commentators and others have largely welcomed Washington's decision to move its air operations center from Saudi Arabia's Prince Sultan air base to Qatar's high-tech al-Udeid facility.
"U.S. presence in the region is very important," said Hassan al-Ansari, head of the Gulf Studies Center at Qatar University. "The region is dangerous and we cannot leave it like that."
"I don't think that Gulf countries could maintain their own security," he added. "Collectively in the past we failed to do it and I don't think we are capable now, so why play with our future?"
Qatar has been a close U.S. ally in the region since the 1990 Gulf War. During the latest war, the United States flew air operations from al-Udeid and the U.S. Central Command's Gulf outpost is at a sprawling base about 12 miles from the capital, Doha.
The Qatari government has allowed the U.S. military to stockpile tanks and other combat equipment at Camp As Sayliyah since August 2000, and about 3,000 coalition troops are there.
U.S. officials announced Monday that most of the 5,000 U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia would leave by the end of the summer and that its air operations base would move to al-Udeid, which boasts the longest runway in the region.
U.S. officials said the withdrawal from Saudi Arabia the first major shift in the American military presence in the Persian Gulf now that combat in Iraq is over was possible because U.S. aircraft no longer have to patrol the southern no-fly zone over Iraq.
The Qatari Foreign Ministry, the only entity allowed to speak on behalf of the government about the shift of the troops, declined to comment.
But analysts, including al-Ansari at the government-run university, said it was in Qatar's interest to have the Americans here.
Ahmed Ali, editor-in-chief of the independent daily Al-Watan, concurred. Gulf countries realize that American presence "is important for preserving security," he said.
"Qatar, as the smallest country in the region, has the right to take the security measures needed in a certain period of time," he said.
He said the Qatari people generally agreed with the decisions by the country's leadership, and cited the example of the high voter turnout in a constitutional referendum this week that was called by the emir, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani.
"I run a widely read paper and I have not received one letter that opposed American military presence in Qatar," he said.
"Let's be realistic," Ali said. "All countries of the region have some sort of (American) military presence and everyone is satisfied about it."
But Mohammed al-Musfir, a political scientist, said an increase of U.S. forces in Qatar would do nothing for the country's security, and said the American presence in the Gulf was "not in the interest of anyone but Israel."
"Their (U.S. forces) presence is not going to achieve stability and security in the region for any Arab regime at all," he said, adding that such a presence would be viewed as occupation even if it is sanctioned by the government.
"People of the Gulf were very happy to be liberated from the British occupation and its misdoing," he said, referring to Britain's departure from the region in the 1970s. "They are not ready to fall under any other occupation whether by force or willingly."
Al-Ansari, however, said American troops would keep Qatar safe from foreign aggression. He declined to say which neighboring country might pose a threat. Saudi Arabia and Iran often are cited privately as potential threats.
"Our presence and territorial integrity is at stake," he said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.