Posted on 10/08/2003 11:05:33 AM PDT by SJackson
Undoubtedly, Saudi Arabia is at a crucial point in its U.S. relationship. As per most Americans, Saudis do not fit the friendship category; there are wide disagreements on the US-Saudi Arabia relationship, especially dealing with the "terrorist factor." It is not strange that 15 out of the 19 terrorists of Sept. 11 were from Saudi Arabia. Moreover, the most "wanted man" by the U.S., Osama Bin Laden, is also a Saudi. In addition, the continuous proofs linking Saudis financially supporting Hamas, makes for not just a suspicion, but a certainty. Additionally, continuously, it is reported that Saudis encourage anti-American feelings within their educational system, as was seen recently during a Barbara Walters Special. This raises two questions.
First, are the Saudis truly a U.S. friend or just playing let's pretend to be friend?
Second, is the U.S. aware of the Saudis' double game and pretending to be a friend, too?
Although the U.S. government repeatedly raises its concerns about Saudis financing Hamas, there has never been an effective follow up to stop this cycle. Adding fuel to the flame, on August 10, while Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah visited Syria, both Syria and Saudi Arabia denounced the U.S. for pressuring them by using "a policy of so-called diktat," as reported by the newspaper al-Sharq al-Awsat.
According to their friendship levels, Syria and Saudi Arabia blame Israel for obstructing peace, while the U.S. calls the terrorist acts sponsored by terrorist groups such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade for being the obstacle to peace. The point of disagreement is precisely in having a common definition of terrorism, which includes different terrorist groups.
We will now concentrate on Hamas and the theory of dividing it into a political and military group. The Saudis maintain, on the one hand, that they are not helping Hamas financially, but allude that they help the social wing of Hamas, which deals with hospitals, schools, etc., and not the military wing, which deals with homicide bombings and other armed attacks against civilians. On the other hand, the U.S. considers Hamas as a terrorist group without making such a distinction.
Just on September 16, it was reported that Khaled Mishaal, a Hamas leader, visited the Saudis in October 2002, to attend a charitable fund-raising conference. The report that was seized by the Israeli military in Gaza, reports that Mishaal and other Hamas representatives even thanked the Saudis for their continuing financial support despite the American pressures exerted on them. Mishaal is included in a U.S. Treasury Department list as a terrorist financier. Moreover, Mishaal reportedly advocates violent confrontation against Israel, which includes homicide bombings.
If separating terrorist groups into political and military wings is a valid theory, then al-Qaeda can adapt this theory and openly deal with a "nice" social wing, while keeping its military wing active, reportedly, in more than 60 countries. Will the U.S. then assume the same Saudi attitude towards al-Qaeda?
This brings us to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell’s remarks that "a terrorist is a terrorist." Despite this, the European Union has accepted the theory of separating the political and military wings of terrorist groups. Last month, the EU included Hamas' military wing on its blacklist of terrorist organizations, but not the "political/social wing." In other words, the current 15 members of the EU can freeze the assets of Hamas.
A better measure is to have Saudi Arabia and the EU accountable for continuing financial support for Hamas through the so-called political wing. Is not one of the purposes of the Palestinian Authority to distribute the billions of dollars for humanitarian aid?
The fact is that those billions barely reach the truly innocent Arab civilians, but rather the pockets of Yasser Arafat and his selected group, as reported by former PA officials and Israeli intelligence. Hence, Hamas has taken advantage of this vacuum and become, in the eyes of Arab-Palestinians, the true social provider and not the PA. According to American law enforcement officials, and Israeli officials, 50% of Hamas' current operations, estimated at $10 million a year, comes from people in Saudi Arabia. However, Saudi officials say that their support goes only to the Palestinian Authority, which aid is calculated between $80-100 million a year.
Now, let us clarify what the PA is: The PA plays a double role. First, it is the Arab-Palestinian official legal representative. Second, it is also the umbrella for terrorist groups, such as Tanzim and al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade, which is an offshoot of al-Fatah and which openly takes credit for terrorist acts. Therefore, the money contributed to the PA is also supporting terrorism. However, the blame here is not only on the Saudis, but also on every country that donates money without holding Arafat accountable for not stopping terrorism, but being part of it.
The bottom line in this era of "The Awareness War" is that Mr. Oil is the best Saudi tool to manipulate the U.S. and, consequently, the Western world. Therefore, one can argue that the Saudi oil is the reason why the U.S. does not take immediate action against Saudi Arabia. The natural question is "Who is the stronger power?" It is a question of vowing to the oil industry or to the principles of true democratic values and effectively fighting against terrorists.
Unfortunately, the clear fact is that most of the Arab world strongly believes that the U.S. is their enemy, especially for supporting their eternal enemy, Israel. The dilemma is whether the U.S. is looking beyond its political views and foreign policies, while protecting the oil industry interests. The truth is that consistent proofs reveal that the Saudis, as sustained by many Americans and politicians, are not actually a U.S. friend, but are just pretending to be friends, while the U.S. government also pretends to believe in the Saudis' true friendship.
[This article originally appeared in the Pakistan Today weekly on Friday, September 25, 2003.]
And Britney Spears is a virgin.
IMO Newt Gingrich would make a great Secretary of State, four years he'd clear out decades of slop.
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.