CONCERNING SAUDI ARABIA, whose de facto ruler, Crown Prince Abdullah, visited Crawford last week, let’s start with a multiple-choice question.
The dictatorship that rules Saudi Arabia is most interested in:
a) Helping the United States fight the war on terrorism.
b) Securing peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
c) Staying in power.
The correct answer is “c,” though, of course, Saudi officials never will acknowledge that. The Saudis want Americans to think the answer is “a.” They have gone so far as to place ads on American television quoting President Bush lauding the Saudis for cooperating in the war on terrorism.
But consider: For weeks now, the Saudis have been explaining to the Bush administration that the war on terrorism shouldn’t and really can’t be pursued until the United States does its part to bring about peace in the Middle East.
The crown prince, you will recall, thrust Saudi Arabia into the search for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict back in March when he proposed a peace initiative. The Saudis contend that peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, so elusive for so many years, now depends on greater American involvement.
In Crawford, the president dutifully declared, “I will work for peace [in the Middle East].” But to the extent that his working for peace diverts him from the war on terrorism, the Saudis achieve their goal. The truth is, for the Saudis, the war on terrorism has gone far enough. And the last place they want it to go is where Bush has declared he will take it next–Iraq.
Under Saddam Hussein, Iraq supports and exports terrorism. It possesses, or soon will, weapons of mass destruction. Those are the reasons Bush has targeted Iraq. But a post-Saddam Iraq would pose problems for the House of Saud.
Saudi Arabia sits on a fourth of the world’s known supply of oil. Iraq has less oil, but only slightly less. A post-Saddam Iraq no doubt would return that nation’s oil fully to market, thus reducing the Saudis’ ability to set oil prices and upsetting its oil-dependent economy, which already is in a deep slump. With an ever worsening economy, the unemployment rate (30 percent) would grow–as would popular discontent with the regime itself.
The very demise of Saddam Hussein, resulting as it would in greater freedom for the Iraqi people, would send a signal to the people of Saudi Arabia, as it would to citizens of other Muslim countries, that regime change is possible. That isn’t a message the Saudi government would like to see communicated to its notably unfree subjects.
Saudi Arabia is a country with no freedom of press or speech or religion, no political parties, no trade unions, no movie theaters. (The list of prohibited things is very long.) With the liberation of Iraq, the liberation of Saudi Arabia would be at least thinkable–a thought that horrifies the House of Saud.
The Saudis have taken actions consistent with their undeclared opposition to further pursuit of the war on terrorism. The Saudis have told the United States that it may not use Saudi bases to stage an attack upon Iraq. And they have joined with other Arab countries in agreeing to consider an attack upon Iraq as an attack upon themselves.
Meanwhile, let the record show that the Saudis have yet to provide the United States key information about September 11. Fifteen of the 19 terrorists responsible for the acts of war perpetrated against the United States were from Saudi Arabia. If the Saudis were truly supportive of the war on terrorism, they would investigate and take appropriate action against those who might have supported the Saudi-born terrorists–and tell us all they learn.
So it is that Crown Prince Abdullah and the 4,000 princes in his ruling family want to stay in power. Just how strong is their commitment to maintaining their dictatorship? The day the crown prince went to Crawford, the New York Times carried a front-page story in which someone close to the Saudi regime anonymously declared it was prepared to do “what is necessary to survive.” He explained:
“If that means we move to the right of bin Laden, so be it. To the left of [Libya’s Moammar] Gadhafi, so be it. Or fly to Baghdad and embrace Saddam like a brother, so be it.”
This is our ally in the war on terrorism, Saudi Arabia.
Terry Eastland is publisher of The Weekly Standard.
