-Caveat Lector-
>>>This looks like the beginning of an Arabian consolidation, which
may turn into an Islamic consolidation. The Saudis are fearful of an
"Iran-isation" within their fiefdom and the continued presence of the
Americans makes the protection money they give to various dissenting
factions too expensive. Plus, I'm sure that Rudi's little $10
Million hissy-fit didn't help much. Watch the other Arab countries
(mentioned in the article). I think this will be the answer to Uncle
Joe (Lieberman) and Cousin Paul (Wolfowitz) with regard to their
constant badgering for an Iraq attaq. And Turkey (Kurds). Do we
want to be in Pakistan while they're warming up their nuclear
arsenals? A<>E<>R<<<
>From Wash DC Post
}}}>Begin
Saudis May Seek U.S. Exit
Military Presence Seen as Political Liability in Arab World
By David B. Ottaway and Robert G. Kaiser
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, January 18, 2002; Page A1
Saudi Arabia's rulers are increasingly uncomfortable with the U.S.
military presence in their country and may soon ask that it end,
according to several Saudi sources. Such a decision would deprive the
United States of regular use of the Prince Sultan Air Base, from
which American power has been projected into the gulf region and
beyond for more than a decade.
Senior Saudi rulers believe the United States has "overstayed its welcome" and that
other forms of less conspicuous military cooperation should be devised once the United
States has completed its war in Afghanistan, accor
ding to a senior Saudi official. The United States has been using a state-of-the-art
command center on the Prince Sultan base that was opened last summer as a key
command-and-control facility during the Afghan conflict.
Saudis give several reasons for deciding that the Americans should leave, beginning
with their desire to appear self-reliant and not dependent on U.S. military support.
The American presence has become a political liabili
ty in domestic politics and in the Arab world, Saudi officials say. The Saudi
government has also become increasingly uncomfortable with a role in U.S. efforts to
contain Saddam Hussein, and earlier ruled out use of Saudi
territory as a base for bombing raids on Iraq.
The withdrawal of U.S. aircraft would end an American presence that began during the
Persian Gulf War and, administration officials warned, would seriously undermine
America's ability to protect Saudi Arabia or Kuwait as
well as carry out all future operations in Iraq.
Past and present U.S. officials said a Saudi decision to ask the Americans to pull
forces out of their country could also complicate the Saudi-American relationship,
which was put under great strain by the events of Sept.
11, and appear to give the impression of rewarding Osama bin Laden, who has vilified
the royal family for hosting American troops, about 5,000 at the present time.
Asked whether Saudi Arabia has told the United States it will ask for an American
withdrawal, Victoria Clarke, the assistant secretary of defense for public affairs,
declined to answer. "We have a very good relationship w
ith the Saudis," she said last night, and "we will continue to work with them in as
cooperative a fashion as possible as we go forward."
Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said this week
that the United States should consider moving its forces out of the kingdom. "We need
a base in that region, but it seems to me we sho
uld find a place that is more hospitable. . .‚. I don't think they want us to stay
there."
"The Saudis actually think somehow they are doing us a favor by having us be there
helping to defend them," he added.
Saudi officials who spoke about a U.S. withdrawal emphasized that nothing would be
done precipitously. They said Crown Prince Abdullah was sensitive to the need to avoid
creating the impression that he was responding to p
ressure from bin Laden. These Saudis emphasized that Saudi-American relations would
remain close, and would continue to include a military component. "You [Americans]
would still have access" to Saudi bases after a withdr
awal, one adviser to the crown prince said.
U.S. troops went to Saudi Arabia in 1990 to fight the Persian Gulf War against Iraq at
a moment when both countries feared that Iraq might march from Kuwait into the
kingdom. The two governments never signed an agreement
about their presence in the country. Though it has long been considered an intimate
ally of the United States, Saudi Arabia is the only Persian Gulf nation with which the
United States has no formal defense cooperation ag
reement. "The Saudis argue, 'We're such good friends, there's no reason to put
anything in writing,' " said a Defense Department official who has worked intimately
with Saudi Arabia.
The same official noted that the United States promised in 1990 to withdraw its
contingent from Saudi Arabia – which at its height included 500,000 troops – "when the
job is done." Saudis, this official said, interpreted
that to mean the job of expelling Iraq from Kuwait, but many U.S. officials think the
job remains undone as long as Saddam Hussein remains in power in Baghdad.
The Saudis were nervous about the U.S. presence in their country from the beginning.
Saudi Arabia was never colonized by a foreign power, and has long been sensitive about
its independence. And the royal family has a spec
ial obligation to the Muslim world as guardian of Islam's two most holy places, Mecca
and Medina.
Bin Laden has made expelling the Americans from Saudi Arabia an overriding objective.
"There is no more important duty than pushing the American enemy out of the holy land
[of Arabia]," he said in 1996.
The Saudis' sensitivity has led to numerous restrictions on America's use of their
facilities, including telling the United States not to use planes based in Saudi
Arabia for bombing raids against Iraq, which have continu
ed sporadically for the last decade. Earlier this year, the Saudis told the United
States not to use Saudi airspace for any flights into or out of Iraqi airspace.
Frustrated by Saudi restrictions, the Air Force moved about 20 jet fighters out of
Saudi Arabia in 1999, according to a senior Pentagon official, and no longer stations
attack aircraft in the kingdom.
U.S. officials say the two countries no longer share a common view on security for the
region now that Saudi Arabia has engineered a detente with Iran, its traditional rival
in the region, and does not consider Iraq a maj
or security threat.
"There is the lack of a shared strategic vision," said Joseph McMillan, a former
Pentagon official responsible for Saudi affairs. "The Saudis deny there is any reason
for the United States to be there to defend the kingdo
m against Iraq," he told a Capitol Hill forum on U.S.-Saudi relations this month.
Crown Prince Abdullah has taken the lead of the faction within the royal family
arguing that the kingdom would be safer without the U.S. military presence, Saudi
sources said. In contrast to King Fahd, still technically t
he monarch though he is completely incapacitated after strokes and other illnesses,
Abdullah has not had long years of a close working partnership with the United States.
He is described by Saudis and American experts on
the kingdom as an astute politician with a good sense of Saudi public opinion, who has
concluded the American presence is more trouble than it is worth.
One big problem for Abdullah, said several past and present officials, is
anti-American sentiment in Saudi society. "For the first time since 1973, we actually
have a situation in which the United States is so unpopular a
mong the [Saudi] public that the royal family now thinks its security is best served
by publicly distancing itself from the United States," remarked Chas. W. Freeman Jr. a
former U.S. ambassador to Riyadh and frequent vis
itor to the kingdom.
"The crown prince will do it slowly and carefully over an extended period of time,"
predicted Nawaf Obeid, a Saudi oil and security analyst, speaking of Abdullah's
intention to ask for a U.S. withdrawal. "From his and a l
ogical Saudi national security perspective, it is clear that the American military
presence in Saudi Arabia is no longer a viable option," Obeid said. "That has been the
predominant thinking in Riyadh well before the Sept
ember 11 incidents." Obeid has extensive contacts in Saudi Arabia.
Some American officials and experts agree. F. Gregory Gause III of the University of
Vermont, an academic expert on Saudi Arabia, said yesterday it "would be in our
interest" to withdraw troops from Saudi Arabia. "If our
major interest is the stability of Saudi Arabia," Gause said, "then we want to take
away whatever pretext there could be for opposition [to the royal family] to arise."
In various ways, the Saudis have been signaling their growing discomfort with what has
come to look increasingly like a permanent U.S. military presence in their country.
Both sides talk of growing frustrations in dealing
with each other. "We tend to step on each other's toes," said one senior U.S. officer
who spent several years in the kingdom.
In a paper for the National Defense University, McMillan, the Pentagon official, has
given a rare public description of how and why U.S.-Saudi military relations have
steadily "withered." According to his paper, since Ame
rican troops in the kingdom were moved to a remote desert base after the 1996 attack
on the Khobar Towers Air Force barracks, there has been little contact between Saudi
and U.S. pilots or ground personnel; fewer joint tr
aining exercises to promote cooperation; increasing cross-cultural frictions stemming
from quick rotation of U.S. personnel (who now serve brief tours of three months to a
year in Saudi Arabia, without their families); an
d mounting Saudi grievance at being overcharged by the Pentagon for spare parts and
training courses.
For more than a decade, U.S. officials have debated whether it would be wiser
politically for the United States to move its military aircraft and personnel out of
Saudi Arabia and assume their pre-Gulf War "over the horiz
on" posture on aircraft carriers in the Arabian Sea.
Gen. Chuck Horner, the U.S. Air Force commander during the Gulf War, said he had
argued "very hard to get all of our people out of there" when most of the 500,000 U.S.
soldiers were withdrawn months after the U.S. rout of
Iraqi forces from Kuwait.
"We make it very difficult for our Arab friends by being there because they have to
defend our presence," he said.
Again after the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, then-U.S. Ambassador Wyche Fowler Jr.
suggested it might be better to withdraw rather than see the American forces confined
to a desert air base. But then-Secretary of Defense W
illiam J. Perry rejected the proposal, arguing it would make a continuation of U.S air
operations over southern Iraq impossible.
Before Sept. 11, said one senior Saudi official, "You [Americans]
were scared to leave and that people will say, 'You cut and run.' We
[Saudis] were scared to tell you to leave and that people will say,
'Hey, you are not grateful.' Nobody has the political courage to say,
'Hey, guys, this [continued presence of U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia]
is dumb.'‚"
U.S. analysts and Pentagon officials say there is a lot more than
perceptions at stake. The U.S. military presence at Prince Sultan Air
Base, they say, is crucial to Washington's entire security system for
defending America's oil-wealthy Arab allies against Iran and Iraq.
"It would be vastly more difficult to defend Kuwait, much less the
kingdom [Saudi Arabia], if we didn't have substantial [U.S.] air
power in place at the begining," said Walter B. Slocombe,
undersecretary of defense for policy in the Clinton administration.
"We need it [Prince Sultan Air Base] if we go to war with Iran or
Iraq. You don't deter from 'over the horizon' the way you can from
the ground," said Anthony H. Cordesman, a specialist on the Middle
East at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "The
United States needs Saudi airspace depth in case of an attack on
Iraq."
Cordesman and several Defense Department analysts said the idea of
transferring U.S. aircraft and personnel to bases in Kuwait, Bahrain,
Qatar and Oman was not realistic because those countries were already
"saturated" with U.S. ships, aircraft and emergency war materiel.
© 2002 The Washington Post Company
End<{{{
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe
simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do
not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not
believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men.
Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it
agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled
one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller,
German Writer (1759-1805)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
