>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
March 31, 2005
An Audience With Saudi Arabia
by Victor Davis Hanson
Private Papers
Victor responded to some questions from Idris A. Ahmed, editor of Al-
watan Newspaper, a daily Saudi news paper.
1. How do you see the world Without the U.S.?
A descent into regional power blocks and zones of influence that
would eventually impair the present global system of trade and
commerce. The strongest would dictate to the weakest, whether a China
becoming a player in the Persian Gulf, a nuclear Iran, or a North
Korea antagonizing Japan. There are thousands of places in the world
that the U.S. silently adjudicates in a manner that disputing parties
respect but do not often report.
All this hinges on Americans willing to spend billions abroad-$100
billion in aid to rebuild Iraq, $50 billion in aggregate aid to Egypt
since the Camp David Accords, billions to Jordan and the old
Palestinian Authority-as well as saving Muslims in Kosovo, Bosnia,
Kuwait, Somalia, and Afghanistan. Remember, it costs about $3-4
dollars a barrel to pump oil in most of the Middle East and it now
sells for about $50-but only because the global system protects
property rights, has free commerce and the sea lanes are open and
safe.
In the shadows of all that is not the U.N., the Arab League, or the
E.U., but the U.S. Without it we will see a world of Saddams, who
simply invade a Kuwait and take what they wish when they wish.
2. Do you agree that the world was more safe before the U.S.
declaration of war against the terrorism, taking into account that
the radical groups have witnessed considerable increase in numbers
and operations since then?
I disagree with your conclusion. Here in America we can chart a 25-
year cycle, beginning with the Iranian hostage taking, moving on to
Lebanon, embassies being bombed, Khobar Towers, first World Trade
Center, USS Cole etc. whose ultimate logic and expression was 9-11.
The theory of these attacks was to weaken insidiously U.S. resolve by
harvesting a few Americans each year. But since the war in Iraq we
have seen new transparency in Libya, revelations about Pakistan's
bomb-making, elections in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the West Bank, and
even calls for more openness in your part of the world.
3. If there were no U.S., is it probable that the conflict in the
occupied Palestine territories might be settled in some other way,
taking into consideration the blind support of U.S. to Israel?
Peace hinges on two democratic interlocutors who can work out the
details of 5% or so of the West Bank. We are not talking about
occupied Tibet, Russia's occupation of Japanese islands, or 10% of
Germany still held by Poland. The area under dispute in the granting
of Palestinian independence is not large and can be settled by
reasonable people.
The problem is that the Arafat kleptocracy could not negotiate as a
legitimate voice, given its absence of regular elections, a free
press, and an independent judiciary. Now we feel that the new
government is both more legitimate and might agree to settle the
issue through diplomacy. The intifada was a tragic mistake and
failed, and so in its detritus we all have more hopes for peace. A
two-state solution is the only answer; if both are truly democratic
then any existing problem can be solved.
4. How do you see the U.S. interventions in the internal affairs of
many independent states, in the name of human rights and often in the
name of democracy?
Much can be attributed to the Cold War: 7,000 nukes pointed at your
country tend to curb idealism and thus resulted in some places
with "pump oil, keep out communists" policies that did not encourage
democracy. But in the post-Cold War, there are new hopes that the
United States policy will be to foster democratic reform. And we will
allow countries to be quite critical of us, like Turkey for example.
It is their country, let them do as they please. But we all must be
mature: a Germany, for example, cannot level such invective against
the U.S. and then expect American bases and subsidized protection.
We in the U.S. were delighted about the pullout from Saudi Arabia.
And by the way, given the end of the U.N. embargo of Iraq, will bin
Laden now call it quits-since his two demands in his 1998 fatwa are
now apparently met?
5. Is the U.S. really playing the role of the "world police", and who
authorized her to play such a role?
Well in 1917 we had kept out and were invited in to save Western
liberalism. In 1941 we came in to save democracy from fascism, albeit
reluctantly. In 1946 the Soviet Union was poised to take over much of
the European continent. And in the Middle East, I think Baathism,
Soviet inspired as it was, did far more damage than the U.S. ever
did. As bad as the Shah was, Iran in 1975 was no worse, and perhaps
much better, than in 2005. A Kuwait or Saudi Arabia was not like
Syria or Libya-Sadat figured that out when he flipped in 1973. But in
general, unless the United States is going to be consistent in its
support for democratic reformers, we should stay out of internal
affairs and deal with nations that wish to us harm in an external way.
6. The invasion and occupation of Iraq resulted in serious human,
material damage and geopolitical change. Given that the proclaimed
weapons of mass destruction-the reason that led U.S. to invade Iraq-
were not found, how do you evaluate the stability of the world before
and after the invasion of Iraq?
Read the October 11, 2002 Senate proclamation authorizing the use of
force to remove Saddam: there were 23 clauses ranging from WMD to 22
other reasons like trying to assassinate a former US President,
gassing his own people, attacking 4 countries, violating the 1991
peace accords, etc. WMD was only one writ-and remember Arab
governments warned the US that Saddam would use WMD, hence the
problems of outfitting thousands in chemical suits in Kuwait. Between
1979 and 2003 Saddam perhaps killed as many as 1 million Arabs or
Kurds; that will not happen again in Iraq. And the U.S. did not set
up a Shah-like figure. With these elections and more to follow, most
Americans hope to be gone rather quickly, once Iraq is fully
constitutional.
7. Do you agree that the crimes of war committed by the American
troops against the Iraqi detainees in Abu Ghraib prison has extremely
damaged trust in the U.S. to bring democracy and maintain human
rights for the Iraqi people-an event that distorted its image in the
world?
Somewhat. Since America must be perfect and when it is not, it feels
it is not even good. Remember that what happened in Abu Ghraib was
investigated, stiff sentences were handed down and the judicial
process continues. But such roguery is a daily occurrence for
political prisoners in the Middle East, and only transparency can
bring these problems to light.
One final point, the image of the Arab world in the U.S. after 9-11
is also at an all time low. We saw dancing in Palestine on news of
3000 murdered, 15 of the killers were Saudis, Atta was not poor but
middle class and Western educated. And now with all the translating
of Arab speeches, documents, and TV news into English that is being
done and printed freely on the Internet the American people are
seeing a Middle East that they feel is violently hostile to the West
and at odds with liberal values. We are seeing and reading uncensored
things from the Arab world, and it has had a devastating effect here
in the U.S. on our views of the Middle East.
The average voter in Kansas finally has read too many speeches by an
imam or cleric calling Americans "pigs and apes" as well as infidels,
and is asking very new questions: is it safer to open a mosque in
Detroit or Church in Saudi? Is a Westerner safer on the street in
Yemen or an Arab in Los Angeles? Can one more easily support Israel
in a speech in Cairo or support the Palestinians in Washington? And
out of this perceived imbalance, a new unease with the Arab Middle
East has arisen. In your part of the world you talk easily
about "Anti-Americanism" but that is old news and the wage of a
superpower.
What is new, really new is what I would call "anti-Middle Easternism"
in America. We have seen one too many beheadings, one too many
burnings of the U.S. flag, one too many fist-shaking mobs, and
collectively sighed, "Enough is enough, they really are different
people and we must go our ways." Hence the brilliant tactics of the
Iraqi terrorists who made themselves so grotesque that they hoped
Westerners would simply say "all of these people are like that, let's
not spend any more money or help in that part of the world."
Freedom and democracy alone will allow all this to recover and to
renew our old friendship. But right now? I'd say we are waiting for
the Arab world to democratize and join the other 4 billion who have,
and until then, we are in a process of disengaging troops from Saudi
Arabia, calls to cut aid to Egypt if it doesn't reform, cutting of
all ties with Syria, almost no US tourism to the Middle East, hard
look at visas and students coming to America, desperate efforts to
look at non-petroleum energy, etc.
8.The U.S. refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocal, in favor of its
industry, was regarded by many environment protection groups as a
deliberate intention to pollute the world and threaten the human
existence. Can you comment on this?
I think the reasoning was rather that since we run huge trade
deficits with China (and now India) other countries were not subject
to the protocols and would continue to use energy in a less
responsible way than the West and thus find cheaper methods of
production to undercut American competitiveness The key is to find a
standard and then to apply it to all nations on earth in exactly the
same manner. We all hope a protocol can be worked out. Also, it is
imperative for the Middle East to build a middle class that is highly
educated and can create wealth since a petroleum based global economy
is under renewed scrutiny on all fronts.
9.The U.S. declared withdrawal from the treaty of nuclear arsenals
reduction with Russia. How do you see the future of the world under
such insane armament race?
I think you are talking about the renunciation of the ABM treaty?
Since the Soviet empire no longer exists, the US felt the treaty did
not either. An ABM system may give the U.S. leverage when countries
like Iran and North Korea attempt to engage in nuclear blackmail, as
Iran is presently with Europe and North Korea with Japan.
Democratization is critical to ensure these growing arsenals are
subject to consensual government.
10. The U.S. major pharmaceutical companies endangered millions of
lives in the poor countries through its monopoly of the patents of
life-saving drugs. How do you see this claim?
Well, the U.S. pledged $15 billion in AIDS treatment money for
Africa, far more than Europe and the Middle East combined. Most of
these drugs cost billions to make, and billions more to defend from
expensive litigation, so the patents allow the companies to find
profit on their investment. If the world ends the present system, I
just hope that governments will be as successful in finding new drugs
as private enterprise. Remember, there is nothing stopping the oil-
rich Gulf States from getting together and creating a shared public
consortium to make their own drugs that are free from Western
protocols and overhead.
11. How do you see the legality of the economic sanctions imposed by
U.S. on many countries, e.g. Sudan, Syria and Cuba?
Castro has killed thousands of his own people and denies freedom to
all-hence their desperate effort to reach Florida. The Sudan is
engaged in genocide in Darfur. Syria sends money and aids in transit
terrorists trying to kill democratic reformers. Hamas was no accident
either. So the U.S. Congress, precisely because it does not wish to
use force, has decided to pressure those autocracies to free their
people and hold elections.
12. How do you see the preemptive attacks on theory adopted by the
U.S. administration and its reflection on the international security
and peace?
It is not a U.S. theory but as old as the Greeks and Romans. The
latest manifestations-Noriega, Milosevic, Taliban, and Saddam-show a
new trend of taking out fascists and allowing democracy to emerge in
their wake. Would you wish any of them to return? But the American
people are tiring of the cost and the invective that follows, and
have come to a sort of consensus "none of these people are worth it"
which is a tragic misreading of the good the U.S. does, but will
curtail it in the future. Saddam's fate was sealed by 9-11 when the
decision was made to take a close look at all those who aid and abet
terrorists from the Middle East.
13. How do you evaluate the risks of the globalization, many of which
are U.S.-based companies, on the international relations, local
cultures of communities and world diversity?
I am very worried about it, growing up on a small farm that was
obliterated by cheap fruit imports from Turkey, Greece, South
America, and South Africa. Local culture in the U.S. was not all Wal-
Mart, so it hit us first. But we must be adults and mature-
globalization has given the world cheap clothes, food, medicines,
etc. that was impossible just 30 years ago and helped at least in a
material sense billions of the world's poor. So a balance must be
struck, but as you know tribal people the world over now have access
to antibiotics, eyeglasses, and books in a fashion not possible
before-so the key is find some balance between material benefit and
cultural autonomy.
14. How do you imagine the Arab world 50 years from today?
I have great hope. I think it will follow the course of Latin America
and Asia and embrace democracy and open markets, take a hard look at
persistent problems such as religious intolerance, polygamy, and near
gender apartheid in places, and allow the Arab masses the same level
of free expression that is now increasingly found elsewhere.
Democratization we think is critical since many autocratic
governments use state-controlled media to deflect popular angst over
their own failures to provide decent housing, jobs, education and
infrastructure onto the bogey-man America-often in an insidious
relationship with terrorists like al Qaeda that were given tacit
support and sometimes money as a sort of blackmail on the promises
their fury would be directed at the West and not Arab monarchies,
autocracies, and dictatorship.
Only democracy can end that harmful calculus. Remember also that
millions of wonderful Arab people have found tolerance, religious
freedom, and economic prosperity in America, without the
ghettoization of Europe and without the worry of state coercion at
home. We believe only freedom in all its manifestations can solve our
differences, and thus many of us in the United States are working to
ensure our government supports reform and democracy in the Middle
East and ends the old realpolitik.
I for one would pray for a strong Arab world, fully democratic and
free, proud, a partner with America on an equal basis in all areas
that gives and takes advice and works shoulder to shoulder with us.
But as along as there is not one truly free election in some 20
countries I see little chance of that happening.
C2005 Victor Davis Hanson
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Take a look at donorschoose.org, an excellent charitable web site for
anyone who cares about public education!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_OLuKD/8WnJAA/cUmLAA/TySplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.intellnet.org
Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods,
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,'
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
